Latest news with #CERC
Time of India
3 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
SC upholds Himachal Pradesh's demand for 18% free power from JSW plant
The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the Himachal Pradesh government's demand for 18 per cent free electricity supply from JSW Hydro Energy 's 1,045-megawatt Karcham Wangtoo hydroelectric power plant in the state. While setting aside the Himachal Pradesh High Court 's order for allowing maximum 13 per cent of free electricity to the state government, a bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar held that the CERC Regulations 2019 do not prohibit JSW from supplying free power beyond 13 per cent to the State, and the Implementation Agreement does not stand overridden by the operation of these Regulations,' the top court said. 'Once the Regulation does not prohibit the supply of free power beyond 13 per cent, JSW cannot rely on it to wriggle out of its contractual obligations . Such an interpretation is necessary to recognise and enforce the generating company's freedom of contract, which includes its choice of business dealings,' the apex court said, adding that the Regulatory Commissions, APTEL, and the courts must enforce these contractual obligations and ensure that their interpretation of regulations does not allow the party to circumvent and breach its contractual undertakings when the same is not intended by the regulation itself. As per agreements executed between JSW Hydro and the Himachal Pradesh government, the former's plant was supposed to supply free power at 18 per cent of the net generation for 28 years to the state after the completion of 12 years of commercial operations of the project that commenced in 2011. However, CERC (Terms and Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2019 capped the maximum free supply at 13 per cent of the net generation on the ground that contractual agreements, to the extent that they are inconsistent with the applicable regulations, shall stand overridden by their operation. The HC had accepted the CERC's findings and directed that the implementation agreement stood modified. Coming down of JSW for its contradictory positions, Justice Narasimha said that the company cannot be allowed to approbate and reprobate, or blow hot and cold at the same time to secure relief under the law. 'The regulator has the expertise, specialisation, and institutional memory to conduct such an interpretative exercise to further the objective of the regulatory regime and systematically lay down legal principles. In this light, the High Court should not have entered into the domain of interpreting these Regulations which deal with tariff determination, as the same falls within the exclusive domain of the CERC,' the SC said.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
4 days ago
- Business
- Business Standard
SC rules in favour of Himachal in power dispute with JSW Hydro Energy
The Supreme Court on Wednesday ruled against JSW Hydro Energy, a subsidiary of JSW Energy, in its dispute with the Himachal Pradesh government over the supply of 18 per cent free power to the state. JSW Hydro Energy had argued that, under the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) Tariff Regulations, it was required to supply no more than 13 per cent as free power. 'We have allowed the appeal by the State of Himachal Pradesh by interpreting the provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 and the CERC Regulations, 2019 in the context of the subsisting and continuing contractual relationship between the parties,' said a Bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Joymalya Bagchi. The Bench held that the CERC Regulations, 2019, did not prohibit the company from supplying free power beyond 13 per cent and that the Implementation Agreement remained valid and enforceable. While CERC must give effect to its regulations and allow a pass-through of up to 13 per cent free power in tariff calculation, any additional supply is a contractual obligation governed by the Implementation Agreement. On interpreting the CERC Regulations, the court stated that the 13 per cent limit applies only for tariff purposes and does not prevent the company from supplying more than that amount of free power. 'Further, a writ petition before the High Court for aligning the Implementation Agreement with the CERC Regulations, 2019, and the CERC's order dated 17.03.2022 is not maintainable,' the court held. In allowing the state's appeal, the Supreme Court criticised the High Court for intervening in the tariff fixation domain, which falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the CERC. 'Considering the expertise and specialisation of the CERC as a statutory regulator and the wide-ranging jurisdiction it exercises under the Electricity Act, as well as Respondent No. 1's (JSW Hydro Energy) conduct in not seeking relief against the appellant (State of Himachal Pradesh) before the CERC, we have held that the present writ petition was not maintainable before the High Court,' the Bench added. JSW Hydro Energy Limited operates a 1,045 MW hydroelectric project at Karcham Wangtoo, originally allotted to Jaiprakash Industries Limited under a Memorandum of Understanding signed in 1993. Under the subsequent Implementation Agreement with the Himachal Pradesh government, JSW (through its predecessor) had agreed to provide 18 per cent of net power generation to the state free of cost after the first 12 years of commercial operation. Later, JSW approached the CERC and then the High Court when the state declined to revise the free power obligation to 13 per cent in line with the 2019 regulations. The High Court had ruled in favour of JSW and directed the state to align the Implementation Agreement with the CERC Regulations. The Supreme Court has now overturned that ruling.
