IN THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR ELECTRICITY (Appellate Jurisdiction)

APPEAL No. 382 OF 2017 Dated: 27.01.2025 Present: Hon’ble Mr. Sandesh Kumar Sharma, Technical Member Hon’ble Mr. Virender Bhat, Judicial Member IN THE MATTER OF:

M/s Green Energy Association Sargam, 143, Taqdir Terrace, Near Shirodkar High School, Dr. E. Borjes Road, Parel (E), Mumbai- 400012 ...Appellant VERSUS

1. Jharkhand State Electricity Regulatory Commission

2^nd Floor, Rajendra Jawan Bhawan-cum-Sainik Bazaar, Mahatma Gandhi Marg (Main Road), Ranchi- 834001, Jharkhand

2. M/s Tata Steel Limited P.O Bistupur, Jamshedpur- 831001 Jharkhand …Respondents Counsel for the Appellant(s) : Mr. Parinay Deep Shah Ms. Mandakini Ghosh Ms. Ritika Singhal Mr. Saransh Shaw Counsel for the Respondent(s) : Mr. Farrukh Rasheed for R- 1 Mr. Saurabh Agarwal Ms. Aakriti Dawar Mr. Vibhu Anshuman for R- 2

JUDGEMENT

PER HON’BLE MR. SANDESH KUMAR SHARMA, TECHNICAL MEMBER

1. Appeal No. 382 of 2017 has been filed by the Appellant Green Energy Association challenging the order dated 28.02.2017 in Case No. 09 of 2015 passed by the Jharkhand State Electricity Regulatory Commission (in short “JSERC” or “Commission”). Description of the Parties:

2. The Appellant, Green Energy Association, is a registered association of companies involved in renewable energy business under the REC mechanism. 3. Respondent No. 1 is the Jharkhand State Electricity Regulatory Commission, formed under Section 82 of the Electricity Act, 2003.

4. Respondent No. 2, M/s Tata Steel Limited (in short "TSL"), is the leading private integrated steel manufacturer in Jamshedpur, producing 10 MT of saleable steel annually.

Factual Matrix of the Case

5. The Respondent Commission notified the Jharkhand State Electricity Regulatory Commission (Renewable Purchase Obligation and its Compliance)

Regulations, 2010 (in short “RPO Regulations”) on 31.07.2010.

6. Respondent No. 2 filed Case No. 09 of 2015 with the JSERC, requesting exemption from Renewable Purchase Obligation (RPO) for the years 2011-12, 2012-13, and 2013-14. This request was based on the assertion that its captive cogeneration exceeded the RPO requirement during those years.

7. The Appellant, an association of renewable energy developers formed under the REC mechanism, submitted an Intervention Application (I.A. No. 01 of 2016). The Respondent Commission granted permission for the intervention through an Order dated 29.07.2016.

8. The Respondent Commission, through its Impugned Order dated 28.02.2017, exempted Respondent No. 2 from fulfilling their Renewable Purchase Obligation (RPO) for the fiscal years 2011-12 to 2013-14. This decision was based on the assertion that Respondent No. 2's captive cogeneration exceeded the RPO requirement during these years. The Commission's decision to exempt Tata Steel Limited was based on a prior Order that was legally untenable.

9. Aggrieved by the Impugned Order in Case No. 09 of 2015 passed on 28.02.2017 by the Respondent Commission, the Appellant has preferred the present appeal.

Submissions of the Appellant

10. The Appellant has not filed Written Submissions, the following submissions are based on the Appeal paper book.

11. The Appellant submitted that according to Regulation 9 of the RPO Regulations, any captive consumer who fails to meet their Renewable Purchase Obligation is subject to penalties as stipulated in Regulation 10 of the JSERC Regulations.

“9.1 Every Captive and Open access consumer(s)/ user(s) shall have to submit necessary details regarding total consumption of electricity and purchase of energy from renewable energy sources for fulfilment of RPO on quarterly basis to the State Agency.

9.2 Captive and Open access Consumer(s)/ User(s) shall purchase renewable energy as stated in Clause 5.2 of these Regulations, If the Captive user(s) and Open Access consumers) are unable to fulfil the criteria, the shortfall of the targeted quantum would attract payment of regulatory charge as per Clause 10.1 and 10.2 of these Regulations.

9.3 Capt