Electricity Companies transferring burden of inferior coal on consumers

CERS lodges protest against Electricity Companies transferring burden of inferior coal on consumers 

Requests GERC to direct generation companies to claim losses Coal India and other suppliers

Ahmedabad, 1st February 2013: Consumer Education Research Society (CERS) has lodged a protest before Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission (GERC) against power generating companies transferring the financial burden of receiving inferior quality coal on its consumers by charging them illegally. The power generating companies in Gujarat have been receiving inferior quality of coal from Coal India Ltd, which has led to an increase in the requirement of coal from 0.6 kg/kWh to 0.75 kg/kWh (increase of 25%); for which the incurred losses are being offset by charging the electricity consumers of Gujarat. Earlier these power generating companies collected a huge amount from consumers for 6-8% loss of coal in Railway transit (from Coal mines to power plants), which is now restricted to only 0.8% after the implementation of Electricity Act. CERS has requested Hon’ble Commission to direct generation companies to claim losses from Coal India Ltd and other coal suppliers, rather unjustifiably and illegally charging consumers. CERS has stated that power companies resort to this since they find it easier to burden consumers than to recover amount from the coal suppliers.

CERS has made following study to strengthen its case:

Grade  of Coal Gross Calorific Value of Coal in Kcal/kWh Pithead price of coal in Rs/MT
   A           Above 6200     3690
   B           5600-6200     2800
   C           4940-5600     1450
   D           4200-4940     1140
   E           3360-4200        880
   F           2400-3360        660
   G           Up to 2400        480

Normally coal of D and E grade is required to generate electricity in power plants. It is shocking that Gujarat generation companies sign contract to purchase ‘D’ grade of coal and receive E grade coal. This increases the consumption of coal, Thereby increasing cost per unit generation and burdening consumers. The cost of coal increases by Rs. 2000-2500 per Metric Ton due to Railway freight charges, as coal is received in Gujarat from distance of more than 1000-1200 kms.

In recent tariff petition filed by two generating companies of Gujarat they have claimed recovery of huge amount due to receipt of poor & inferior quality of coal which has been opposed by CERS. The state owned power generation company, Gujarat State Electricity Corporation Ltd (GSECL) has claimed recovery of Rs. 160.69 crores from consumers due to its inefficiency and receiving inferior quality of coal compared to contracted grade of coal. Similarly Torrent Power Ltd has claimed a loss of Rs. 62.0 crores from its consumers for getting inferior quality of coal. This increase in fuel cost is recovered by electricity companies through GERC approved formula under Fuel Price & Power Purchase Adjustment Charges (FPPPA). Gujarat  is the  first to  introduce  FPPPA  formula  other  States  have  implemented  this  formula  from  1st April 2012 , after  directives  from  Appellate  Tribunal  for  Electricity.

CERS states that situation is not different in other state of India where consumers are being burdened due to receipt of short supply of coal and inferior quality of coal. The power generation companies in collaboration with Coal India Ltd exploit consumers with State Electricity Regulatory Commissions being silent spectators.

For more information, please contact Mr K.K.Bajaj on +91-9374103578

79(A) Maharashtra Co-operative Housing Societies Manual – 15.10.2011

Section 79 (A) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. 

No. SAGRUYO-2011/PRA.KRA. 360/14-SA, Co operation, Marketing and Textile Department, Date 15th October, 2011

Directive to be given to all co-operative Housing Societies in the Maharashtra State Under section 79 (A) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960.
In respect of applying Co-operative Housing Societies Manual

Very important and interesting
Courtesy : J.B.Patel (Jeby), Housing Societies’ Activist!, Mobile:9820538570

 

79(A) MAHARASHTRA CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCITIES MANNUAL – 15.10.2011

 

 

How is Service Tax and Service Charge calculated in Restaurants ?

A typical restaurant bill has the items which you have ordered and their prices. Then there is service charges, service tax and value added tax as well.

“Service charge is not the same as service tax. Service charge is the amount you pay for the service of the establishment and it goes into their pocket,” said Anil Rego, chartered accountant and CEO, Right Horizons, an investment advisory and wealth management firm.

The following example will illustrate the tax calculation.

Total for food items is: Rs 865

Service charge (5%): Rs 43

Sub total: Rs 908

Service tax is 12.36% of 40% of Rs 908.

40 percent of Rs 908 is Rs 363.20

12.36% of Rs 363.20 is Rs 44.89.

So the service tax to be charged is Rs 44.89.

Grand total (after rounding off) = (Sub total + Service tax) = (908 + 44.89) = Rs. 953

The most important thing to remember is that service tax is not charged on VAT. The restaurant might cheat you by charging you a service charge, even when it’s not mentioned in the menu. Or, they might cheat you by charging a service tax which includes VAT as well. Or they might collect a service tax but calling it service charge and cheat you as well as the government.

Click Here for the full story and the detailed explanation

Nominee – Transfer of Shares in Co-operative Housing Society: Maharashtra CHS Act

Source Courtesy: Advocate Sanjeev Kanchan
Transfer of Shares in Co-operative Housing Society: Maharashtra CHS Act
Can Society transfer the Share Certificate in the name of the nominee in spite of objections from legal heirs ?

By Advocate Sanjeev Kanchan

Posted on 10th July 2002 ( Provisions still Valid )

I would like to deal with the above query in detail, since similar problems are faced in many co-operative societies.

For instance, a person has been nominated as a legal nominee by the deceased member in the records of a co-operative housing society. The said deceased husband died in Bombay in 1999, leaving behind him his wife and his two adult sons. The sons have filed their objection with the society and requested them not to transfer the share certificate in the name of their mother, although she is the nominee of the flat as per the records of the society.

Section 30 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act 1960 deals with the provision of transfer of interest which is as under :-
Section 30 (1) : On the death of a member of a Society, the society shall transfer the share or interest of the deceased member to a person or persons nominated in accordance with the rules. Or if no person has been so nominated, to such person as may appear to the committee to be the heir or legal representative of the deceased member. Provided that such nominee, heir or legal representative, as the case may be duly admitted as a member of the Society.

All transfer and payments duly made by a society in accordance with the provisions of Section 30(4) shall be valid and effectual against any demand made upon the society by any other person. Rule 25, for the purpose of transfer of his share or interest under sub-section (1) of Section 30, a member of a Society may by a document signed by him, or by making a statement in any book kept for the purpose by the society, nominate any person or persons. Where the nomination is made by document, such document shall be deposited with the society during the members life-time and, where the nomination is made by statement it shall be signed by the member and attested by one witness.

MCS Rule 25 – Section 3
Where a member of a society has not made any nomination, the society shall on the member’s death by a public notice exhibited at the office of the society, invite claims or objections for the proposed transfer of the share or interest of the deceased within the time specified in the notice.

After taking into consideration the claim or objections received in reply to the notice or otherwise, and after making such inquiries as committee considers proper in the circumstances prevailing, the committee shall decide as to the person who in its opinion is the heir or the Legal Representatives of the deceased member and proceed to take action under Section 30.

However, what is important is the section and not the rules and bye- laws in as much as the rules and bye laws cannot provide everything contrary to the section. It is very clear on the plain reading of the section that the intention and purpose of Section 30 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act is to provide for who has to deal with the society on the death of a member and not to create a new rule of succession. The purpose of the nomination to make certain that the person with whom the society has to deal on the death of a member. The society has to deal with the legal nominee who has been nominated by the deceased member on the records of the society. The purpose of this section is to avoid confusion in case there are dispute between the heirs and legal representatives and to avoid uncertainties as to with whom the society should deal to get proper discharge.

The society is not concerned with any kinds of dispute raised by any person whosoever, so for the transfer of membership of deceased member to his nominee is concerned. Nevertheless all the persons entitled to the estate of the deceased as per succession law applicable to them do not lose their right to the same, even after transfer of the shares in the name of the deceased member.

It is pertinent to note that transfer of any property including share of the society is not governed by the ordinary law but by the provisions of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, and the rules and bye-laws framed by the Society. However, the right of society to admit a person of its choice as a member cannot be exercised arbitrarily and so as to deprive person of his/her right to the shares or property of a deceased member.

The law does not give a right to the society to refuse membership to a person who is entitled to become a member. To repeat, a society has the right to admit a nominee of a deceased member of an heir or legal representative of deceased member as chosen by the society as a member. A member of the society will have to obtain relief in the normal court against such person and have his rights ascertained and declared, and thereafter apply to the society on the basis of the Court Judgement to make him a member of the society.

Whether nomination is will
From the requirements for making a nomination, one may feel that nomination is Will. But is reality the Nomination is not a Will. Will as nomination filed in accordance with the provisions of rule and bye laws in the prescribed form and general intention (which is must in the Will) is not to provide for succession after death of a member.

Status of a Nominee
The provisions of nomination is found in various Acts, for example, L.I.C., Provident Fund, Gratuity, but the nomination does not create any title or interest in favour of the nominee. In a recent case under the Insurance Act, the Supreme Court in SMT SARBATI DEVI versus SMT USHA DEVI reported in A.I.R. 1984 SC, 346 held that it does not confer any beneficial interest in the nominee and the other heirs can claim the amount in accordance with the law of succession governing them. Therefore as a principal as can very well say that nominee is mere trustee with whom society can initially or prima facie deal with and after the death of a member, all the heirs of the deceased member will have a right of succession to the property, and the nominee cannot exclude other heirs. In other words the provisions of ordinary succession law will not be affected by nomination.

In view of aforesaid facts and the judgement, it is simply clear that the society will have to transfer the shares in the name of the nominee, irrespective of any objection being raised by any other person unless and until the aid objections obtain relief in the normal court against the nominee and society. In my opinion the society has no alternative except to transfer the shares in the name of the nominee.

