SHRI VIRENDRA BHATIA (CONTD.): Because under section 379, the offences are triable by the Magistrate. (Time-bell) Here, the offences are triable by the Session Court. Hence, both should be tried by the special court. This is number one.

Then, Sir, section 152 of the Act deals with compounding of the offence. Let me read it out. Section 152 says "the acceptance of a sum of money for compounding an offence in accordance with the sub-section 1 by the appropriate Government or an officer empowered in this behalf shall be deemed to amount to an acquittal", then, you are right in saying that notwithstanding section 379, offence may be there, but then, it will be argued from the accused side. Being a lawyer, I can argue that whether the principle of double jeopardy will not apply in that case. For the same act or omission, for the same offence, you are being tried one under the provisions of the Electricity Act and another under the provision of section, 379 and when you are discharging one case, whether the accused cannot seek shelter under section 300 Cr.PC.

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Please conclude.

SHRI VIRENDRA BHATIA: That is the question to be considered by you. Sir, this is the ambiguity and that may make this amendment redundant and it may be used for the benefit of the accused. With these words, I thank you and support the Bill. (Ends)

SHRI TAPAN KUMAR SEN (WEST BENGAL): Hon. Deputy Chairman, Sir, I would like to express some of my serious concerns on some of the aspects of the Bill while welcoming some other aspects. It is a mixed bag, in my perception. Sir, in the National Common Minimum Programme, they have committed for a thorough review of the Electricity Act, 2003. If we construe that Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 2007, is a product of that review, then, I think, I am frustrated over the kind of review that has been made. In my view, the basic plank of the Electricity Act, 2003, was unbundling, dismantling, corporatisation and privatisation, to enthuse all round initiative in the power sector. In fact, the process of unbundling, dismantling, corporatisation and privatisation started well before the Act was enacted, possibly from 1998 or 1999 onwards. Today, the situation is there to see what the result is. Sir, the CRISIL, ICRA, had made some studies. As per their studies and the rating made by them, out of the six State power utilities in terms of efficiency, improvement of ATNT losses, improvement of performance etc., five SEBs are in those States which were till 2004 not unbundled. That is the way they responded to the kind of reorganisation prescribed by the Electricity Act, 2003. If a review of this development is made, then, I think the Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 2007 would have brought forth certain other important issues, required issues which are not present in this Bill. So, my first complaint is that the review has not been made in an objective manner, which is really to give a right direction to the country's power situation. (Contd. by PB/2P)


SHRI TAPAN KUMAR SEN (CONTD.): Secondly, Sir, I would like to point out that this Bill which has been brought here has made certain amendments to certain provisions which are welcome. Let me start with the welcome provisions. Sir, a tightening measure has been introduced about the theft. It is a welcome step. But, at the same time, I will request the hon. Minister to consider one thing. While defining theft, the unauthorised usage is also included in theft. I think, it is not a correct approach. As you have seen, the theft and the authorised usage should not be construed as one and the same thing. There are various procedures of recovering the dues, disconnecting lines, etc. There are also so many other things. But the manner in which the measures have been suggested in the Amendment Bill to tackle the theft, I think, is not correct, if the unauthorised usage is also included in that, a segment of persons who are involved in that will be subjected to such harsh measures, which they do not deserve. One is the administrative default and another is a deliberate crime. Definitely, the crime should be handled in a very stringent manner, but, at the same time, the default should not be tackled in the same parameter as crime. So, I request the hon. Minister to reconsider that area so that the theft is properly defined, removing the default part from it.

Thirdly, Sir, I am quite apprehensive about the provision that has been made regarding captive generation. I think, it is going to create a serious problem. Some of my friends have welcomed it, but I conceive a serious problem is going to come in, particularly, when in the power sector, the private power producers are also being encouraged. It will also create a serious problem for the Regulator. Anybody as captive power generator in a particular corner of the country can demand the power being produced to be wheeled to them through the open access to the general transmission line and, without attaining a licence, he will be having his business on power, just claiming that I am a captive power generator for ten other group of industries. I think, it will create a serious anomaly in the power and electricity administration of the country and, definitely, in the larger interest, will not be beneficial either to the general power administration or to the common people, except allowing some big bang gains for a few private operators. This is alarming, particularly, when, as a matter of policy, the Government is encouraging more and more private operators. They need a Regulator; they need proper regulation, not a kind of licence-free raj to them. So, I think, that is an important case to be addressed. I request the hon. Minister to totally review and revise this provision so far as the captive generation part is concerned. Who are captive, they must remain captive. If a steel plant is having a captive power plant, let them cater to that steel plant, and if they are to cater their excess power to others, let them come through licences and let them do it through the State power utilities by paying the required service charges. I think, that should be the idea. Without getting the licence, they should not be allowed that kind of liberty.

