Supreme Court: Indian Railways Not a Deemed Distribution Licensee, Liable to Pay Cross-Subsidy Surcharge – EQ

Summary:

—

### **Case Background**
The Indian Railways appealed against a common judgment of the **Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL)** dated 12.02.2024. APTEL had held that:

– Indian Railways is **not a Deemed Distribution Licensee (DDL)** under the third proviso to Section 14 of the Electricity Act, 2003.
– Railways is a **consumer** of electricity, not a distributor.
– Railways must pay **Cross-Subsidy Surcharge (CSS)** and **Additional Surcharge (AS)** to State DISCOMS when availing **open access** to procure electricity from external sources.

### **Key Legal Issues Decided**

1. **Does Indian Railways qualify as a Deemed Distribution Licensee (DDL)?**
– **No.** The Court held that Railways does not “distribute” electricity to consumers. It only conveys electricity within its own network for self-consumption (traction, stations, signals, etc.).
– A distribution licensee must operate a *distribution system* that connects to *consumers* (third parties). Railways has no such consumers.

2. **Does Section 11 of the Railways Act override the Electricity Act?**
– **No.** Section 11 authorizes Railways to erect and operate electrical installations for its own working, but this does not exempt it from the licensing and surcharge framework of the Electricity Act. The two statutes can operate harmoniously.

3. **Is Railways the “Appropriate Government” under Section 14 of the Electricity Act?**
– **Yes, but irrelevant.** While Railways is an arm of the Central Government, this status does not automatically make it a DDL. The key test is functional: does it actually distribute electricity to third-party consumers? It does not.

4. **Is Railways liable to pay CSS and AS?**
– **Yes.** Even if treated as a DDL, Railways consumes electricity entirely for itself, making it a *consumer* under Section 2(15). Sesa Sterlite (2013) confirms that any entity consuming electricity for itself must pay CSS and AS when availing open access.

5. **Can a proposed amendment bill be used to interpret current law?**
– **No, but it confirms legislative intent.** The Draft Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 2025 proposes to exempt Railways from CSS/AS within five years. This shows that under the *current* law, no such exemption exists. Courts cannot read a proposed exemption into existing law.

### **Final Conclusion**
– **Appeals dismissed.**
– APTEL’s judgment upheld.
– Indian Railways is **not a DDL** and must pay **Cross-Subsidy Surcharge and Additional Surcharge** to DISCOMS for open access.
– DISCOMS directed to compute outstanding surcharges and provide Railways a reasonable opportunity to respond.
– No order as to costs.

—

## 💼 **Key Takeaways**

### **For Indian Railways**
1. **Higher power procurement cost** – Railways must now pay CSS and AS to DISCOMS for open access, increasing its operational expenses.
2. **No deemed licensee benefits** – Cannot claim exemption from surcharges or regulatory obligations under the Electricity Act.
3. **Liability for past dues** – DISCOMS will compute outstanding surcharges; Railways must budget for retrospective payments.
4. **Await legislative relief** – Only if the 2025 Amendment Bill is passed (exempting Railways within 5 years) will the burden reduce.

### **For DISCOMS (State Electricity Distribution Companies)**
1. **Revenue protection** – CSS and AS ensure DISCOMS recover cross-subsidy losses and stranded costs when high-revenue consumers like Railways switch to open access.
2. **Clarity on billing** – Court directs DISCOMS to compute and issue detailed surcharge calculations, strengthening their recovery position.
3. **Precedent for other bulk consumers** – The judgment reinforces that any entity consuming electricity for self-use (even if government-owned) is a *consumer* liable for surcharges.

### **For Policymakers & Regulators (CERC, SERCs, APTEL)**
1. **Deemed licensee status restricted** – Mere ownership by Central/State Government does not confer DDL status; functional test (actual distribution to third parties) applies.
2. **Legislative intent confirmed** – Proposed amendments cannot be read into existing law; judicial interpretation must be based on enacted provisions.
3. **Open access framework protected** – Surcharge mechanism remains critical to maintaining cross-subsidy and financial viability of DISCOMS.

### **For Other Bulk Consumers (Industries, Metro, Defense, etc.)**
1. **No automatic exemption** – Being a government entity does not exempt from CSS/AS if electricity is for self-consumption.
2. **Sesa Sterlite principle reaffirmed** – Any entity consuming electricity for itself (even if also a licensee for other purposes) is a *consumer* for that transaction.
3. **Monitor legislative changes** – The 2025 Amendment Bill proposes phased elimination of surcharges for Railways, Metro, and manufacturing enterprises. If passed, this could reduce power costs significantly.

### **For Investors & Project Developers (RE, Open Access, Captive Power)**
1. **Railways as a customer** – It remains a large, creditworthy consumer, but now must factor in CSS/AS costs in power purchase agreements.
2. **Regulatory certainty** – The judgment clarifies that open access for self-consumption triggers surcharges, regardless of the consumer’s identity.
3. **Policy risk** – Proposed amendments show legislative intent to change the surcharge regime; long-term PPAs should include change-in-law clauses.

—

For more information please see below link: