Persistent AT&C losses and the ACS–ARR gap continue to threaten the viability of India's power sector. Evaluate RDSS and the proposed Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 2025 as remedies.

Aggregate Technical & Commercial (AT&C) losses are power lost to technical faults, theft and unpaid bills. Together with the gap between cost of supply and revenue (ACS–ARR gap), they leave discoms unable to pay generators. This makes distribution the weakest link of the power chain [1]. RDSS treats the symptoms through funding tied to results, while the draft Bill tries to change the market structure. Together they are promising but incomplete.

RDSS (2021): Strengths

• Results-linked funding: money is released only when states meet reform conditions. The targets are AT&C losses of 12–15% and a zero ACS–ARR gap [2].
• Smart metering and network upgrades improve energy accounting and expose high-theft areas.
• Measurable gains: AT&C losses fell from 22.62% (FY14) to 15.04% (FY25). Discoms recorded their first combined profit of ₹2,701 crore [3].

RDSS: Limitations

• At 15.04%, losses are still just above the 12–15% target band, and the national average hides high-loss states [3].
• Gains depend on states paying subsidies on time, and the smart-meter rollout has been slow.
• It does not address tariffs kept low for political reasons. Large accumulated losses remain.

Electricity (Amendment) Bill, 2025: Strengths

• Competition: several discoms could supply over one network, under SERC oversight [4]. This targets the monopoly that removes any incentive to improve efficiency [1].
• Cost-reflective tariffs: cross-subsidies for manufacturing, railways and metros would end within five years [4].
• Electricity Council: a body of Union and state ministers to coordinate reforms [4].

Bill: Concerns

• Cherry-picking: discoms may be exempted from supplying consumers above 1 MW. Public discoms could be left with subsidised, loss-making consumers [4].
• Stranded PPA costs: the Bill does not say who bears the cost of existing power-purchase contracts when consumers switch discoms [4].
• Federal friction: governments could start proceedings to remove SERC members, which threatens regulators' independence [4].

Verdict: RDSS has delivered real but partial results. The Bill is structurally ambitious but carries risks in how it would be implemented.

The two work best together: RDSS fixes the hardware and accountability, and the Bill fixes the market design. The way forward is timely subsidy payment through DBT, independent and empowered SERCs, and safeguards for universal supply. This would make discoms viable and advance SDG 7, affordable and reliable energy for all.