Back
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR ELECTRICITY AT NEW DELHI (APPELLATE JURISDICTION)
APPEAL NO. 26 OF 2025 & IA NOs. 89, 88, 91, 253 & 707 OF 2025 and APPEAL NO. 54 OF 2025 & IA No. 263 of 2025 Dated: 12th September, 2025 Present: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ramesh Ranganathan, Chairperson Hon’ble Ms. Seema Gupta, Technical Member (Electricity)
APPEAL NO. 26 OF 2025 & IA NOs. 89, 88, 91, 253 & 707 OF 2025 In the matter of:
M/s JSW RENEW ENERGY FIVE LIMITED Through Jatin Sharma JSW Centre, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai City Maharashtra – 400051. … Appellant VERSUS
1. CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION Through Secretary
16th, 7th and 8th Floors, Tower B, World Trade Centre, Nauroji Nagar, New Delhi – 110029. … Respondent No.1
22. SOLAR ENERGY CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED Through Managing Director
6th Floor, Plate-B, NBCC Office Block Tower-2, East Kidwai Nagar, New Delhi – 110023. … Respondent No.2
33. NATIONAL LOAD DESPATCH CENTRE (NLDC/
GRID-INDIA)
Through Managing Director C/o Grid Controller of India (Formerly Power System Operation Corporation Ltd), B-9 (1st Floor), Qutab institutional Area, Katwaria Sarai, New Delhi – 110016. … Respondent No.3
44. GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED Through Managing Director Sardar Patel Vidyut Bhavan, Race Course, Vadodra – 390007 Gujarat. … Respondent No.4 Counsel for the Appellant(s): Aman Anand Aman Dixit Natasha Debroy Counsel for the Respondent(s): Dhananjay Baijal for Res.1 Shri Venkatesh Anushree Bardhan Surbhi Kapoor Aneesh bajaj Shirsa Saraswati for Res.2 Anand K. Ganesan Swapna Seshadri Utkarsh Singh Parth Bhalla Sneha Singh Baghel for Res.4 APPEAL NO. 54 OF 2025 & IA No. 263 of 2025 In the matter of:
SOLAR ENERGY CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED Through its Deputy General Manager
6th Floor, Plate-B, NBCC Office Block Tower-2, East Kidwai Nagar, New Delhi - 110023 … Appellant VERSUS
1. CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION Through its Secretary
6th, 7th and 8th Floors, Tower B, World Trade Centre, Nauroji Nagar, New Delhi – 110029. … Respondent No.1
2. JSW RENEW ENERGY FIVE LIMITED (BESS DEVELOPER (JREFL)
Through its Managing Director JSW Centre, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai City Mumbai, Maharashtra – 400051. … Respondent No.2
3. GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED Through its Managing Director Sardar Patel Vidyut Bhavan, Race Course, Vadodra – 390007 Gujarat. … Respondent No.3
4. NATIONAL LOAD DESPATCH CENTRE Through its Managing Director C/o Grid Controller of India (Formerly Power System Operation Corporation Ltd), B-9 (1st Floor), Qutab institutional Area, Katwaria Sarai, New Delhi – 110016. … Respondent No.4 Counsel for the Appellant(s): Anushree Bardhan Surbhi Kapoor Ritika Singh Counsel for the Respondent(s): Dhananjay Baijal for Res.1 Aman Anand Aman Dixit Natasha Debroy Srishti Gupta for Res.2 Anand K. Ganesan Swapna Seshadri Utkarsh Singh Parth Bhalla Sneha Singh Baghel for Res.3
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR ELECTRICITY AT NEW DELHI (APPELLATE JURISDICTION)
APPEAL NO. 26 OF 2025 & IA NOs. 89, 88, 91, 253 & 707 OF 2025 and APPEAL NO. 54 OF 2025 & IA No. 263 of 2025 Dated: 12th September, 2025 Present: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ramesh Ranganathan, Chairperson Hon’ble Ms. Seema Gupta, Technical Member (Electricity)
APPEAL NO. 26 OF 2025 & IA NOs. 89, 88, 91, 253 & 707 OF 2025 In the matter of:
M/s JSW RENEW ENERGY FIVE LIMITED Through Jatin Sharma JSW Centre, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai City Maharashtra – 400051. … Appellant VERSUS
1. CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION Through Secretary
16th, 7th and 8th Floors, Tower B, World Trade Centre, Nauroji Nagar, New Delhi – 110029. … Respondent No.1
22. SOLAR ENERGY CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED Through Managing Director
6th Floor, Plate-B, NBCC Office Block Tower-2, East Kidwai Nagar, New Delhi – 110023. … Respondent No.2
33. NATIONAL LOAD DESPATCH CENTRE (NLDC/
GRID-INDIA)
Through Managing Director C/o Grid Controller of India (Formerly Power System Operation Corporation Ltd), B-9 (1st Floor), Qutab institutional Area, Katwaria Sarai, New Delhi – 110016. … Respondent No.3
44. GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED Through Managing Director Sardar Patel Vidyut Bhavan, Race Course, Vadodra – 390007 Gujarat. … Respondent No.4 Counsel for the Appellant(s): Aman Anand Aman Dixit Natasha Debroy Counsel for the Respondent(s): Dhananjay Baijal for Res.1 Shri Venkatesh Anushree Bardhan Surbhi Kapoor Aneesh bajaj Shirsa Saraswati for Res.2 Anand K. Ganesan Swapna Seshadri Utkarsh Singh Parth Bhalla Sneha Singh Baghel for Res.4 APPEAL NO. 54 OF 2025 & IA No. 263 of 2025 In the matter of:
SOLAR ENERGY CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED Through its Deputy General Manager
6th Floor, Plate-B, NBCC Office Block Tower-2, East Kidwai Nagar, New Delhi - 110023 … Appellant VERSUS
1. CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION Through its Secretary
6th, 7th and 8th Floors, Tower B, World Trade Centre, Nauroji Nagar, New Delhi – 110029. … Respondent No.1
2. JSW RENEW ENERGY FIVE LIMITED (BESS DEVELOPER (JREFL)
Through its Managing Director JSW Centre, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai City Mumbai, Maharashtra – 400051. … Respondent No.2
3. GUJARAT URJA VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED Through its Managing Director Sardar Patel Vidyut Bhavan, Race Course, Vadodra – 390007 Gujarat. … Respondent No.3
4. NATIONAL LOAD DESPATCH CENTRE Through its Managing Director C/o Grid Controller of India (Formerly Power System Operation Corporation Ltd), B-9 (1st Floor), Qutab institutional Area, Katwaria Sarai, New Delhi – 110016. … Respondent No.4 Counsel for the Appellant(s): Anushree Bardhan Surbhi Kapoor Ritika Singh Counsel for the Respondent(s): Dhananjay Baijal for Res.1 Aman Anand Aman Dixit Natasha Debroy Srishti Gupta for Res.2 Anand K. Ganesan Swapna Seshadri Utkarsh Singh Parth Bhalla Sneha Singh Baghel for Res.3
JUDGEMENT
PER HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN, CHAIRPERSON
I. INTRODUCTION:
Both JSW Renew Energy Five Ltd, and the Solar Energy Corporation of India Ltd, are in appeal against the order passed by the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (“CERC” for short) in Petition No. 138/AT/2024 dated 02.01.2025. The said Petition was filed by the Solar Energy Corporation of India Ltd (“SECI” for short), under Section 63 of the Electricity Act, 2003, seeking adoption of the competitively discovered tariff for the Pilot Project of 500 MW/1000MWh Stand-alone Battery Energy Storage System (‘BESS’ for short). By the Impugned Order, the CERC rejected adoption of tariff on the basis that the tariff proposed to be adopted was not aligned with the market prices, and was not in the interest of the public at large. While JSW Renew Energy Five Ltd (“JSW” for short) is the Appellant in Appeal No.26 of 2025, SECI is the Appellant in Appeal No. 54 of 2025.
According to the Appellant-JSW, the basis on which adoption of discovered tariff was rejected by the CERC, in the Impugned order dated 02.01.2025, is (a) the decision of the Supreme Court in Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited Vs. MB Power (Judgement in Civil Appeal No. 6503 of 2022 dated 08.01.2024) = (2024 (8) SCC 513) empowered the Commission ‘to examine whether the prices quoted are market aligned or not’; (b) there has been a ‘delay of 145 days in issuance of the LoA’; a ‘delay of 160 days in execution of BESSA’ from the date of issuance of the LoA; and a ‘delay of 245 days in execution of the BESPA’ after signing of the BESSA; (c) subsequent to the e-RA for the subject project, e-RA for ‘similar projects’ were conducted in March 2024, June 2024 and August 2024, where the rates discovered were considerably lower; for the e-RA conducted in August 2024, the Appellant was also the successful bidder with a considerably lower quoted price; thus, this decline reflected the decreasing cost of batteries due to reduction in material cost and growing competitiveness of BESS projects; as per the ‘prevailing industry norms and even otherwise, the batteries are one of the last items to be purchased closer to the commissioning of the project by the developers for optimising cost’; the guidelines stipulate that the schedule commissioning date shall be 18 months after the effective date of BESPA; the chronology of events reveals that there had been a ‘delay in achieving the timelines specified in the guidelines and the RfS documents’; (d) the unreasonable delay (for whatever reason) in the instant case will lead to ‘unintended gains for the developer and a wrongful loss to the public at large’; (e ) the ‘tariff proposed to be adopted is not aligned with the prevailing market prices in view of the delay in signing BESSA and BESPA’; (f) ‘SECI has not yet signed BESPA with the Appellant’ and the COD may further get extended giving undue benefit to the developer to take advantage of reduced price in the battery market; (f) the decision to reject the prayer for adoption was solely based on the ‘circumstances in the present case – that is, due to inordinate delay in signing of BESPA/BESSA and subsequent cost reduction in BESS’ leading to undue benefit to the developer at the cost of the consumer, as the commission was conscious of the fact that the ‘price falls post bidding cannot generally be a ground for rejecting and earlier bidding process and price discovery’; and, even in the instant case, such occasion would not have arisen, notwithstanding subsequent developments ‘had the project being completed within the original time lines’.
SECI, on the other hand, has preferred Appeal No. 54 of 2025 only to the limited extent the CERC had concluded, in the Impugned Order dated 02-01.2025, that SECI had delayed: (1) in the issuance of Letter of Award (‘LoA’); (2) in the signing of the Battery Energy Storage Purchase Agreement (‘BESPA’) which was 245 days after the Battery Energy Storage Sale Agreements (‘BESSA’) was
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
