22 June, Kathmandu. It has been found that the decision to implement the report submitted by the commission headed by ex-judge Girish Chandra Lal to the Supreme Court regarding the dispute resolution related to ‘dedicated’ and ‘trunk line’ was tampered with in the cabinet meeting on 27 Baisakh.
On the same day, the decision of the Council of Ministers was as follows – ‘To resolve the dispute regarding the electricity tariffs of dedicated and trunk lines, the Government of Nepal has sent the recommendations mentioned in the report submitted to the Government of Nepal by the Commission of Inquiry, which was formed in accordance with the decision of the Council of Ministers dated 2080/9/24, to be sent to the Ministry of Energy, Water Resources and Irrigation for implementation. .’
Chief Secretary Dr. confirming the decision made by the Council of Ministers. Baikunth Aryal sent a letter to the Ministry of Energy, Water Resources and Irrigation on June 4 to implement the decision of the Council of Ministers. same day Online newsChief Secretary Aryal said while talking to, ‘The decision has been verified and has gone to the Ministry of Energy, he will start the necessary work.’
same day Online newsHe contacted Sushil Chandra Tiwari, Secretary of the Ministry of Energy, and asked about the progress made in implementing the decision of the Council of Ministers.
Secretary Tiwari also informed that he has received the letter sent by the Chief Secretary and the recommendation section of the commission’s report and if possible on the same day (4th June) for the implementation of the decision, he will send it to the authority on Sunday (6th June).
However, the Ministry of Energy did not write any letter for the implementation of the report for two weeks. 15 days after that, Chief Secretary Aryal sent another letter to the Ministry of Energy stating the decision of 27 Baisakh.
In these two letters sent on 4 June and 18 June, the date is 27 December and the invoice number of the letter is also the same.
However, the difference between the two letters is like heaven and earth. In the second letter, as a ‘decision of the Government of Nepal’, ‘in accordance with the decision of the Government of Nepal (Council of Ministers) dated 2080/9/24, to implement the suggestions of the report submitted to the Government of Nepal as follows’ Three points are mentioned. Whereas, in the first letter, only the issue of implementing the Commission’s report is mentioned.
The Council of Ministers has not made any other decision that will be above and below the decision made on 27 Baisakh. There was no question of different decisions on the same issue on the same date. However, why did the Chief Secretary send a different letter saying the decision of the same date? Where did the chief secretary get the power to change the decision of the cabinet?
Hidden behind it is the ‘power’ of the Executive Director of Nepal Electricity Authority, Kulman Ghising.
As soon as the Council of Ministers decided to implement the Red Commission report, he rushed to reverse that decision.
Sources informed that he met Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal and Energy Minister Shakti Basnet to reverse the decision of the Council of Ministers under any circumstances.
Ghising’s argument was that the Council of Ministers should not decide to implement the recommendations of the commission.
‘We cannot implement the recommendations of the commission, so we did not decide to implement the report itself. The Council of Ministers should clearly write down what to do according to the commission’s recommendations,’ said a source in the Prime Minister’s Office, quoting what Ghising told the Prime Minister and the Minister.
Ghising himself Online newsIn a conversation with him, he said that the Council of Ministers should make an implementable decision and that he has placed his concerns before the Minister of Energy. In this way, the decision of the Council of Ministers has been tampered with under the influence of Kulman.
Exactly what Kulman was lobbying for, Behora’s letter was sent to the Ministry of Energy two weeks later by Chief Secretary Baikunth Aryal.
Before sending that letter, the Chief Secretary himself came to the Ministry of Energy and took back the old letter, according to ministry sources Online newsinformed. But before that Online newsHe found a copy of the letter.
Navinraj Singh, the spokesperson of the Ministry of Energy informed that the brief report of the commission was included with the same letter and the ministry has sent a written letter to the authority accordingly. The letter written by Urja to the Authority is similar to the letter sent by the Chief Secretary.
In a new letter written by the Chief Secretary, Behora states:
Government of Nepal decision-
To resolve the dispute regarding electricity tariff of dedicated feeder and trunk line, the Government of Nepal, Council of Ministers, constituted in accordance with the decision dated 2080/9/24, to implement the opinions and suggestions mentioned in the report submitted to the Government of Nepal as follows:
a) Although load shedding continued in the disputed first period (from July 2072 to December 2072), the tariffs for that period were not determined by the then Electricity Tariff Determination Commission, but as the case in this regard is pending in the Supreme Court, the dedicated and trunk lines of that period will be as per the final decision of the court. No additional fees will be charged.
b) In the disputed second period (from January 2072 to April 2075) load shedding continued and since the tariff for that period had already been determined by the then Electricity Tariff Determination Commission, the tariff should be calculated according to the current law of Nepal Electricity Authority regarding the calculation of tariff and the addition for the use of dedicated and trunk lines for that period. Toll collection.
c) In the disputed third period (from May 2075 to June 2077) since the load shedding has completely ended, no additional fee shall be charged for the dedicated and trunk lines of that period.
Looking at the two letters, it seems that Chief Secretary Aryal tampered with the decision of the Council of Ministers. Because, the date and invoice number of the letter written by the Chief Secretary to the Ministry of Energy are the same. Behora, which is mentioned as the decision of the Council of Ministers, is different from heaven and earth.
