04.08.2013 Views

Report of Indian Institute of Public Administration ... - Ministry of Power

Report of Indian Institute of Public Administration ... - Ministry of Power

Report of Indian Institute of Public Administration ... - Ministry of Power

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

State <strong>Report</strong>s (Vol.-III)<br />

Study on `Impact <strong>of</strong> Restructuring <strong>of</strong> SEBs’<br />

ACCUMULATED FINANCIAL LOSSES<br />

As part <strong>of</strong> the restructuring process, the State Government, has undertaken considerable<br />

settlement <strong>of</strong> the liabilities <strong>of</strong> UPSEB as indicated below:<br />

Government <strong>of</strong> UP loan and accrued interest written <strong>of</strong>f Rs. 20,116 crore<br />

Adjustments for transfer <strong>of</strong> Unchahar Plant to NTPC Rs. 919 crore<br />

CPSU liabilities retained by Government <strong>of</strong> UP Rs. 2,515 crore<br />

The financial commitment taken by the Government during the restructuring <strong>of</strong> UPSEB<br />

is further indicated below:<br />

Terminal liabilities retained by the Government Rs. 6,176 crores.<br />

GPF liabilities Rs. 1,634 crores.<br />

Despite such massive write-<strong>of</strong>fs, the State power utilities are proceeding on the same<br />

path <strong>of</strong> mounting losses in their books. This is due to a variety <strong>of</strong> reasons including<br />

operational performance, losses, tariff and recoveries from consumers. The average<br />

recovery per unit <strong>of</strong> electricity is indicated as under:<br />

Average Recovery Per Unit <strong>of</strong> Electricity<br />

Consumer Category 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04<br />

Domestic (%) 51 48 50<br />

Agricultural (%) 22 26 25<br />

Commercial (%) 106 117 116<br />

Industrial (%) 108 123 124<br />

Others (%) 56 50 62<br />

Total (%) 69 72 73<br />

Simiarly, the cash gap indicators, excerpted from the UPERC order <strong>of</strong> 2003-04 are<br />

provided in the following table:<br />

Cash Gap per Unit to Cover Cost<br />

Performance indicators 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03<br />

Collection per unit power input (Rs/ kWh) 1.21 1.26 1.39<br />

Cost <strong>of</strong> power purchase per unit <strong>of</strong> input (Rs/ kWh) 1.59 1.57 1.81<br />

Cash Gap to cover power purchase 0.38 0.31 0.42<br />

Cost per unit <strong>of</strong> power purchase (Rs/ kWh) 2.06 2.04 2.53<br />

Cash gap per unit to cover total cost 0.85 0.78 1.14<br />

Thus, the cash gap in the system is leading to accumulation <strong>of</strong> losses in the books<br />

<strong>of</strong> the utilities. The following are the key financial parameters <strong>of</strong> the utilities<br />

during the pre-reform and post-reform periods:<br />

7.28

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!