In preparing the audit report on the three private power distribution companies (discoms) in Delhi, the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG)’s draft report also mentions constraints that limited the audit’s scope.
The draft report says discoms were slow to furnish records, did not submit sets of data for several financial years and gave incomplete information in some cases, said sources.
The draft CAG audit report indicts three discoms — Tata Power Delhi Distribution Limited (TPDDL) and two BSES companies, BYPL and BRPL run by Reliance Infra — for inflating dues by Rs 8,000 crore. The draft report goes on to say that the discoms manipulated consumer figures, violated Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission’s (DERC) norms in reimbursement of taxes, misrepresented facts and lists out instances of conflict of interest.
The draft report also lists out seven roadblocks that ‘constrained’ the scope of the audit. According to the CAG, “TPDDL did not furnish records to audit pertaining to CAPEX for 2002-03 to 2006-07. BRPL and BYPL did not furnish the records to audit pertaining to CAPEX for 2002-03 and 2003-04. The records and information produced for the remaining period had several gaps.” Sources also said that the CAG report mentions billing and collection data for the year 2002-03 to 2004-05.
“Enforcement and settlement of theft data was not provided by BRPL and BYPL for the year 2002-03 to 2003-05 and 2002-03 to 2006-07 by TPDDL. Customer complaints data was not provided by BRPL and BYPL and in TPDDL, data of only 2011-2012 and 2012-13 was provided.” the report says.
According to the report, master meter data for the period 2002-03 to 2012-13 was not provided by BRPL and BYPL. “…These discoms did not produce certain records and furnished incomplete information, the details of which are given…” the CAG concluded.
Asked about such restraints, TPDDL, in a statement, said, “The copy of the draft report of the CAG, which TPDDL has received recently, is marked ‘Secret and Confidential’ and specifically instructs TPDDL not to reveal any contents. TPDDL feels deeply constrained in being required to follow these instructions thereby not being able to respond to prejudicial interpretations and allegations drawn from an obviously leaked draft report.”
“The Company is firmly of the view that all the points in the CAG draft report that require its response are merely an outcome of divergences in the interpretation of the applicable law and regulations, and looks forward to clarifying this to all the relevant authorities,” the TPDDL statement said.
Despite repeated calls, text messages and emails, BRPL and BYPL were unavailable for comment.