Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query!
Scanned Judgements…!
References:["Avaada Energy Private Limited vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - Central Electricity Regulatory Commission"]["INTERNATIONAL VISA SERVICES PVT LTD FORMERLY KNOWN AS IVS LANKA PVT LTD VS. UNION OF INDIA - Delhi"]["Odisha Power Transmission Corporation Limited (OPTCL) vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - Central Electricity Regulatory Commission"]["Hindalco Industries Limited vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - Central Electricity Regulatory Commission"]["Avaada Energy Private Limited vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - Central Electricity Regulatory Commission"]["Hindalco Industries Limited vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - Central Electricity Regulatory Commission"]["M/s. Oyster Renewable Energy Private Limited vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - Central Electricity Regulatory Commission"]["Application under Sections 14 15 and 79(1)(e) of the Electricity Act 2003 read with the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Procedure Terms and Conditions for Grant of Transmission License and other related matters) Regulations 2024 and its subsequent Clarification and replacement if any with respect to grant of Transmission Licence to Paradeep Transmission Limited. TP Paradeep Transmission Limited - Central Electricity Regulatory Commission"]["Rays Power Infra Limited vs State Of Karnataka Department Of Energy - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 22722"]["Avaada Energy Private Limited vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - Central Electricity Regulatory Commission"]_IA_NO_212_2024["PROJECT NINE RENEWABLE POWER PRIVATE LIMITED vs CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION & Ors - Appellate Tribunal for Electricity"]["Solarone Energy Private Limited vs Central Electricity Regulatory Commission - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 22680"]["MS Agarwal Foundaries Private Limited vs State Load Dispatch Centre - Telangana"]["MS Agarwal Foundaries Private Limited vs State Load Dispatch Centre - Telangana"]["MS Agarwal Foundaries Private Limited vs State Load Dispatch Centre - Telangana"]["Mahalakshmi Profiles Private Limited vs State Load Dispatch Centre - Telangana"]["Avaada Energy Private Limited vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - Central Electricity Regulatory Commission"]
In the dynamic realm of India's electricity sector, the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) plays a pivotal role in regulating inter-state transmission. A common query among developers, generators, and stakeholders is: Please find out judgements on the fact that GNA regulations are binding in nature. The CERC (Connectivity and General Network Access to the inter-State Transmission System) Regulations, 2022 (GNA Regulations) govern connectivity, open access, and transmission usage. This blog post delves into judicial precedents affirming their binding nature, drawing from Supreme Court rulings, High Court decisions, and recent CERC orders. Note: This is general information based on public judgments and should not be considered specific legal advice—consult a qualified lawyer for your situation. Rays Power Infra Limited vs State Of Karnataka Department Of Energy - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 22722Ramayana Ispat Pvt. Ltd. VS State of Rajasthan - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 565
CERC's power stems from the Electricity Act, 2003, particularly Sections 79(1)(c) for inter-state transmission and open access, and Section 178 for making regulations. Courts have consistently upheld CERC's exclusive jurisdiction over inter-state matters, distinguishing it from state commissions under Section 86. Ramayana Ispat Pvt. Ltd. VS State of Rajasthan - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 565
Practical enforcement is evident in CERC's use of GNA Regulations 41, 42, 5.8(xi), 11(A), and 11(B) to annul Letters of Award, permit route changes, and mandate financial closure—without judicial invalidation. Solarone Energy Private Limited vs Central Electricity Regulatory Commission - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 22680
Recent CERC orders reinforce this. In a petition by Avaada Energy Private Limited (Avaada Energy Private Limited vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - Central Electricity Regulatory Commission_CERC_333_MP_2024), the Commission upheld cancellation of connectivity for failing to furnish required bank guarantees (Conn-BG2) within timelines, stating: Timely submission of bank guarantees as per regulatory requirements is mandatory for maintaining connectivity to the power grid, and non-compliance justifies cancellation. The court found the action in accordance with regulations, emphasizing mandatory timelines. Avaada Energy Private Limited vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - 2025 Supreme(Online)(CERC) 48
GNA Regulations are statutorily binding, overriding contracts and imposing duties on entities. This principle is enshrined in key precedents:
Literal interpretation applies to unambiguous provisions. State policies, such as Karnataka's Renewable Energy Policy 2022-2027, cannot impose extra requirements absent GNA stipulation. Rays Power Infra Limited vs State Of Karnataka Department Of Energy - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 22722
CERC orders exemplify enforceability. In Indian Railways' case (Avaada Energy Private Limited vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - Central Electricity Regulatory Commission_CERC_359_MP_2024), CERC accepted RBI's Letter of Mandate as a valid alternative to bank guarantees, clarifying: The Letter of Mandate is a valid payment security mechanism under the GNA Regulations. This shows flexibility within binding frameworks for public interest. Indian Railways vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - 2024 Supreme(Online)(CERC) 10
