The Biz Reporter
Srinagar, Aug 26:
Valley’s apex industrial chamber, the Federation of Chambers of Industries Kashmir (FCIK) has filed a comprehensive Review Petition before the Joint Electricity Regulatory Commission (JERC) against Order No. 06 of 2026 dated August 20, seeking reconsideration of the enhanced power tariff imposed on existing industrial consumers and interim protection pending disposal of the petition.
In a 17-page detailed petition, FCIK has challenged what it described as the central anomaly in the tariff determination. It pointed out that while KPDCL and JPDCL had proposed a 5% across-the-board increase before the Commission and stakeholders, JERC ultimately raised the principal energy charge for LT Industry from ₹4.20 to ₹4.60 per kVAh, an increase of 9.52%, and for HT Industry at 11 kV from ₹4.10 to ₹4.50 per kVAh, an increase of 9.76%, besides enhancing fixed and demand charges.
FCIK said the widely publicised 6.83% hike is merely the overall increase in tariff revenue and masks the actual near-10% increase imposed on industry.
The Federation has questioned the basis for imposing a near-10% increase when the Order itself acknowledges that category-wise and voltage-wise Cost of Supply data are presently unavailable with the DISCOMs, despite earlier directions of the Commission. FCIK said that without such data, there is no transparent category-specific cost determination explaining why industry should face almost twice the increase originally proposed.
FCIK has further challenged the passing of system-wide inefficiencies onto an essentially fully-metered industry, pointing to distribution-loss assumptions of around 19% for KPDCL and 15% for JPDCL, projected collection efficiency of only 93%, and over ₹102 crore provided towards bad debts. It reminded the Commission of its own regulatory principle that distribution loss is controllable and that “inefficiencies cannot be passed on to the consumers.”
The petition also highlights the DISCOMs’ own Business Plans, which project stagnation or only marginal industrial growth over the next three years. FCIK said it was paradoxical to acknowledge such a weak industrial outlook while simultaneously making electricity—a basic manufacturing input—substantially more expensive.
FCIK has also raised serious concerns over the stakeholder consultation process in Kashmir. It said only three persons attended the KPDCL public hearing in Srinagar, while no written objection appears to have been filed by any organisation or consumer from the region. FCIK’s Head of Advisory Committee, Shahid Kamili, attended only after being contacted by a JERC official when the hearing had already commenced, leaving no opportunity to study the petition, consult members or prepare written objections. The Federation said such attendance could hardly be treated as meaningful institutional consultation.
More importantly, FCIK said, stakeholders were invited to respond to a 5% across-the-board proposal—not to a near-10% industrial hike eventually imposed. Even a fully prepared stakeholder could therefore not have objected to the specific basis for the substantially higher industrial increase ultimately determined.
The Federation has asked JERC to restore the pre-order tariff for existing industry until reliable category-wise and voltage-wise Cost of Supply is determined. It has also sought disclosure and scrutiny of category-wise losses, collection efficiency, arrears, bad debts and the methodology used to justify the differential industrial increase.
Pending disposal of the Review Petition, FCIK has sought immediate abeyance of the enhanced industrial tariff and continuation of billing at pre-order rates, subject to final adjustment.
“Industry is not asking to escape the legitimate cost of electricity it consumes. The question before JERC is simple: when the utilities sought 5%, what category-specific cost or efficiency finding justified imposing nearly 10% on industry when the data required establishing industry’s actual cost-to-serve are admittedly unavailable?” FCIK said.
