I was invited by WRI to join a webinar on "ESG Reporting for Indian Electricity Utilities: Challenges & Opportunities" held on Oct 16, 2025 03:00 PM India.
Over a decade back, in March 2014, I had been invited to a half-day workshop, in Bangalore, on "an initiative launched in the Electricity sector", put together by WRI, along with Prayas, which initiative they had claimed as having led to many notable changes in the sector.
My report on the same, may be accessed @ https://praja.in/hi/blog/murali772/2014/03/13/connectkaro-report#comment-35746, where, for all of the claims made, I had stated as "Now, what I learnt was that the power sector expert (who attended the workshop) was largely unaware of the transformation that had taken place in Delhi, particularly in the areas covered by TataPDDL" (check @ https://praja.in/en/blog/murali772/2018/08/05/failed-ppps-and-finally-good-model). Further, as seen from the rest of the contents of my report too, my stance was largely critical of WRI and associates, so much so, I went on to note at the end of the blog-post as @ Perhaps, that's the end of any invitation for me for such workshops :))). And, I had continued in the same critical vein of WRI's work, subsequently too, whenever an occasion arose.
So, when I received the invitation for the recent (Oct 16th) webinar, I had thought that probably the blog-post on my dismissed PIL, for replication of the Delhi power supply PPP model in Bengaluru (check @ https://praja.in/en/blog/murali772/2024/12/12/my-pil-quality-power-supply#comment-38770), had drawn WRI's attention, and they finally seemed to want to know more.
But, as the webinar progressed, I realised that I was quite mistaken, and while there were some positive remarks on the performance of the private players in the field, in the background paper as well as during the talks, the panelists as also the invitees were either unaware of what I saw as a transformation achieved by TataPDDL, or they didn't see as much in it as to want to talk about it all.
So, midway through the webinar, when I posted on the Q&A box that I would like to make a mention of the matter (and clicked on the 'raise hand' button too), it was responded to (in the Q&A box) by the moderator that the subject of the webinar was "environment & social governance" and not 'privatisation' or "PPP model", and if time permits, I may be given some time towards the end of the session. With just about 15 minutes remaining of the planned 2 hr session, and no indication whatsoever from the moderator that he was going to allow me to have my say, I put out in the Q&A box that they were being unfair to an invitee. Even at this stage, it required a panelist to prompt the moderator to allow me time.
When that finally happened, I pointed out that TataPDDL had already achieved all of the ESG parameters that had been talked about, and much much more. As such, I stated that I was surprised that there was very little recognition of it all. Also, if my PIL was dismissed, it was only because of my having been part of the electrical industry once (I sold out over 20 years back), and hence my petition could not be treated as in "public interest". All of this was in spite of the fact that none of the four respondent lawyers (representing Bescom, Govt of Karnataka, KERC & KSPCB) had any valid counters to the many points I had raised, which fact was tacitly acknowledged by the CJ too.
A panelist (a Dr Verma, if I recall correctly) then commented as to why PPP mode (if all of the claims made were true), and why not straight forward privatisation. The answer to that from me would have been (if I had been allowed to respond, which unfortunately I was not), that in a key infrastructure area like power supply, the government has to have a say to take care of the social obligations, about which there had already been much talk during the session itself.
I had also wanted to ask the lady from Prayas (which again I was not allowed to) as to why Pune and even Thane (just beyond Mulund, in Mumbai) tolerate the poor quality supplies from MSEB, even as most of Mumbai enjoys good quality power.
Well, all in all, even as I had thought that WRI had come to terms with me, it appears I was mistaken. Either way, nothing is going to prevent me from shouting from the roof-tops to demand quality services, whether from PSU's or even private players, and all in public interest. Well, I will admit there is a private interest too, since I would like to provide for a better future, in my country itself, now for my grandson (all of two years now) too.
PS: Incidentally, based on the claimed "success of the initiative launched in the Electricity sector" (talked about at the half-day workshop in March '14 - check 2nd para above), Parisar, Pune, along with Embarq, was supposedly proposing to replicate the exercise in the urban transport sector (a "ConnectKaro" workshop co-hosted by Embarq India, and WRI, in collaboration with DULT, Bangalore, was held on two days prior to this workshop - my report on same may be accessed @ https://praja.in/hi/blog/murali772/2014/03/13/connectkaro-report ). Needless to add, I was not impressed. They would, on the other hand, do well to look at Delhi power supply PPP model, and see if public bus transport services could be worked along similar lines, with the required tweakings, where necessary - my blog-post @ https://praja.in/en/blog/murali772/2019/07/16/outline-most-equitable-public-bus-transport-model#comment-38761 provides an outline on the same.
Listing-wise links to posts (in case the links fail):
1) https://praja.in/hi/blog/murali772/2014/03/13/connectkaro-report#comment-35746
2) https://praja.in/en/blog/murali772/2018/08/05/failed-ppps-and-finally-good-model
3) https://praja.in/en/blog/murali772/2024/12/12/my-pil-quality-power-supply#comment-38770
4) https://praja.in/hi/blog/murali772/2014/03/13/connectkaro-report
5) https://praja.in/en/blog/murali772/2019/07/16/outline-most-equitable-public-bus-transport-model#comment-38761
Muralidhar Rao
ಈ Blog entry ಅನ್ನು ಸ್ನೇಹಿತರಿಗೆ ಕಳಿಸಿ