Fourthly, Sir, I welcome the provision for elimination of the word 'elimination' of cross subsidy. While placing the Bill for the consideration of the House, the hon. Minister mentioned about the elimination of 'cross subsidy'. That word is taken away. But it was replaced by the word 'reduction'. I do not want to go on debating on this. Our society requires cross subsidy. Sir, at present, the economic level of our society is such that subsidy should not be construed as an obscene concept.

(Contd. by 2q/SKC)


SHRI TAPAN KUMAR SEN (CONTD.): When 2.3 lakh crores of rupees revenue has been forgone, as declared in our Budget, it means it is subsidising of the few by millions of commoners. When there are Rs. 1.2 lakh crores of unpaid tax arrears, a substantial part of which is indisputable but still remaining as arrear for years together, that again means a subsidy by millions of common people to the few biggies in the society; subsidy should not be construed as an obscene concept. Cross-subsidy must continue. Replacement of the word 'elimination' by `reduction', no doubt, is an improvement, but the hon. Minister must assure that that reduction should not finally lead to elimination because there is every reason to have that kind of an apprehension in the minds of the common people of the country. I personally know how much people have mobilised themselves throughout the country to ensure the inclusion of the expression 'review of the Electricity Act' in the NCMP and the retention of the cross subsidy. So, I would request the hon. Minister to kindly ensure, through his reply, that reduction does not ultimately lead to elimination.

Sir, I welcome the Central Government's cooperation in rural electrification. But, at the same time, I would like the hon. Minister to kindly consider the view that that area also needs to be clearly defined. The area of cooperation, the job, the tasks involved, the authority, and so on must be clearly defined so that there are no conflicts of interest and there is no mutual blame-game which ultimately results in nothing. It is very important that that is clearly defined. Secondly, the Rajiv Gandhi Vidyutikaran Yojana provides for 90 per cent capital subsidy for rural electrification, which is a welcome step. But, unfortunately, that creates an apprehension about this conflict of authority and interest. It was tied with the conditionality of introducing a franchise system. I think most of the State Governments are opposed to that kind of a concept of franchise. You are providing monetary assistance for rural electrification. That is a welcome step. But, don't tie up with that condition; let the State power utilities decide how they would administer it. You must only monitor the result -- how much area they could cover, how much losses they could contain, how much revenue they could collect, etc. You may monitor the results, but you must leave the modalities of collecting revenue and other things to the State Governments; that would be the real spirit of cooperation. Hence, I would urge upon the hon. Minister not to make franchise as a conditionality for the Rajiv Gandhi Vidyutikaran Yojana.

Sir, I would make one last point and conclude my speech. Cost of power is one aspect on which I would like to seek some clarification from the hon. Minister. All necessary steps should be taken to make electricity available to all at an affordable price. The situation is that post Electricity Act, 2003, the cost of power has been increasing at a very fast pace, particularly in the States which went ahead with the dismantling exercise. The Chief Minister of Delhi had herself said that private distribution could not deliver the results. Now, what is the situation of power cuts? I would not go into all that. But I wish to draw your attention to a few facts.

The NTPC is the biggest provider of power in the country; it is biggest producer and generator of power. Now, Government has launched an ambitious programme of ultra mega power projects of 8000 mw; five projects have been planned. In the Sasan Project, NTPC being the leading power generator, has quoted Rs. 2.97 per unit vis-a-vis the lowest quotation of Rs.1.99 by Lanco. In reply to a question in this House, and in a subsequent clarification given by the hon. Minister to me, he had quoted that NTPC's production cost was Rs.1.32 to Rs.1.33 per unit for smaller projects of 210 or 250 MW. (Contd. by 2r/hk)