Another instance (Avaada Energy Private Limited vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - Central Electricity Regulatory Commission_CERC_305_MP_2024) denied further extensions under Regulations 41 and 42, noting: The Commission exercised its authority under Regulation 41 and 42... but the Petitioner failed to meet the financial closure deadlines previously established. Petitions were dismissed, underscoring non-negotiable compliance. SolarOne Energy Private Limited vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - 2025 Supreme(Online)(CERC) 47
While binding, GNA faces review under Article 14 for vagueness or discrimination. No judgment declares GNA ultra vires, but applications can be challenged:
Broader principles require regulations to avoid arbitrariness. Unlike non-statutory guidelines (e.g., Indian Road Congress), CERC's are enforceable unless Article 14-violative. Ardhendu Manna VS Union of India - 1997 0 Supreme(Cal) 274
In Avaada Energy Private Limited vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - Central Electricity Regulatory Commission_CERC_333_MP_2024, the Rajgarh site's renewable energy zone status was discussed, but cancellation stood due to non-compliance: Petitioner failed to furnish the required bank guarantee within stipulated timelines - Statutory obligation. Avaada Energy Private Limited vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - 2025 Supreme(Online)(CERC) 48
GNA exclusively governs inter-state open access, preempting state norms. Section 2(36) vests jurisdiction in CERC for CTU-controlled systems. Central rules override state per Dhanraj v. Gulbarga University. Ramayana Ispat Pvt. Ltd. VS State of Rajasthan - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 565BRINDAVAN HYDROPOWER PRIVATE LIMITED VS UNION OF INDIA, NEW DELHI - 2024 0 Supreme(Kar) 631
For instance, state surcharges on inter-state power are invalid. This primacy aligns with Act objectives for green energy certainty. BRINDAVAN HYDROPOWER PRIVATE LIMITED VS UNION OF INDIA, NEW DELHI - 2024 0 Supreme(Kar) 631
| Precedent/Reference | Key Holding ||--------------------|-------------|| PTC India Ltd. v. CERC (2010) 4 SCC 603 BRINDAVAN HYDROPOWER PRIVATE LIMITED VS UNION OF INDIA, NEW DELHI - 2024 0 Supreme(Kar) 631 | Regulations override contracts; binding on entities. || Energy Watchdog v. CERC (2017) 14 SCC 80 Ramayana Ispat Pvt. Ltd. VS State of Rajasthan - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 565 | Exclusive CERC jurisdiction over inter-state access. || Karnataka HC WP (CTUIL/CERC) Rays Power Infra Limited vs State Of Karnataka Department Of Energy - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 22722 | Binding but discriminatory if no level playing field. || Avaada Energy Private Limited vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - Central Electricity Regulatory Commission_CERC_333_MP_2024 Avaada Energy Private Limited vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - 2025 Supreme(Online)(CERC) 48 | Mandatory timelines for guarantees; non-compliance justifies cancellation. || Avaada Energy Private Limited vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - Central Electricity Regulatory Commission_CERC_359_MP_2024 Indian Railways vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - 2024 Supreme(Online)(CERC) 10 | Flexibility in security mechanisms within binding regs. || CERC Orders under GNA 41/42 Solarone Energy Private Limited vs Central Electricity Regulatory Commission - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 22680 | Authority for extensions/revocations upheld. |
Judicial precedents robustly affirm GNA Regulations' binding nature, rooted in CERC's Electricity Act authority. They override contracts, preempt states, and ensure grid discipline—vital for investments. However, challenges succeed on discriminatory application, not validity. BRINDAVAN HYDROPOWER PRIVATE LIMITED VS UNION OF INDIA, NEW DELHI - 2024 0 Supreme(Kar) 631Ramayana Ispat Pvt. Ltd. VS State of Rajasthan - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 565Tamil Nadu State Electricity Board VS Central Electricity Regulatory Commission - 2007 0 Supreme(SC) 543
Key Takeaways:- Comply strictly with timelines (e.g., bank guarantees) to avoid cancellation. Avaada Energy Private Limited vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - 2025 Supreme(Online)(CERC) 48- Seek relaxations under Reg. 41 judiciously; repeated failures limit options. SolarOne Energy Private Limited vs Central Transmission Utility of India Limited - 2025 Supreme(Online)(CERC) 47- Ensure level playing field to mitigate Article 14 risks. Rays Power Infra Limited vs State Of Karnataka Department Of Energy - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 22722
Stay informed on CERC updates for seamless inter-state operations. For tailored guidance, engage legal experts.
#GNARegulations
In effect, the entire action of CTUIL is based on a misplaced interpretation of the GNA Regulations and conduct in the present matter are not only arbitrary but also discriminatory in nature. ... In fact, AEPL specifically brought this fact to the notice of CTUIL by way of its email dated 05.07.2024. ... application due to non-compliance was mandatory in nature. ... Due to CTUIL’s flawed interpretation of the GNA Regulations and on the basis of an ad....
Issue a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and/or setting aside the email dated 29.12.2025 issued by the Respondent No.2 indicating the trigger date for payment and recovery of the GNA charges as 03.01.2026 vide which the ... Issue a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and/or setting aside Clause 13(7) of the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Sharing of Inter-State Transm....