How can the Council of Ministers make two different decisions on the same issue on the same day? It is clear that Behora was tampered with by saying the decision of the Council of Ministers,’ said a senior government official. This means that the decision of the Council of Ministers seems to have changed.
Whereas, if the Council of Ministers has to correct any decision, the old decision should be canceled and the new decision should be made by the Council of Ministers. Bimal Koirala says. ‘The decision made by the Council of Ministers cannot be contradicted by the Chief Secretary. Sometimes, if there is a situation where the old decision needs to be corrected, then the Council of Ministers should decide to cancel the old decision. After that, you can make the decision you want,’ said Dr. Koirala said.
Dr. Chief Secretary writes the decisions that are not made by the Council of Ministers in different languages or cannot be explained by himself. Koirala says.
However, the Council of Ministers has not canceled the decision of 27 Baisakh and has not made a new decision on this matter. In such a situation, the chief secretary only changed the clock of the decision by a high source which was done by the government itself Online newsTold to
Energy Minister Shakti Bahadur Basnet claimed that the Chief Secretary sent the second letter according to the spirit of the discussion in the Council of Ministers. “Whatever the content of the last letter was, the same topic was discussed in the Cabinet meeting on 27 Baisakh. However, since this matter was not clear in the letter sent before, with the consent of the Prime Minister, a second letter has been sent with clarity,” Minister Basnet said. Online newssaid with
However, when asked how it is possible to send two letters of different dates on the same invoice number on the same date, Minister Basnet claimed that because the old letter was not clear, another letter was sent again to ‘elaborate’ it and send it.
Chief Secretary Baikunth Aryal also claimed that the decision of the Council of Ministers has not changed, but the old letter has been replaced with a new letter. “The matter that was discussed in the Council of Ministers was not clarified in the first letter, so the second letter was sent with clarity, the first letter has been withdrawn, it is not valid,” Chief Secretary Aryal said.
In the two letters, the decision made by the Council of Ministers is written differently? To the question, he claimed that the decision of the Council of Ministers has not changed, only the letter has changed.
Why did Kulman try to reverse the Cabinet decision?
Nepal Electricity Authority has cut the discount bill to collect the premium tariff of dedicated and trunk line for five years from 2072 to 2077. However, when the recommendations of the Red Commission were implemented as they were, the fee could be collected only for a few months. At that time, Kulman Ghising was determined to reverse the decision of the Council of Ministers at any cost.
The commission has concluded that the electricity authority cannot collect the tariff due to the fact that the tariff was not determined before December 2072 and load shedding has ended after May 2075.
The commission has recommended that the premium fee for dedicated and trunk lines should be charged after determining the days and periods of load shedding in the period from January 2072 to April 2075.
Time of Day (TOD) meter data is required to determine the day and period in between. Although there is a provision in the regulations of the authority to download the TOD meter data every year, he has not done so. As a result, the authority has written to various courts that the data of the TOD meter has been deleted.
Ghising was going to reverse the decision of the cabinet when the recommendation of the commission was implemented and it was necessary to re-bill based on the data of TOD meter and it could not be done due to lack of data.
“Since the regulations stipulate that TOD meter data should be kept in the executive director’s office, he may be accused of hiding or destroying the evidence,” the source said.
On the other hand, since the outstanding amount of dedicated and trunk lines is about 22 billion, the authority has booked the profit by keeping it in the remaining balance.
“However, the authority can only get a very small amount when re-billing as recommended by the commission,” informed sources said.
The Board of Directors meeting has not yet been held since the authority received the letter changing the Cabinet decision through the Ministry of Energy.
Are there dedicated trunk line conflicts?
Since 2075, there has been a dispute between the electricity authority and the industrialists regarding the payment of electricity tariffs distributed through dedicated feeders and trunk lines. In this dispute, the authority cut the line of 24 industries in the first week of December last year.
Even during load shedding, the authority used to provide electricity through dedicated feeders and trunk lines to some industrialists and businessmen who wanted to receive electricity regularly for 20 to 24 hours, i.e. they did not have to stay in load shedding.
Those customers who did not have to sit on load shedding, they also regularly paid up to 65 percent more. However, this dispute came to the surface after the Electricity Authority sent a letter to 61 industrialists asking them to pay discounted bills in 2075. The premium fee for dedicated and trunk lines which started from July 2072 was running till June 2077.
At that time, 298 customers took such lines from various government hospitals, offices and private industries, and recently there is a dispute over the bills of 61 industries.
The authority claims that some industries used electricity at an expensive rate during that crisis period, but paid the bill at normal rates. The authority says that the discount bill of some industries that have to pay premium fee has been cut.
Although they are ready to pay the bill according to the usage, the industrialists are of the stand that they should provide proof of how much electricity was allowed to be used by the authority.
In the meantime, the Electricity Regulatory Commission decided that the customers who consume electricity from dedicated and trunk lines can only be charged on the basis of evidence that they have reached the standards set by the authority.
However, even after that, when the dispute was not resolved, the Council of Ministers formed an inquiry commission on 24th December 2080. The commission submitted its report with recommendations to the government on 23 Baisakh 2081. In the same report, it is recommended that the authority should not charge the premium fee for the period before December 2072 and after April 2075.
From January 2072 to April 2075, it is recommended that the industries can collect the tariff only after determining the days and periods of electricity consumption and recalculating.
The decision to implement the recommendations of this commission was taken by the Council of Ministers on 27 Baisakh 2081.
