IN THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR ELECTRICITY (Appellate Jurisdiction)

APPEAL No. 345 OF 2021 Dated: 08.05.2025 Present: Hon’ble Mr. Sandesh Kumar Sharma, Technical Member Hon’ble Mr. Virender Bhat, Judicial Member In the matter of:

RATTAN INDIA POWER LIMITED Through its Authorised Signatory A-49, Ground Floor, Road No. 4, Mahipalpur, New Delhi – 110037 … Appellant Versus

1. MAHARASHTRA ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION Through its Secretary World Trade Centre, Centre No. 1, 13^th Floor, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005 secretary@merc.gov.in

2. MAHARASHTRA STATE ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED Through the Chairman and Managing Director

6th Floor, Prakashgad, Plot No. G-9, Anant Kanekar Marg, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400 051 cepp@mahadiscom.in … Respondent (s)

Counsel for the Appellant(s) : Amit Kapur Vishrov Mukerjee Counsel for the Respondent(s) : Pratiti Rungta for Res. 1 Ravi Prakash, Sr. Adv.

Samir Malik Rahul Sinha for Res. 2

J U D G M E N T

PER HON’BLE MR. VIRENDER BHAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER

1. In this appeal, assail is to the order dated 16/11/2021 passed by 1st respondent Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (in short “Commission” or “MERC”) in petition no. 83/2021 filed by the appellant seeking compensation on account of Change in Law (CIL) events.

2. Appellant is a Public Limited Company and owns as well as operates a 1350 MW (5x270 MW) coal fired power plant located at Nandgaonpeth, Amravati District in the State of Maharashtra. It is a generating company as defined in Section 2 (28) of the Electricity Act, 2003.

3. In pursuance to the Case-I Competitive bidding process initiated by 2^nd respondent Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. (in short “MSEDCL”) which is a Distribution Licensee operating in the State of Maharashtra, two power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) dated 22/04/2010 (for 450MW) and 05/06/2010 (for 750 MW) were executed between MSEDCL and the appellant for supply of 1200 MW aggregate power by Appellant to MSEDCL at levelized tariff of Rs.3.260/kWh. The PPAs were duly approved by the Commission vide order dated 28/12/2010.

4. The Appellant had approached the Commission by way of Petition no.83/2021 under Section 86(1)(f) of the Electricity Act, 2003 read with Article 10 of the PPAs seeking compensation on account of following Change in Law events:

“(a) Levy and increase in Surface Transportation Charge and Crushing/Sizing Charges by Coal India Limited pursuant to Notifications dated 15.10.2009 and

13.11.2013.

(b) Levy of Port Congestion Surcharge by Ministry of Railways on 20.11.2014 pursuant to power granted under Section 30-32 of Railways Act, 1989.

(c) Notification dated 25.01.2016 issued by Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (“MoEFCC”) which for the first time introduced the condition that thermal power plants were to bear the complete cost of transportation of fly ash till 100km and half the cost from 100-300km.”

5. The petition was disposed off by the Commission vide impugned order dated 16/11/2021 holding, inter alia, that: -

“(a) Imposition of Port Congestion Charges by Indian Railways qualifies as a change in law event. However, in view of compensation allowed for difference in landed cost of domestic coal and alternate coal as per Order dated 16.11.2021 in Case No. 240 of 2020, no separate compensation is required to be allowed on account of Port Congestion Surcharge. The landed cost of imported coal would include all taxes, duties, transportation charges etc.

(b) Revision in Surface Transportation Charges and Sizing/crushing charges by the Coal India do not constitute a Change in Law event as per provisions of PPAs.

(c) RattanIndia’s claim for transportation of fly ash as per MOEFCC notification dated 25.01.2016 being a change in law event was rejected. Ld. MERC further observed that RattanIndia has not incurred any expenses towards transportation of fly ash. Thus, RattanIndia’s claim is premature.

(d) No carrying cost is payable in the present matter as Ld. MERC has not allowed