WHAT IS THIS CASE ABOUT
Haryana Utilities are licensees that undertake the distribution and supply of electricity to consumers in Haryana. They entered into 2 Power Purchase Agreements with The Adani Power Mundra Limited (AP(M)L) in 2008. The PPAs were by a tariff-based Competitive Bidding Process under the provisions of Section 63 of the Electricity Act, 2003, as per the Standard Bidding Guidelines notified by the Central Government. When the tariff was increased on various grounds, Adani Power sought relief and filed a petition before Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC). An appeal was filed before APTEL, which the tribunal dismissed as it was in favor of the respondents. The present petition is an appeal to the judgment passed by APTEL dated 3rd November 2020.
CONTENTIONS OF THE PARTIES
Learned counsel on behalf of the appellants contended that there was Change in Law and that the CERC as well as the APTEL made a mistake in granting relief to AP(M)L. He put forward that in the PPA, both domestic coal and imported coal were admittedly premised in the ratio of 70:30. Hence, relief can only be granted if there’s a shortfall in the 70% of domestic coal. Senior counsel for respondents submitted that there was no distinction regarding the 70% domestic coal and 30% imported coal provided.
OBSERVATIONS OF THE COURT
The court after examining the documents on record held that no representation was given by AP(M)L that its bid is concerned with 70% domestic and 30% imported coal. The court was of the view that the contentions put forth by the appellants were contradictory and that there was no mistake in the decision by CERC and APTEL. Hence Adani Power would be entitled to 100% relief of the contracted capacity on account of Change in Law.
What do you think about this judgment? Write down in the comments below!
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
