Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether review petitions before the Commission must be heard by the same members who passed the original order, and what quorum should be constituted when one or more such members are unavailable.
Analysis: The statutory scheme under the Electricity Act, 2003 and the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Conduct of Business) Regulations, 1999 did not contain an express provision governing the quorum for review petitions. The Commission therefore drew guidance from Section 114 and Order 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, particularly the principle that a review should ordinarily be heard by the same judge or judges who passed the impugned order. The Commission also relied on the doctrine of necessity, recognising that where a member who participated in the original decision is unavailable because of death, superannuation, or similar unavoidable cause, another quorum may hear the review. The procedure adopted had to preserve both propriety and the underlying review jurisdiction.
Conclusion: If the members who constituted the original quorum are available, only they shall hear the review petition. If one or more of them are unavailable due to death, superannuation, or prolonged absence, the Chairperson shall constitute an equal quorum including the available original members. If an equal quorum cannot be formed, a lesser quorum of not less than two members, including the available original members, may hear the review petition.