SHRI TAPAN KUMAR SEN (CONTD.): For 8000 megawatt project, according to the economy of scale, the cost should have been much less. Still, instead of quoting less than Rs.1.33, quotation was given above Rs.2, much above Rs.1.19. Has it been done by NTPC management under its own prudence or they have done it under the direction of the Power Ministry? If they have done it of their own to allow private operators to have a cakewalk in the project, I think, they have to be called and seriously pulled and their integrity has to be questioned. If they have not done it under the direction of the Ministry, the Ministry should clarify whether it is the policy of the Government to allow the private operators to have a free cakewalk in the area of ultra mega power projects. At least, this economics of quoting vis-a-vis power unit cost brings forth this basic question, and this basic question is equally related to making power cheap and making cheaper power available to mass of the people. Then I think this House owes an answer to this basic question. With this, I again request the hon. Minister to kindly reconsider the areas of captive power generation problem, the definition of theft vis-a-vis unauthorised uses and also reconsider and give an assurance to this House that cross subsidy, however improbable it is, is subject to reduction, but not push to final elimination because in the present society, in any equitable society, a differential treatment to people of differential economic position is called equity and that is the definition of the equity. If we claim our society to be an equitable one, cross subsidy must continue, must continue to continue even in the power utility sector. (Ends)

SHRIMATI S.G. INDIRA (TAMIL NADU): Thank you, Mr. Deputy Chairman, Sir. On seeing the Electricity Amendment Bill, 2007, the first amendment is in Section 6 of the Act which speaks about the appropriate Government which is responsible for electrification in the rural areas. The Central Government is always supporting the rural electrification through budgetary provision and through instruments like rural electrification cooperation. Sir, now, we are talking about rural electrification. But there is a shortage of electricity in every State. So, we have to be concerned about that and we should take care of this shortage. Sir, the Government is in a position to provide electricity to consumers. Now, we are talking about the State Governments and Central Government's joint responsibility in the rural electrification. But before that, we should think about the quality of the electricity and we should not put more burden on the already over-burdened present infrastructure. My second point is regarding reliability. In most States, there are unannounced power cuts for more than five or six hours. It is prevailing in Tamil Nadu. Unannounced power cuts affect the domestic consumers. So, we should also take care of the reliability.


My third point is regarding affordability. We should think as to how we can maintain these three things. If we take care of these things, only after that we should think about rural electrification. Just putting the Electricity Bill will not help the rural poor. So, all these things should be taken care of and benefits should reach the poor people. (Contd. by 2s)


SHRIMATI S.G. INDIRA (CONTD): Next issue relates to cross-subsidisation. We should balance it among the more-paying consumers and the less-paying consumers. We should not ignore the industries because they are the more-paying consumers of the Electricity Boards. Sir, at the same time, I am not opposing giving subsidy to the agriculture sector or the poor people. The Government should balance both the sectors. This new amendment talks about subsidy. It is a welcome step, but it must be done in a transparent manner, that is, the State Government giving the subsidy to the utility by a transfer of amount which is equivalent to the difference between the tariff, that is fixed, and the amount of subsidy which the Government wants to give. So, this should be done in a transparent manner. Then, I would like to say that the poor agriculturist should get power at a subsidised rate, but, at the same time, we should not ignore the industries which are paying more to the Electricity Boards because they are also creating employment by providing jobs to the workers who are working there and earning their livelihood. So, both should be provided subsidies in a balanced manner.

The other point is regarding theft. It is a very serious problem and it should be prevented at the earliest. The Government is losing crores and crores of rupees due to electricity theft. Theft of electricity should be treated as a cognisable offence. The Government can curtail this menace in many ways. Sir, theft takes place due to lack of accountability. There can be a provision whereby the Government should take the responsibility regarding distribution, and persons liable for theft should be punished. It is a serious thing that they are going to jail and again, they come out and they do the same thing again and again. So, the Government should have a proper mechanism and the culprits should be punished severely. It is a great loss to the Government. So, it should be seriously taken care of. Some technological measures can also be taken to avoid the electricity theft. Opinion of experts can also be taken on how to avoid it.

Again, one more thing, which is not in the Amendment, is regarding increasing generation of e-waste, which is not utilised. In this connection, I would like to draw the attention of the Government to establish a separate authority which will make laws and regulations for the safe disposal of e-waste in our country to avoid environmental disaster. At least, in the years to come, measures should be taken in this regard.

Then, I would like to say that we have to give importance to the captive power generation. In some States, they are not providing the power to the consumers and also they are not encouraging the captive power generation. So, the State Governments, jointly with the Central Government, should encourage the captive power generation plants.

Finally, Sir, there is one more welcome provision in this Bill, that is, 'open access'. Only then, we can get more and more power generation and will be able to help the poor people. So, when we are providing the electrification in rural areas, we should take care that it is affordable, and without any shortage, we should provide electricity to the poor people and to the agriculture sector. With these words, I welcome this Bill. (Ends)

SHRI SANTOSH BAGRODIA (RAJASTHAN): Thank you, Mr. Vice-Chairman, Sir. I rise to support the Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 2007. Before I go into the details, I just quote Lord Macaulay's address to the British Parliament on 2nd February, 1835. This is a historical comment and I quote, "I have travelled across the length and breadth of India and I have not seen one person who is a beggar, who is a thief. Such wealth I have seen in this country, such high moral values, people of such calibre, that I do not think we would ever conquer this country, unless we break the very backbone of this nation... (continued by 2t)


SHRI SANTOSH BAGRODIA (CONTD.):...which is her spiritual and cultural heritage, and, therefore, I propose that we replace her old and ancient education system, her culture, for if the Indians think that all that is foreign and English is good and greater than their own, they will lose their self esteem, their native culture and they will become what we want them, a truly dominated nation."

Why I quoted this, Sir, every Speaker has mentioned about the subsidy, every Speaker has mentioned about theft, and, that is what was a different situation in 1835. This is very unfortunate situation that after independence, this has only grown. Sir, before coming to the main subject, I would say that my learned colleague hon. Bhatiaji has mentioned about Centre not supporting his State, Uttar Pradesh. I wish he could have been a little more tolerant than blaming the Centre for the faults of his own Government after losing the battle; because UPA is the only Government which has proved beyond doubt that they do not discriminate as to which Party's Government is there in a State.

ֵָ : ֯ ? ָ Ϥ ֯ ֱ֟ Ԯ ו֋

ֳ֬ (0 ..׸֮) : , כÙ ֟ ׸ Please don't disturb. (Interruptions)

ӟ ֛פ : ָ, ִ

ֳ֬ : ִ֟, ֯ ו֋

ӟ ֛פ : ָ ߋ ָָ , ß֮ ָָ ־ ߅ ־ã , ִֻ֯ ִ , ײ֛ ִ ֕ã֮ ֮ ־ ֻ ָ drought ו֮֟ ߋ ָָ ׯ֔ ߮ ֕ã֮ פ , ֮ ֛ߋ פօ ֻ ׻֋ ֯ ֟ ָ ָ֮ ׻֋ ־֮Դ ָ ֬ ִֻ֯ ִ ֻ, ִ֟ ֮ ֯ ֻ ֟

ֵָ : , ִ ֵ ..(־֮֬)..

ֳ֬ : ֯ ך I am not allowing you. (Interruptions) I have not allowed you. (Interruptions)

ֵָ : ֲ ֮֮ߵ ӡ ָ , ֲ ֺ ֟֋ ִܵӡ פ ֲ ֋ , ״ֻ , ֲ - ׮־ ? ־߮ ֲ ӟ ׌ , ֻ֯ ׌ Ӆ ֮֮ߵ ׾֪ ӡ ״ֻ ָ ָ ..(־֮֬)..

ֳ֬ : ֯ ך և

ֵָ : ֵ ָ ״׮Ù ֲ ׸և , ֲ ָ ֺ ֟֋Ӆ

0 ִ ӛָ : Ӥ ֟ , ֈ ߅

ӟ ֛פ : , ֯ ֣ ׾֮֟ ֯ - ו֋ ֯ ֮ ָ ֟ , ֯ ָ ׾֮֫ ׻֋ ֟ ֟ ֮ ֻ օ ׻֋ ׾֮֟ - ֮ ִ ֟ ֯ ָ ֋, ӡ ו֮֟ , ̸ ֤ ֯

׾֪ ӡ ( ߻ ָ ׿֮) : ֟ , ֲ ֟ֈ օ

ӟ ֛פ : ӡ , ֲ ֯ ִָ ֋ ֯ ֺ ֟ ו֋օ

..׻ֵ : ָ, ӟ ֛פ ӡ ֮ Ù ֤ , ֮ ֲ ו֋, ֮

ӟ ֛פ : ӡ ֯ע ׻ֵ ֟ ֯ע ׻֋ ӡ ִ , ׻֋ ߱ ־ ָ ֮ ß

(2- ָ ֟)