2022 GNA Regulations. ... 19.2 of the GNA Regulations. ... However, we also note that the responsibility for preparing the GNA Application by the STU has been introduced vide the GNA Regulations, and OPTCL was making the application for the first time; accordingly, we find it appropriate to allow relaxation of the stipulated deadline of 30.09.2024 as a one-time ... Regulation 41 of the GNA Regulations vests the Com....
Thus, we find the case of the Petitioner a fit case to be considered for relaxation under Regulation 41 of the GNA Regulations. The said Regulations vests the Commission with the power to relax any of the provisions of the GNA Regulations to remove the hardship in operation of the GNA Regulations. ... , 2022 ("GNA Regulations, 2022") readwith the Format of the Conn BG accompanying the Detailed Procedure under the #....
b) CTU during the course of argument on 19.05.2025 had averred that it had erroneously stated in the Final Grant that the GNA is granted with network augmentation when in fact, under the GNA Regulations, augmentation is only of the common transmission system. ... , as per Regulation 22.4 (b) of the GNA Regulations, since no common transmission system under ISTS was identified at the time of granting GNA. ... The Petitioner has sought directions to R-1/CTU for the rev....
b) CTU during the course of argument on 19.05.2025 had averred that it had erroneously stated in the Final Grant that the GNA is granted with network augmentation when in fact, under the GNA Regulations, augmentation is only of the common transmission system. ... , as per Regulation 22.4 (b) of the GNA Regulations, since no common transmission system under ISTS was identified at the time of granting GNA. ... The Petitioner has sought directions to R-1/CTU for the rev....
In fact, this Commission directed that even in similar cases, the dispensation laid down under this Commission’s order dated 16.1.2025 in Petition No. 503/MP/2024 shall be followed till the issuance of the amendment to the GNA Regulations. ... b) The Commission, in its Order dated 12.07.2024 in Petition No. 192/MP/2024, while taking note of the fact that there is no provision under the GNA Regulations, regarding submission of documents by the subsidiary in favour of parent connectivit....
Accordingly, a necessary amendment may be introduced in the GNA Regulations, 2022, to this effect. ... The GNA/ GNARE grantee entities shall deposit the cost as intimated by CTUIL, within 30 days of intimation of such cost. In case of failure, GNA/ GNARE grants to such entities shall be cancelled, and available BGs shall be treated as per the extant GNA Regulations. ... We find that the Petitioner company meets the requirements of the Act and the Transmission Licence ....
the Commission with the power to relax any of the provisions of the GNA Regulations to remove the hardship in operation of the GNA Regulations………………………….. ... The Order provides that the deductions shall be from the Con-BG2 and Con-BG3 of the GNA Regulations. Again, no Con-BG2 and Con-BG3 of the GNA Regulations were available with CTUIL. ... We observe that since the GNA Regulations do not have the provision to al....
There is no reference to ‘stranded capacity’ in the GNA Regulations, 2022. ... (b) Petitioner is deliberately confusing the relinquishment of GNA under the GNA Regulations, 2022, with the relinquishment of Long-Term Access (‘LTA’) under the Connectivity Regulations, 2009. ... The corresponding relinquishment is dealt under the proviso to Regulation 25.1 of the GNA Regulations, 2022. As per the 2022 GNA Regulations....
This finding is also totally incorrect; rather, this has been admitted by the learned Additional Advocate General as well as by the counsel appearing for the M.C.I. that M.C.I. Regulations are binding and are mandatory in nature. The Secretary also observed in his order that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its order dated 16.08.2012 passed in Civil Appeal No. 8047 of 2016, ‘State of U.P. v. Dinesh Singh Chauhan’ has held any sort of reservation for in-service medical officer to be unconstitutional. We think that the case in hand is not related to reservation.
Para Nos. 31, 32 and 35 of the aforesaid judgment was referred. The MCI Regulations are binding, being statutory in nature. The University was established much beyond the scheduled date for holding entrance test, thus there is violation of judgment of Apex Court in the case of Mridul Dhar (supra). Therein, Regulations of MCI were considered to be statutory, thus binding in nature. In the instant case, the Mahatma Gandhi University alleged to have conducted entrance test at their own level and that too, within a period of three days. It was held that MCI is....
The Regulations are mandatory in nature and they are binding as specified in the Communication dt.31.12.2008 issued by the Department of Higher Education, MHRD. Thus, it was not open to the State Government to take the benefit of the age extended under the Scheme and on the other hand, not to enhance the age of the Teachers in the Universities from sixty to 65 years.
The Medical Council of India framed statutory regulation under section 33 of the Act with prior approval of the Central Government prescribing minimum required infrastructural, teaching facilities, including conduct of examinations in U.G., P.G., and Diplomas as well as Super Speciality courses, without which there cannot be proper teaching, training and assessment in the medical course. The said regulations are statutory in character and are binding all concerned to strictly follow. As per the amended notification dated 20.10.2008 it is stated that no person shall be appoi....
( 38 ) PARAGRAPH No. 10 of the guidelines stipulates that in the event a technical institution contravenes any of the provisions of the guidelines AICTE is entitled to withdraw approval after carrying out such inquiry and an opportunity of being heard. Thus the guidelines are mandatory, binding in nature.
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