 

Transfer Charges, Circular for Transfer Charges in MarathiMCS BYE LAWS FOR TRANSFER OF SHARES75 Transfer to nominee or nominees

Associate Members in Co-operative Housing Societies

We have noticed that many co-operative housing societies have either elected or co-opted Associate Members (by paying Rs.100/- as Associate Membership fee) on the managing committees. If you have any Associate Member as MC Member in your co-operative housing society, LODGE a formal complaint with Deputy Registrar / Assistant Registrar of your concerned ward immediately with the following reference and ask such MC Member to resign or get him / her dismissed. 

“Directive to be given to all co-operative Housing Societies in the Maharashtra State Under section 79 (A) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960.
In respect of applying Co-operative Housing Societies Manual
GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA
No. SAGRUYO-2011/PRA.KRA. 360/14-SA, Co operation, Marketing and Textile
Department,
Date 15th October, 2011

CHAPTER 3

MEMBER, MANAGING COMMITTEE AND RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF THE MEMBERS
3.1
Member
Types of membership

D)

  • Even though there is not mentioned the name as an owner in the purchase deed, the Associate  Membership can get by paying only admission fee and with the consent of the original member.In the absence of original member and with his consent associate member can attend the annual general body meeting, the associate member can take part in the election as a voter/ candidate. In case the associate member gets elected as a committee member, he becomes office bearer also.

A person, who became an Associate member by paying only admission fee, shall not get any rights in voting or election behalf the original member. It is necessary for the Associate member that his share/name is included in the ownership of property for holding share jointly.”

J.B.Patel (Jeby)
Housing Societies’ Activist!
Mobile:9820538570

Bt Brinjal Poll

What if we had not done anything to stop genetically modified (GM) Bt brinjal? By now we would have been eating various kinds of GM foods. Thankfully, that’s not true.

Three years ago protests from thousands of us got a moratorium on Bt brinjal.[1] Multinational seed companies like Monsanto and our very own Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar dislike this moratorium. [2] It’s now up to us to ensure that they don’t use the sham of food scarcity to unleash this dangerous technology on us.

Take this poll to show your support for safe GM-free food.

 

CLICK HERE

 

The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Agriculture [3]and an expert committee appointed by the Supreme Court have recommended a cautionary approach to GM crops.[4] The responses to this poll will create a solid base for the support for safe food and these recommendations as well.

There is enough food being produced by our country. A lot of it is rotting in food godowns.[5] The government is using this to create the notion of scarcity. Inserting genes of other organisms into our crops makes them unnatural and unsafe. Once GM crops are out in the open, they’ll only contaminate other crops. How is this going to secure our food?

The third anniversary of the moratorium on Bt brinjal was celebrated on February 9, 2013, all over the country. It was a reminder, that our consistent opposition to the introduction of this technology has kept it away so far. It has also prevented the government from introducing the BRAI bill, which seeks to ease entry of GM foods.[6] Let’s keep up this fight to protect our food.

So answer this poll now to build a strong support base for safe food.

 

CLICK HERE

 

 

Aadhar number mandatory for EPFO ?

Hi Everybody, for your information please.
Aadhar number mandatory for EPFO ( Employees Provident Fund Organization)

Please find attached a circular by EPFO dated 21.01.2013 making aadhar number mandatory to new members from 01.03.2013 and to existing members in a time bound manner.
Courtesy : Roshan Pastakia
And now, after discovering that the UIDAI is organising enrolment camps only in 18 states, the provident fund body decided to withdraw its decision to make Aadhaar number mandatory for all EPFO members

Advertising Standards Council of India raps 15 firms for misleading claims

Advertising Standards Council of India raps 15 firms for misleading claimsAds for Horlicks and Pepsodent among those pulled upPiyali Mandal & Sounak Mitra / New Delhi Dec 29, 2012, 00:17 IST

http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/ad-council-raps-15-firms-for-misleading-claims/497089/

The Advertising Standards Council of India ( ASCI) pulled up 15 companies, including GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare, Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL) and Max Life Insurance, for misleading claims in their advertisements, in a report released on Friday.

While GlaxoSmithKline was asked to withdraw the commercial for its energy drink Horlicks, Hindustan Unilever was asked to pull out the commercial for its toothpaste brand Pepsodent Expert Protection.

In 2010-11, the independent agency, which monitors advertisements in Indian media, received 187 complaints, of which 104 were upheld. According to ASCI, during this period, 85 advertisers complied with its decisions.

“The advertisement (for Horlicks) does not disclose the manner in which Horlicks provides comprehensive nutrition, as claimed in the advertisement,” ASCI said, adding five of the seven claims in the advertisement didn’t follow ASCI guidelines.

An e-mailed query to GlaxoSmithKline did not elicit any response.

Other companies asked to withdraw or modify their advertisements include Cadilla Healthcare (for its Everyouth Natural Fairness brand of face wash, VLCC Personal Care for VLCC Shape Up Waist and Tummy Trim Gel and Healthcare Shape up), the Dainik Bhaskar Group (for its ‘How Divya Marathi opened the new market’ campaign) and Max Life Insurance (for its Shiksha Plus II Child plans).

ASCI said about 80 per cent of advertisers in India complied with codes set by the council. Five years earlier, compliance stood at 71 per cent.

Click here for the full story