SHRI SANTOSH BAGRODIA (Contd.): Now, coming to the next point, Sir, somebody has just now mentioned about the NTPC also. The total requirement of the country and the total target fixed by the Government is about one lakh megawatts for five years, during the Eleventh Plan. That means, we have to add 20,000 megawatts per year. Obviously, we need equipment for that. Now, BHEL is one organisation which is already producing equipment to generate 8,000 megawatts of power. I am told that the Power Ministry is trying to advise their own department, NTPC, to put up a separate plant so that they can manufacture equipment for another 5,000 to 6,000 thousand megawatts. I would like to request the hon. Minister, I am talking about BHEL, which is a Nav Ratna company and that is a unit which can produce 20,000 megawatts also. But, where are the buyers? You don't have plans. You don't have people who are willing to place orders for them. And, if you consider world minimum requirement of this kind of unit, it is 20,000 megawatts. If you create and invest separate funds, for a smaller unit like 5000 or 6000 megawattss, it is not going to be viable, rather you will be competing with your own PSU, and may be both the PSUs become sick, because in the globalised economy, today, for all the mega projects or for other projects, there is an international bidding going on. People are coming from all over the world. And, against that competition, BHEL is competing successfully. I am sorry to say that there is something wrong in the communication between these two Ministries, the Ministry of Heavy Industries and the Ministry of Power. I think they are not meeting each other. I request you to please meet the hon. Minister of Industry and discuss with him. If you are not satisfied, you help BHEL itself so that they can produce up to 20,000 megawatts, provided you can arrange it. And, there is no use of wasting very hard-earned funds required for development of the country otherwise. NTPC has got enough. Their goal is to produce electricity. They have done very well in producing power so far. Let them continue with that. Please don't disturb them on that.

Sir, the National Common Minimum Programme states, "Households electrification will be completed in 5 years. The UPA will give special attention to augmenting and modernising rural infrastructure". Sir, electricity connections must be given to below poverty line families free of charge. Now, this is what we have been discussing -- how to give this subsidy. I have absolutely nothing against subsidy being given to these people, or, giving free power even to the farmers. But, let us not mix up production of power, distribution of power and giving subsidy. Let there be a separate Budget for supplying free power to below poverty line families. Let there be a separate Budget from Ministry or Agriculture or any other Ministry, the Finance Minister has run away just now. I thought I would tell him to provide for this subsidy separately because by giving this subsidy through the present system, nobody knows how much subsidy is going. Nobody knows farmers are using how much power. As a result, this is free for all. As a result, this subsidy is going to places where it is not required. Subsidy is going to small industries also. In some cases, it is going to medium industries also. In some cases, or, in most of the cases, subsidy is going to domestic consumers. It is just because we don't know how to handle this subsidy. Sir, as a result, the industries which are put up in villages, are suffering. Either they don't get power or they don't get quality power. (Contd. by 2w)


SHRI SANTOSH BAGRODIA (CONTD.): Sir, Gujarat is one State which I appreciate because they have got double grids in villages. One for the agriculture and one for the rest of the consumers. As Indiraji has mentioned just now, the result is that at least the rest of the consumers, who are paying consumers, are getting power 24 hours and the production is not affected. Whatever amount of subsidy the State Government wants to give, the electricity is given to the farmers. Similarly, if all the States can have this kind of double grid in villages, production will not suffer. Another thing I am noticing is that these industries are moving from villages to towns, because they do not get power there. Forget about other infrastructure. In view of this, for no fault of theirs, they suffer. This aspect may please be looked into, hon. Minister, Sir.

Sir, another point is, creation of Rural Electricity Distribution Backbone (REDB) with at least one 33/11 kv (or 66/11 kv) sub-station in each block. You create that. That is a good idea. But, as I said, the grid should be separate. That may please be looked into.

Another point is, Decentralised Distributed Generation (DDG) systems where grid supply is not feasible or cost effective. Is it possible to set up village grids? Please look into it, hon. Mr. Minister, Sir.

