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, 2003, an exhaustive code, barring specified exceptions.

JUDGMENT :

JYOTSNA REWAL DUA, J.

1. All these petitions are identical, based upon same set of pleadings, claiming same reliefs, hence, are taken up together.

2. All these writ petitions have been filed for the grant of almost identical reliefs. The substantive reliefs in CWP No.2747 of 2026 read as under:-

“b. Quash and set aside order(s) dated 4.11.2023 23.2.2024 passed by respondent No.1 in suo moto petition No.8/2023 arbitrarily and unilaterally fixing the normative O&M charges for solar PV Generators connected through solid tap having interconnection voltage level of 11/22 kV (above 500 KW and up 1 MW capacity);

c. Quash and set-aside communication dated 15.10.2025 issued on behalf of respondent No.2 calling upon the petitioner to deposit Rs.51,920/- towards Operation and Maintenance charges for its Solar Power Project connected with HPSEBL;

d. In the alternative, the non-applicants respondents may be directed to conduct a proper study and lay down proper principles/basis for fixing O&M charges for Solar Power Projects connected through Solid tap having interconnection voltage level of 11/22 kV (above 250 KW and up to 500 KW capacity) on cost basis and not on capacity basis;

e. Respondent No.2 may be directed to maintain seamless electricity supply to the Solar Power Project of the petitioner, so that there is no loss of power generation by it and in default thereof to pay proportionate compensation to the petitioner.”

3. Petitioners’ main grievance is against the order passed by the Himachal Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission, Shimla on 04.11.2023 (Annexure P-3 in all the petitions), fixing normative O&M charges to be paid by the Small Hydro Power Projects (upto 25 MW) and other Renewable Energy (RE) generators connected at Sub- stations owned by the Distribution Licensee where maximum nominal voltage level at any point in such Sub- stations does not exceed 33 kV. The order has been passed by the Commission for discharging its mandate under Section 86 (1)(e) of the Electricity Act, 2003.

As per the case set up, Petition No.29 of 2023 was pending before respondent No.1 for adjudication of dispute between Independent Power Producers and HPSEBL under Section 86 (1)(f) of the Electricity Act. Respondent No.1 decided the petition on 16.10.2023. This order was assailed before the APTEL in Appeal No.920 of 2023. Based upon order dated 16.10.2023, respondent No.1 initiated suo moto proceedings bearing Petition No.8 of 2023 in the matter of fixation of normative O&M charges to be paid by Small Hydro Projects and other Renewable Energy Generators connected at Sub-stations owned by Distribution Licensee where maximum nominal voltage level at any point in such sub-station does not exceed 33 KV. An order was passed in the aforesaid petition by respondent No.1 on 04.11.2023. A further order was passed in the said matter by respondent No.1 on 23.02.2024. Petitioners are aggrieved against orders dated 04.11.2023 and 23.02.2024 passed by respondent No.1 in Suo Moto Petition No.8 of 2023, whereby O&M charges have been fixed as also the demand notice issued by respondent No.2-HPSEBL to the petitioners on 15.10.2025 on the strength of above orders.

4. It is not disputed by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have statutory remedy available to them under Section 111 of the Electricity Act, 2003 by preferring an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal. The Section reads as under:-

“111. Appeal to Appellate Tribunal.—

(1) Any person aggrieved by an order made by an adjudicating officer under this Act (except under section 127) or an order made by the Appropriate Commission under this Act may prefer an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity:

Provided that any person appealing against the order of the adjudicating o