PUCSL Chief faults and stays clear of Govt.’s decisions on electricity

• Police seals PUCSL Chairman’s office after obtaining Court order

Public Utilities Commission (PUCSL) Chairman Janaka Ratnayake yesterday declared that he wasn’t responsible for the decisions taken by the Government to increase electricity tariff as well as assurance of uninterrupted supply now onwards.

“As PUCSL Chairman I am not responsible but other Commissioners who rejected the alternative proposal of a lower hike are responsible and should be held accountable in the future,” 



Ratnayake told the Daily FT.

He also said that Government arbitrary actions are undermining the value for and disrespecting the mechanism of independent commissions.  

“The Commission stands to protect the rights of the public as an independent organisation and not to be henchmen of any political authority or State agency,” he added.

On Tuesday, three Commissioners rejected a lower 36% increase in electricity tariff after public consultations and opted to go ahead with 66% proposed by the Ceylon Electricity Board. 

As per President Ranil Wickremesinghe-supportive PUCSL commissioners, electricity groups using below 90 units (or five million users) in the domestic sector will see an effective tariff hike of 250%. The CEB tariff hike will also increase tariffs in the industrial category including tourist hotels by 150% thereby endangering the much needed recovery in the economy.

Ratnayake, whose office at the PUCSL was sealed yesterday via a Court order obtained by the Police, also said the Government’s assurance of uninterrupted power supply wasn’t feasible but will be at great cost. 

“To do away with the 2-hour power cut the country will have to generate an additional 2 GW hours per day. With water levels in reservoirs reducing and/or required for irrigation along with likely dry season ahead, the CEB will be forced to resort to more expensive fuel-powered generation including coal,” Ratnayake opined.

He also believes that higher tariffs will reduce electricity usage thereby anticipated higher revenue by the CEB. The proposal put out for approval by CEB was 66% to earn Rs. 288 billion for the year. However, the PUCSL alternative of 36% hike was to raise Rs. 142 billion.

Ratnayake was of the view that approving the proposal to increase the electricity tariff proposed by the CEB, in the same way, is against Section 30 of the Electricity Act.