Coming to the Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana, one goal is to bridge the urban-rural gap and the second goal is to provide reliable and quality power to the rural areas. When we talk about rural areas, it says 81 per cent villages have been electrified and 19 per cent have not been electrified. It sounds very good. I do not know, Sir, but they say that there are three types of lies. One is a straight lie, like Bhatiaji mentioned just now. Another one is statistical lie. In my opinion, these are all statistical lies. Statistical lies are there not only in this system, but in all the systems. Sir, what is happening is this. I will give you an example, which I have given to hon. Minister previously also. Earlier, you know the system was, the villages were considered electrified if there was only one bulb. Now, I think, in 2004, the system was changed. Ten per cent consumers must get the power. I would like to know from the hon. Minister whether this 81 per cent is based on this 10 per cent and that only for one bulb.

ϟ֯ : ӟ ֛פ , ֯ ֮ ׻֋ ֟֟ ָ Ϥ - Ӿ , וִ֮ ָ Ƹ ִ ֵ , ײֻ֕ և , ׌և ֮ ֟

ӟ ֛פ : ֟ ָ ֮֯ ֟ ..(־֮֬) .. Sir, after this new classification, I would like to know whether it is still 81 per cent. In Bihar, I think 39,000 villages have been de-electrified on the basis of old classification. And if you calculate it on the basis of new classification, probably all the villages in Bihar are de-electrified. By the number of villages, which are being electrified every year, I calculated it, Sir, it will take only 110 years to electrify all the villages of Bihar! (Contd. by VKK/2X)


SHRI SANTOSH BAGRODIA (CONTD.): In 110 years, we will be able to electrify all the villages of Bihar. I don't know are how we going to handle in five years. Bihar is also a part of the country. Similarly, my friend also has mentioned. Ի ׾֟ֆ ֟ , ֪ Ӿ ׌֙ և ֓ և , ־ָ וִָ Ù ־֮Դ ֤ ִ ־֮Դ וִָ כ Ù ִ , ׻֋ ӡ ׮ִֵ ֵ֮ ӓ ָ ...(Interruptions)... Sir, I will stop. Every point is not connected to each other. The moment you will ask me to stop, I will stop.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): I have not said anything.

SHRI SANTOSH BAGRODIA: I thought you want me to stop.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: No, you can continue. You are making very good points. How can I ask you to stop?

SHRI SANTOSH BAGRODIA: Sir, in Uttar Pradesh also, ָ ׌ױ֮, ו֮֟ , Ù ־֮Դ ֮ ִ , ׻֋ .. ָָ ָ ׮ֵ Ӭ . ִ֮ 韾 ׮Ե ׻ֵ פ ؛ ֋ ָ ׌ױ֮ օ ӡ ֻ ֿ ß־ ײָ , .., ֕ã֮ ו֮ Ϥ ִ ָ ֯ ӕֲ פ , ֻ֓ פ , ָ ָ ָ פ Ù ֻ

Sir, the number of households electrified should be, at least, ten per cent which I have already mentioned. The National Electricity Policy envisages supply of quality power to rural areas for 24 hours. I wish this comes true, I will rather say, not in five years, not in six years, not in seven years, but, at least, in my life time. The way things are developing -- we do have big plans -- but, unfortunately, the pace is very slow. Sir, if the hon. Minister does not become the President of the country -- I would like him to -- we will discuss this issue again after two years and we would like to see what kind of pace it has taken. If he becomes the President, I would request him to follow electrification maximum. With his push, probably, electrification in the country will happen during my lifetime. (Interruptions) Sir, only for statistical purpose, seven States have achieved more than 95 per cent village electrification, Rajasthan is also mentioned in the statistics given by some organisation, I think, the Government itself. But, I don't think, these are all correct statistics. That is why, I am saying that these are all statistical lies. Sir, five States have to do a lot because in these States, electrification is only 20 per cent....

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P.J. KURIEN): You don't speak about Rajasthan. Only Bihar.

SHRI SANTOSH BAGRODIA: Sir, I have already said, it is not enough in Rajasthan. I am sure, our hon. Minister has come given me a smile and told me that sit down, I will look after Rajasthan. He has just now told me. Five States have less than 20 per cent household electrification. I would like to quote these States, Assam, Bihar and, of course, Mr. Pany's State, Orissa, Jharkhand and Uttar Pradesh.