Time of India
4 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
SC upholds Himachal's demand for 18% free electricity from JSW Hydro Energy's Karcham Wangtoo plant
The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the Himachal Pradesh government's demand for 18% free electricity supply from JSW Hydro Energy 's 1,045-megawatt Karcham Wangtoo hydroelectric power plant in the state. While setting aside the Himachal Pradesh High Court's order for allowing maximum 13% of free electricity to the state government, a bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar held that the CERC Regulations 2019 do not prohibit JSW from supplying free power beyond 13% to the State, and the Implementation Agreement does not stand overridden by the operation of these Regulations,' the top court said. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Select a Course Category Technology MCA Healthcare Public Policy Data Science Data Science Artificial Intelligence Others CXO Cybersecurity Data Analytics Digital Marketing healthcare others Finance Leadership Management Design Thinking Operations Management Project Management Degree Product Management MBA PGDM Skills you'll gain: Duration: 12 Weeks MIT xPRO CERT-MIT XPRO Building AI Prod India Starts on undefined Get Details 'Once the Regulation does not prohibit the supply of free power beyond 13%, JSW cannot rely on it to wriggle out of its contractual obligations. Such an interpretation is necessary to recognise and enforce the generating company's freedom of contract, which includes its choice of business dealings,' the apex court said, adding that the Regulatory Commissions, APTEL, and the courts must enforce these contractual obligations and ensure that their interpretation of regulations does not allow the party to circumvent and breach its contractual undertakings when the same is not intended by the regulation itself. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Play War Thunder now for free War Thunder Play Now Undo As per agreements executed between JSW Hydro and the Himachal Pradesh government, the former's plant was supposed to supply free power at 18% of the net generation for 28 years to the state after the completion of 12 years of commercial operations of the project that commenced in 2011. However, CERC (Terms and Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2019 capped the maximum free supply at 13% of the net generation on the ground that contractual agreements, to the extent that they are inconsistent with the applicable regulations, shall stand overridden by their operation. The HC had accepted the CERC's findings and directed that the implementation agreement stood modified. Live Events Coming down of JSW for its contradictory positions, Justice Narasimha said that the company cannot be allowed to approbate and reprobate, or blow hot and cold at the same time to secure relief under the law. 'The regulator has the expertise, specialisation, and institutional memory to conduct such an interpretative exercise to further the objective of the regulatory regime and systematically lay down legal principles. In this light, the High Court should not have entered into the domain of interpreting these Regulations which deal with tariff determination, as the same falls within the exclusive domain of the CERC,' the SC said.
The Print
5 days ago
- Business
- The Print
CERC rejects CESC's 300 MW hybrid power tariff bid over procedural lapses
CESC sought to adopt a tariff of Rs 3.81 per kWh for the hybrid power procurement. The power utility had failed to obtain prior approval for deviations in the bidding process from the appropriate authority, which in this case should have been the Centre and not the West Bengal government, the CERC said in its report. Kolkata, Jul 15 (PTI) The Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) has rejected a petition by CESC Ltd seeking approval for the adoption of tariff for the long-term procurement of 300 MW power from grid-connected wind-solar hybrid projects, citing non-compliance with competitive bidding guidelines. 'We reject the adoption of the tariff so discovered, as the petitioner has not complied with the bidding guidelines under Section 63 of the Electricity Act. The petitioner may go for re-bidding, if so advised, strictly in accordance with the guidelines issued under Section 63 of the Act,' the CERC said in the order. CESC had floated the tender on November 8, 2024, for procuring 150 MW wind-solar hybrid power with a greenshoe option for an additional 150 MW, aiming to meet its renewable purchase obligations. The project was proposed to be located in Mandsaur in Madhya Pradesh. The final tariff was discovered through competitive bidding and an e-reverse auction conducted on December 27, 2024. Purvah Green Power Pvt Ltd, a subsidiary of CESC, emerged as the successful bidder for the entire 300 MW capacity. CESC did not respond to requests for comments till the time of filing of this report. The Commission noted that despite being aware from a previous case (Petition No. 365/AT/2024) that approval for deviations in inter-state transmission system (ISTS)-connected projects must be obtained from the central government, CESC proceeded with approvals from the West Bengal government. The Commission also observed that CESC had misled the state government by not disclosing the ISTS nature of the project and continued the tender process despite being aware of the requirement to approach the Centre. 'The Commission had condoned this requirement once as an exception, but cannot make the exception a rule,' the order said, referring to a previous instance where similar deviations were allowed in view of exigencies. 