SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SURYA KANT, CJI., B.V. NAGARATHNA, JOYMALYA BAGCHI, JJ.
West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Adhunik Power & Natural Resource Ltd. & Ors. – Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 2584-2585 OF 2026
Decided On : 27-02-2026
(A) Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Sections 91 and 95 [Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 – Sections 94 and 98] – Written contract – Ordinarily, when a contract is reduced to writing, its terms must be determined from the document itself – However, this rule does not put embargo on looking into such facts which establish link between terms of contract and existing facts i.e. attending circumstances, or impart meaning to a term which may otherwise be meaningless or unworkable. (Para 22)
(B) Coal Mines (Special Provision) Act, 2015 – Section 4 – Coal Linkage – Shortfall in tapering linkage – Award of compensation – Article 2.5 of PPA/PSA refers to a ‘captive source’ for coal supply for generation and supply of power and indemnifies WBSEDCL against any additional cost arising from procurement of coal from alternate sources – Change in Law materially affected right of APNRL to procure coal from cancelled coal block, compelling it to source coal from other sources at a higher price – It was incorrect for APTEL to hold that indemnity clause contained in Article 2.5 of PPA/PSA would be inapplicable as delay in operationalization of coal block was attributable to inaction by lead miner TISCO and/or owing to ‘go-no-go’ policy of Ministry of Environment and Forests – Such restrictive interpretation of Article 2.5, is untenable – Impugned order passed by APTEL set aside to limited extent that it grants compensation for procurement of coal through e-auction/import to meet shortfall in tapering linkage granted to it pending operationalization of captive coal block – Remaining portion of order awarding compensation on account of Change in Law events with effect from 25.08.2014 along with carrying costs till date of actual payment, upheld. (Paras 23, 24, 25 and 26)
Facts of the case:
Present appeals are directed against judgment and order dated 04.09.2025 whereby Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (‘APTEL’) modified the order dated 29.01.2020 passed by Central Electricity Regulatory Commission, New Delhi (‘CERC’) and directed that Respondent No.1, Adhunik Power and Natural Resources Ltd. (‘APNRL’), was entitled to (i) compensation for coal purchased through e auction/import to meet the shortfall in tapering linkage granted to it pending operationalization of the Ganeshpur captive coal block, and (ii) compensation on account of Change in Law events with effect from 25.08.2014 as per Article 10.2 of PPA1/PSA2, along with carrying costs till actual payment was made.
Findings of Court:
Article 2.5 of the PPA/PSA refers to a ‘captive source’ for coal supply for generation & supply of power and indemnifies WBSEDCL against any additional cost arising from procurement of coal from alternate sources. Though captive source is not expressly identified in Article 2.5, its identity is clearly discernible from the surrounding circumstances, in particular, Minutes of Meeting dated 03.01.2011 recording salient features underlying the PPA/PSA, which specifically note that APNRL had a captive coal block at Ganeshpur.
Result : Appeals partly allowed.
Facts of the Case:
On 05.01.2011, a Power Supply Agreement (PSA) was executed between West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. (WBSEDCL) and PTC India Limited (PTC) for supply of 100 MW of power for 25 years. (!) As a back-to-back arrangement, a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) was executed on 25.03.2011 between Adhunik Power and Natural Resources Ltd. (APNRL) and PTC for onward sale of the power to WBSEDCL. (!) The West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission approved the PPA/PSA on 15.12.2011. (!)
Minutes of a meeting dated 03.01.2011, convened for negotiation of rates and finalization of the PPA, recorded that APNRL had a captive coal block at Ganeshpur, Jharkhand, in joint venture with Tata Steel Ltd. (TISCO). (!) (!) Subsequent to execution of the PPA/PSA, WBSEDCL issued a letter dated 30.04.2012 enquiring about the status of coal lifting and transportation from the Ganeshpur captive coal block. (!) (!) (!) (!)
Article 2.5 of the PPA/PSA provided that coal sourced from other than the captive source would be deemed sourced from the captive source, with no separate escalation in escalable energy charges. (!) Article 10 defined "Change in Law" events entitling compensation to restore the affected party to its pre-event economic position.[p_8 to p_22]
The Ganeshpur captive coal block was not operationalized. (!) APNRL sourced coal under tapering linkage from Central Coalfields Ltd. (CCL) and met shortfalls through e-auction and imports, commencing power supply to WBSEDCL via PTC. (!) APNRL sought pass-through of additional coal costs from PTC/WBSEDCL, which was denied citing Article 2.5. (!)
Cancellation of the coal block and subsequent legislative changes affected APNRL's coal procurement, leading to claims under Article 10 as Change in Law events. (!) (!) APNRL filed Petition No. 305/MP/2015 before the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) on 25.10.2017 seeking pass-through of actual fuel costs. (!)