(Contd. by TMV/2y)


SHRI SANTOSH BAGRODIA (CONTD.): We have to think of new strategies. If the hon. Minister can give the State-wise details about the Rajiv Gandhi Grameen Vidyutikaran Yojana, it would be better. What are the financial and technical requirements for these franchisees? What is the revenue sharing arrangement between the franchisees and the REC? Is there any financial stake of the State Governments? How do you discipline these franchisees? Do you have any plan to discipline these franchisees also? Is it a State problem? Then you can simply say that it is a State problem. Either there is an overlapping of the mandate of the REC and the CPSUs or the REC has outsourced its mandate to the CPSUs. If there is overlapping, it means that one work is done by two people. With the kind of limited resources, it is better not to have overlapping. How many States have asked the CPSUs for help, as the States want to do it themselves? They want the CPSUs' help. But Bhatiaji would say that the Central Government is not giving help. I would like to know how many State Governments have asked for help and whether the Government is giving complete help to all the States.

Sir, according to section 14 of the Electricity Act, 2003, the States are required to notify rural areas.

Sir, if you want, I will finish. I will do that. But the Minister wants me to speak now. Whose order should I take? I don't know.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN (PROF. P. J. KURIEN): You have to take my order.

SHRI SANTOSH BAGRODIA: I will take your order.

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Now you try to conclude.

SHRI SANTOSH BAGRODIA: Will you give me five more minutes?

SHRI SANTOSH BAGRODIA: I will take exactly five minutes and I will stop. So far only 12 States have notified these areas. The States have been advised. I don't know whether Orissa is included in these States. If Orissa is not there, you request your State Government to notify them. ֯ ָ notify ֯ ױ ֟ - According to section 14 of the Electricity Act, 2003, the States are required to notify the rural areas. Rural areas , notify ֛օ ֯ ֮ ָָ ׻֋ ֟֋, ֻ 12 Ù notify

ֵָ : rural כ ־ ֻ 1952 ֋ ֲ ֛ Ӿ Ӳ׬֟ ..... (־֮֬)


ӟ ֛פ : notify ׸, ִ ֟ , ׮ִֵ follow ֛օ

THE VICE-CHAIRMAN: Mr. Pany, if you want, I will give you time. But don't disturb.

SHRI SANTOSH BAGRODIA: The States have been advised to set up district committees and only 19 States have notified the same. ָ ִ ׸ ֮ Ù օ Deployment of franchisees is also to be done by the State Governments. A few State Governments feel that appointment of the franchisees will lead to cost escalation and need not be made compulsory. Demand for enhanced electricity is also to be met. An amount of Rs.1,100 crores was allocated for 2005-06 and the target was to electrify 10,000 villages. But only 6,300 villages had been electrified. If we don't meet the target, as I said earlier, it will take not 100 or 110 years but a very long time. For the year 2006-07, an amount of Rs.3,000 crores have been allocated and the target of 40,000 villages has been fixed to electrify. We apprehend that considering the pace of physical and financial achievements during the previous year, the target for 2006-07 would be unachievable. Special attention should be given to the States which have a large number of unelectrified villages. The RGGVY will increase the demand for electricity considerably because this Scheme is not restricted to the households alone. Considering the present status of generation of electricity, we are concerned about meeting this demand by the Government. We are of the view that the electrification of villages should not just mean existence of infrastructure, but the people in the rural areas should really get electricity for their varied needs. (Contd. by VK/2Z)


SHRI SANTOSH BAGRODIA (CONTD): It is not a question of only having a line. You have the line but there is no power. It has to be seen that there is complete matching between production of increased electricity and supply to rural areas. I must come to the last point; otherwise, I am sure the Minister, who is my childhood friend will become my old age enemy.

As on 4th May, 2007, 330 projects have been sanctioned by the REC, worth Rs. 12,008 crores against which Rs. 4,948 crores have been released. These 320 sanctioned projects cover 2,43,082 villages, out of which 74,472 are unelectrified and 1,68,619 are partly electrified villages. I want to mention these statistics so that the House can know that this is a very voluminous problem. It is good to say that electrify the rural areas, but, through you, Sir, I want to explain how difficult this work is. As on 4th May, 2007, electrification of 1,65,364 villages, including 63,333 unelectrified and 1,02,031 partly electrified have been achieved. It is a good achievement during the last one year or so. But can we maintain this pace?

