We wish to clarify that the recent allegation of consumers being overcharged by ₹0.36 per unit is factually incorrect and disregards the well-established tariff-setting framework mandated under the Electricity Act, 2003 and the OERC Tariff Regulations, 2022.
Every year, Distribution Companies (Discoms) file their Aggregate Revenue Requirement (ARR) before the Hon’ble OERC. After inviting comments from consumers, the public, Government of Odisha, GRIDCO, OPTCL and other stakeholders, the Commission finalizes consumer-category-wise tariffs following detailed prudence checks of audited data.
The tariff structure approved by the Commission includes a legally recognized cross-subsidy mechanism, wherein industrial, commercial and other higher-paying consumer categories bear a larger share of the cost to enable concessional tariffs for prioritized segments such as domestic and agricultural consumers. Suggesting that all consumers are uniformly “overcharged” ignores this statutory and transparent design.
At the end of each financial year, OERC undertakes a True-Up exercise, comparing estimated figures with actual sales and expenditure of the Discoms. Any gap or surplus is factored into the tariff of the following year.
As the True-Up for FY 2023–24 and FY 2024–25 is still pending, drawing any conclusion on excess or inadequate recovery is premature and misleading. The claim of ₹0.36 per unit “overcharging” is based on flawed assumptions, including misinterpretation of revenue figures that also include past arrears, and an absence of verified actual cost data for FY 2024–25.
A Tata Power Odisha Discoms spokesperson said:
“Odisha’s tariff process is transparent, participative and guided entirely by the Hon’ble OERC. The allegation of overcharging ignores the legal framework, the cross-subsidy structure and the ongoing True-Up process. We humbly urge all concerned not to be misled by speculative and incomplete figures circulating in the public domain.”
Odisha’s power-sector reforms have consistently aimed at ensuring stability, affordability and consumer protection. It is unfortunate that selective interpretations are being used to create confusion and undermine public trust in a system built on transparency and regulatory oversight.
