The Supreme Court on Monday directed the Delhi government to submit a clear timeline on when it will notify the selection committee responsible for appointing the regular chairperson and members of the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (DERC).
The directive comes amid a year-long standstill in the commission’s adjudicatory functions, which has reportedly blocked consumer complaints against power distribution companies (DISCOMs).
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice Vipul M Pancholi instructed the Delhi government’s counsel to obtain explicit instructions from the competent authority regarding the appointment schedule. The top court has scheduled the next hearing for May 29.
A Year of Paralysis: The Consumer Impact
During Monday’s proceedings, Advocate Pranav Sachdeva, representing the petitioner NGO Energy Watchdog, informed the court that the DERC has been unable to carry out its adjudicatory functions for the last year.
According to the petition, this regulatory paralysis began after the former DERC chairperson, Justice (retd) Umesh Kumar, superannuated in July 2025. Since July 15, 2025, an administrative notice on the DERC website has kept petitions and applications under Section 142 of the Electricity Act from being listed or heard.
The petitioner argued that this prolonged vacancy directly harms public interest, violating consumers’ fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution by denying them access to judicial redress against DISCOMs.
Constitutional and Statutory Violations Alleged
The NGO’s plea challenges the legality of the regulatory body’s current functioning. Currently, the DERC operates with only two pro tem (temporary) members, lacking both a permanent chairperson and a mandatory judicial member.
Energy Watchdog contends that this temporary arrangement violates:
- The Electricity Act, 2003: Which mandates autonomous and independent State Electricity Regulatory Commissions.
- A April 2018 Supreme Court Verdict: Which explicitly requires the inclusion of a judicial member or a person of law on the commission.
- The Separation of Powers: The plea argues that relying on temporary, court-devised pro tem appointments is constitutionally impermissible as it undermines adjudicatory independence.
“Since the pro tem members are operating solely pursuant to a temporary mechanism devised by this court in the interest of justice… the petitioner is constrained to approach this court to seek vacation of their appointments and to seek directions for the regular appointment process,” the plea stated.
Broken Assurances
This is not the first time the issue has reached the apex court. The petitioner pointed to an August 2025 Supreme Court order in a separate matter, during which the Delhi government’s counsel had formally assured the court that the process of making regular appointments to the DERC would be completed expeditiously.
Despite this assurance, the petition claims the state government failed to take concrete steps until very recently. The court was informed on Monday that a proposal to constitute the selection committee was finally moved on May 4.
The petitioner is now seeking a court order directing the Delhi government to file an affidavit explaining its failure to meet the August 2025 commitments, alongside an immediate mandate to establish the selection committee and restore the commission’s legal composition.