My last point is, it is not the question of only supplying electricity, it is not the question of only quality power, it is the question of cost of power also. In case the cost of power is Rs. 7/- or Rs. 8/- or Rs. 9/- in the coming years, the supply of power will become useless. Only 10 per cent of the population in our country will be able to afford it. We have to compete in the world market. If we have to supply all kinds of good, to the consumers in the country, then power is the most important infrastructure which should be available at a reasonable price. Would the hon. Minister ensure that during the next five years, power will definitely be available at less than Rs. 4/- or Rs. 5/- per unit and the increase will be just marginal. That can be possible if a lot of hydro power which has not been tapped in different parts of the country, is tapped more urgently than going in for any other kind of generation. With these words, I am thankful to the hon. Minister for giving me all assurances about Rajasthan. (Ends)

. ִ ӛָ (ײָ) : ֮֮ߵ ֳ֬ , ײֻ ִ֣Ԯ ׻֋ ֛ ײֻ ӿ֮ ֵ 2003 ֮ ײֻ ִ֬ ָֆ ӿ֮

, ߋ ־֮Դ ™ߵ ִ֟ ֵ ֵ֮ ֵ ִ ׻֋ ֲ֮֓֨ ָָ ֳ Ѿ - Ѿ , Ѿ ײֻ֕ ٟ֯ ֋߅ ִֵ ײֻ֕ ٟ֯ ִֻ Ѿ ߓ ӟ֮ ... (3 ָ ֿ:)



0 ִ ӛָ (֟) : ָ ӟ֮ ֵ ָ פև - ָ ָ ִ ָօ ֮֮ߵ ָ ֱ ߤ ֛ פ ֟ ָ Ӿ ײֻ֕ ֋߅ ׾ֿ ֲ ־ ִֵ ֟ ֻ Ӿ ֟ ϓָ ֟ ײֻ֕ ֜ פ ֟ ױ -ָ ֻ ֤ Ӭ-֮ ߓ ָ ֟ Ӿ ײֻ֕ ֟߅ ָ Ӿ ãן , ֕ ߓ ֛ ӟ֮ ӕֲ, ׸ ֕ ָ ֕ , ֻ֮ ָ ãן

, ֛פ ֱ ׾ßָ ֤ ֵ֟ Ԯ ãן ו֮ ֤ ִ֮ ֮ , ָ ֵ , ꌙ߱և ֈ-껛 ָ 87.60 ָ ׸ ꌙ߱և ֈ-껛 43.50 ֮ ֵ ӕֲ ãן Ԯ ׸ 96.49 ָ ׸ 89.46 ָ , ׸ Ԯ ׸ 92.94 ׸ 78.50 ֲ ײָ Ԯ ׸ 59.3 ׸ 5.1 , ֲֻ , ָ֬ ָ ֟ , ָ ׾׳֮ ֕ ֮ ֛ ӟ֮ ָ ֲ֕ օ ֮ ֟ ֲ ָ߸ ֳ ֲ֕ ֲ ָ߸ ֲ֕ օ ׻֋ ָ ֯ ָ ӯ ֲ֕ ֮֮ ֕ ߓ ײֻ֕ ִֻ ӟ֮ , ֛օ

, ֛ ִԻ ־ָ Ù֮ ײָ ְ ִԻ ־ָ Ù֮ ֛ ֙ 320 ־֙ ְ ә ֙ 230 ־֙ , ֮ , ֲֻ ָ֮ ָ֬ ָ ֮ 14 ־֙ ֛ , ֟ ֕ ãן ְ ә ߸ , ײָ և ֙ 44.9 ָ ֮ 8.6 ֕ ãן ֟ ? ײָ 0000 ָ ׬ ־֙ ֯և , ֲ ײָ ײֻ֕ ״ֻ֟ ִ ײֻ֕ ״ֻ֟ ײֻ֕ ״ֻ֮ ִ ãן Ӥ֕ ֵ ײֻ֕ ֱ ֮ ״ֻ֟ ׻ ײֻ֕ ײֻ֕ - ֻ֟ , ֕ ִ ֵֻ֮ ָ , ֕ 60 ָ ֮ ָ ׮ֳԸ 40 ָ ׸֮ ָ ׮ֳԸ ו ׻ְ ׸֮ פ ֮ ׮ֻ ظ ֮ ׮ֻ ֵ ֟ ׸֮ ꌵ ׸֮ ״ֻ ָ ײֻ֕ ֋? ָ ײֻ֕ ӯ ֻ, ӯ ֻ ֮ ֋ ֮ ֋ ߅ ָ - Ӿ ֻ֟ , ײֻ֕ ֕ Ӥ (3 /ߋ־ ָ ֿ:)