The Supreme Court on Wednesday disposed of a Public Interest Litigation concerning vacancies in Electricity Regulatory Commissions after noting that the issue concerning Delhi had become infructuous following the appointments made to the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission.

During the hearing, counsel submitted that while Delhi had filled its vacancies following the Court’s intervention, the situation in several other States remained serious. He pointed out that in other States there had been no Chairperson for two years, and no legal member. Counsel referred to West Bengal as an example and submitted that the absence of members in regulatory commissions was affecting bodies entrusted with important regulatory and adjudicatory functions.

The Chief Justice, however , orally remarked: “Regulatory Commissions hardly deal with public grievances. We are not much concerned about that. Most of them are ornamental. We don’t want to say little more.”

Counsel thereafter sought to explain that the commissions perform serious adjudicatory functions, particularly in relation to tariff fixation. It was submitted that although the Government creates such regulatory bodies, adequate personnel are not provided.Counsel emphasised that the Electricity Regulatory Commission is the forum at the first instance for tariff fixation, while the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) exercises appellate jurisdiction. The absence of functioning commissions, counsel submitted, ultimately affects consumers, apart from distribution companies and generators.

Counsel requested the Court to issue notice to other States where similar vacancies existed. However, the Bench indicated that the petitioner could approach the Court with a fresh petition dealing with the vacancies on a State-wise basis. The Court said: “File fresh petition state wise, we will see.”

Since the appointments concerning Delhi had already been made, the Supreme Court ultimately disposed of the PIL as infructuous.