Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
B. P. COLABAWALLA, FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA
O2 Renewable Energy VII Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
B. P. COLABAWALLA, J.
1. Rule. Respondents waive service. With the consent of parties, Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally.
2. All the above Writ Petitions take exception to the impugned review order dated 25th June 2025 passed by the 1st Respondent – Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (hereinafter referred to as “MERC”) in a Review Petition filed by the 2nd Respondent – Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as “MSEDCL”). By the impugned review order, the original Multi Year Tariff Order (for short the “MYT Order”) dated 28th March 2025 was substantially modified. In most Petitions, namely, Writ Petition (L) No. 19450 of 2025; Writ Petition (L) No. 19640 of 2025; Writ Petition (L) No. 20790 of 2025; Writ Petition (L) No. 21714 of 2025; Writ Petition (L) No. 20635 of 2025; Writ Petition (L) No. 19529 of 2025; Writ Petition (L) No. 20945 of 2025; and Writ Petition (L) No. 20792 of 2025, paragraphs 35.9 to 35.16 of the impugned review order are challenged. In other words, in these Petitions, the Petitioners have challenged the directions given in the aforesaid paragraphs of the impugned review order as the
Regulatory bodies are mandated to consult affected stakeholders before altering significant tariff orders, as per statutory provisions ensuring transparency and adherence to natural justice.
Writ petitions challenging regulatory fixation of normative O&M charges as tariff component not maintainable due to statutory appeal to expert Appellate Tribunal under Electricity Act, absent jurisdi....
Point of law: Commission cannot be kept in the dark when the effect is amendment to the PPA.
The Ombudsman erred in failing to recognize the commercial relationship between the parties, which affected the determination of electricity tariff under the Electricity Act.
The Electricity Board's action to issue energy bills without subsidy was lawful under the Electricity Act after the State Government's withdrawal of additional subsidy, as the Tariff Order provided f....
The court necessitated a fresh review by the High Court due to its failure to meaningfully engage with the discriminatory impact of revised regulations on projects in the same control period.
Writ petitions under Article 226 against electricity regulatory commission orders fixing O&M charges not maintainable due to efficacious statutory appeal remedy under Section 111 of Electricity Act, ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