CERC, by order dated 29.01.2020, held Article 2.5 applicable only post-operationalization of the captive block; allowed compensation for e-auction/import coal to meet tapering linkage shortfall; rejected Change in Law claim for block cancellation and related events; directed a fresh petition for shortfall details. (!)
APNRL and WBSEDCL appealed to the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL). By order dated 04.09.2025, APTEL upheld compensation for e-auction/import coal shortfall; reversed CERC on Change in Law (block cancellation and Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Act, 2015), holding it covered under Articles 10.1.1(b) and 10.1.1(f); remanded to CERC for compensation from 25.08.2014 with carrying costs. (!) (!)
JUDGMENT
Joymalya Bagchi, J.
1. The appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 04.09.2025 whereby the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (‘APTEL’) modified the order dated 29.01.2020 passed by the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission, New Delhi (‘CERC’) and directed that Respondent No.1, Adhunik Power and Natural Resources Ltd. (‘APNRL’), was entitled to (i) compensation for coal purchased through e- auction/import to meet the shortfall in tapering linkage granted to it pending operationalization of the Ganeshpur captive coal block, and (ii) compensation on account of Change in Law events with effect from 25.08.2014 as per Article 10.2 of the PPA1 [Power Purchase Agreement]/PSA2[ Power Supply Agreement], along with carrying costs till actual payment was made.
2. On 05.01.2011, a PSA was executed between the Appellant, West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. (‘WBSEDCL’) and Respondent No. 3, PTC India Limited3[ An inter-state trader of electricity] (‘PTC’) for supply of 100 MW of power for a period of 25 years.
3. As a back-to-back arrangement on 25.03.2011, a PPA was executed between APNRL and PTC for onward sale of 100 MW of power to WBSEDCL.
4. The West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission vide its order dated 15.12.2011 approved the PPA/PSA.
Relevant clauses of the PPA/PSA
5. Article 10 of the PPA/PSA defines “Change in Law” events that entitle the affected party to compensation through monthly tariff payments in a manner that restores such party to the same economic position as if the Change in Law had not occurred. For better appreciation, Article 10 of the PPA/PSA is extracted hereinbelow:
I. Change in Law means occurrence of any of the following events:
a) the enactment, coming into effect, adoption, promulgation, amendment, modification or repeal (without re-enactment or consolidation) in India, of any Law, including rules and regulations framed pursuant to such Law;
b) a change in the interpretation or application of any Law by any Indian Governmental Instrumentality having the legal power to interpret or apply such Law, or any Competent Court of Law;
c) the imposition of a requirement for obtaining any Consents, Clearances and Permits which was not required earlier;
d) change in the terms and conditions prescribed for obtaining any Consents, Clearances and Permits or the inclusion of any new terms or conditions for obtaining such Consents, Clearances and Permits; except due to any default of the Seller;
e) any change in tax or introduction of any tax made applicable for supply of power by the Seller
f) any change in law relating to Mining laws and Environment Laws or tax cess or duty affecting input cost or raw material.
II. But Change in Law shall not include:
a) Any change in any withholding tax on income or dividends distributed to the shareholders of the Seller, or
b) Change in respect of UI charges or frequency intervals by an Appropriate Commission.
III. Such Change in Law could be but not restricted to any of the following cases where it,
a) Results in any change in respect of tax.
b) Affects Seller’s or PTC’s obligation under this Agreement.
c) Materially affects the construction, Commissioning or operation of the Project.”
6. Article 2.2 of the PPA/PSA provides that for sale of power under the Agreement, the buyer shall pay capacity charge, non-escalable energy charge and escalable energy charge in accordance with Table A of Schedule A to the PPA/PSA. Article 2.2 of the PPA/PSA is reproduced hereinbelow:
Seller shall be entitled for recovery of the Capacity Charges for a Contract Year in accordance with the formula of Monthly Capacity Charges payable as per charges mentioned in schedule A.”
7. Article 2.5 of the PPA/PSA stipulates that if t
Manohar Lal Sharma v. Principal Secy. & Ors.
Anglo American Metallurgical Coal Pty. Limited v. MMTC Limited
Written contract – Ordinarily, when a contract is reduced to writing, its terms must be determined from the document itself – However, this rule does not put embargo on looking into such facts which ....
Definition of “Law” is wide enough to include all rules, regulations, orders, notifications by Governmental instrumentalities.
Expert bodies' decisions should not be interfered with unless they violate statutory provisions or are arbitrary.
A notification or order by an Indian Governmental Instrumentality can constitute a 'Change in Law' event under a Power Purchase Agreement if it impacts contractual obligations.
The term “Law” in the PPAs would include all applicable rules, regulations, orders, Notifications issued by an Indian Governmental Instrumentality and shall also include all rules, regulations, decis....
The court upheld that coal supply from power generation must be allocated equitably among all electricity distribution companies, as mandated by regulatory guidelines, rejecting attempts to prioritiz....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.