The Reliance Infrastructure-owned BSES Yamuna and BSES Rajdhani and Tata Power Delhi Distribution (TPDDL) on Monday disputed the claim made by CAG in the Delhi High Court that the power companies have not cooperated with the audit currently underway against them.
Earlier this year, Arvind Kejriwal, during his tenure as the Delhi CM, had levelled allegations against the discoms that they had in the past manipulated accounts with an intention to hike power tariff. Subsequently, on January 7, he had directed CAG to carry out an audit of the three discoms.
For now, the court has put up the matter for further hearing on May 16.
During the proceedings, counsels on behalf of the discoms argued that they have fully co-operated with the national auditor in respect of the requisitions made by the auditor and that claims of an uncooperative attitude made against the discoms are factually incorrect.
The discoms also argued that the SC order on audit of telecom companies is not applicable to them as CAG audit conditions were provided in the TRAI regulations itself, however, no such express provision of CAG audit has been stated in the discoms licence of the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission or under the electricity Act. ďIn the telecom case, the accounts stating revenue of the telecom companies from which revenue sharing of government was to be arrived at was the point of contention, whereas in case of the discoms, audit is being conducted on the parameters of performance, statutory and financial compliance, in short proprietary audit,Ē the counsel for the discoms argued.
Counsel for TPDDL also told the court that 68 document requisitions, consisting of 311 queries, have been made by the auditor so far and that of these, 211 have been responded in full, 20 have been partially answered as further queries have been raised by the auditors, while 80 are under compilation.
Discoms further argued that they have filed a detailed affidavit before the court stating on record the requisitions made by the CAG and their compliance of the same, adding that the current stand of the top auditor that the companies are not cooperating has caused prejudice to them. The discoms are seeking to challenge the validity of the audit ordered against them and have repeatedly argued that the audit exercise is without the authority of law.