'Acceptance of the petitioner's prayers in the instant petition would not be in consonance with the principles as contained in Section 63 of the Electricity Act, 2003,' it added. CESC defended the higher-than-average tariff by citing two key advantages in the winning bid. First, the project promised a higher Capacity Utilisation Factor (CUF) of 50 per cent, well above the usual 30 per cent for comparable hybrid projects. Additionally, the bidder committed to completing the project within 20 months, shorter than the standard 24-month timeline, which CESC claimed could result in potential savings of Rs 0.02 per kWh. The Commission further pointed out that awarding the entire 300 MW capacity to a related party. 'Another interesting point to note is that in response to the RfS in Petition 365/AT/2024 as well as the present petition, the bidders participating in the bids are precisely the same, and the winning bidder, being a wholly owned subsidiary of the petitioner, is also the same. While this could be a coincidence, it raises a question mark on transparency,' the order noted. The Commission also rejected CESC's justification of the higher tariff on the grounds of higher capacity utilisation and project timelines, noting that the company's comparison of the discovered tariff with short-term prices in the Green Day-Ahead Market (G-DAM) was misplaced. CERC clarified that such comparisons are not valid under the guidelines, which require benchmarking against tariffs discovered through long-term competitive bidding. The July 9 order advised CESC to go for re-bidding strictly in accordance with the guidelines issued under Section 63 of the Electricity Act. PTI BSM NN This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
Time of India
5 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
CERC rejects CESC's 300 MW hybrid power tariff bid over procedural lapses
The Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) has rejected a petition by CESC Ltd seeking approval for the adoption of tariff for the long-term procurement of 300 MW power from grid-connected wind-solar hybrid projects, citing non-compliance with competitive bidding guidelines. The power utility had failed to obtain prior approval for deviations in the bidding process from the appropriate authority, which in this case should have been the Centre and not the West Bengal government, the CERC said in its report. CESC sought to adopt a tariff of Rs 3.81 per kWh for the hybrid power procurement. "We reject the adoption of the tariff so discovered, as the petitioner has not complied with the bidding guidelines under Section 63 of the Electricity Act. The petitioner may go for re-bidding, if so advised, strictly in accordance with the guidelines issued under Section 63 of the Act," the CERC said in the order. CESC had floated the tender on November 8, 2024, for procuring 150 MW wind-solar hybrid power with a greenshoe option for an additional 150 MW, aiming to meet its renewable purchase obligations . The project was proposed to be located in Mandsaur in Madhya Pradesh. The final tariff was discovered through competitive bidding and an e-reverse auction conducted on December 27, 2024. Purvah Green Power Pvt Ltd, a subsidiary of CESC, emerged as the successful bidder for the entire 300 MW capacity. CESC did not respond to requests for comments till the time of filing of this report. The Commission noted that despite being aware from a previous case (Petition No. 365/AT/2024) that approval for deviations in inter-state transmission system (ISTS)-connected projects must be obtained from the central government, CESC proceeded with approvals from the West Bengal government. The Commission also observed that CESC had misled the state government by not disclosing the ISTS nature of the project and continued the tender process despite being aware of the requirement to approach the Centre. "The Commission had condoned this requirement once as an exception, but cannot make the exception a rule," the order said, referring to a previous instance where similar deviations were allowed in view of exigencies. "Acceptance of the petitioner's prayers in the instant petition would not be in consonance with the principles as contained in Section 63 of the Electricity Act, 2003," it added. CESC defended the higher-than-average tariff by citing two key advantages in the winning bid. First, the project promised a higher Capacity Utilisation Factor (CUF) of 50 per cent, well above the usual 30 per cent for comparable hybrid projects. Additionally, the bidder committed to completing the project within 20 months, shorter than the standard 24-month timeline, which CESC claimed could result in potential savings of Rs 0.02 per kWh. The Commission further pointed out that awarding the entire 300 MW capacity to a related party. "Another interesting point to note is that in response to the RfS in Petition 365/AT/2024 as well as the present petition, the bidders participating in the bids are precisely the same, and the winning bidder, being a wholly owned subsidiary of the petitioner, is also the same. While this could be a coincidence, it raises a question mark on transparency," the order noted. The Commission also rejected CESC's justification of the higher tariff on the grounds of higher capacity utilisation and project timelines, noting that the company's comparison of the discovered tariff with short-term prices in the Green Day-Ahead Market (G-DAM) was misplaced. CERC clarified that such comparisons are not valid under the guidelines, which require benchmarking against tariffs discovered through long-term competitive bidding. The July 9 order advised CESC to go for re-bidding strictly in accordance with the guidelines issued under Section 63 of the Electricity Act.
