The rift between Jharkhand State Electricity Board (JSEB) and JSEB Engineer, Official & Workers Co-ordination Committee (JEOWCC) has widen with the later threatening the board of dire consequences for going against the demands of the association on restructuring of board and distribution franchisee.
The JEOWCC has decided to protest at the JSEB headquarters on May 14 against the decisions of the management.
The association accused the JSEB of foul play on the issue of distribution franchise and questioned the intention of the management for demanding a reply from the JEOWCC in one day. In its letter dated May 28, the JSEB asked the association to come forward with their decision on working with the distribution franchisee in Ranchi and Jamshedpur.
“We have been given only 24 hours to respond to the letter from the management. We are going on State wide visit from tomorrow and if anything happens in the meantime from the board’s side even I am also not in a position to tell what would be the reaction of workers,” said Convenor JEOWCC Prashant Chaturvedi.
Incidentally, the JSEB has signed an MoU with Calcutta Electric Supply Company (CESC) and Tata Power for distribution franchisee in Ranchi and Jamshedpur correspondingly for 15 years.
The JEOWCC accused the State government and the JESB of colluding and neglecting the association on a host of issues besides bypassing the High Court’s order to have a meeting with the association on all issues.
The association said it had submitted a 45 page of representation to the management which the board has not acted upon till date.
The 45 page memorandum contained losses to JSEB in Ranchi & Jamshedpur, purported violation of Electricity Act 2003, mandatory energy audit before awarding distribution franchisee, sub-delegating powers delegated to JSEB officers, terms & conditions for deputation of JSEB employees with the franchisee, supposed loss of jobs, et al.
The association castigated the stand taken by the State government on the issue of restructuring of the board. According to the association the State government had insisted on a tripartite agreement before proceeding on the proposed restructuring.
Chaturvedi said, “We were never called for any discussion on the matter,” and whatever we know has come through media.