| Work Detail |
The case involves a dispute between Siwana Solar Power Projects Ltd. and the Haryana Power Purchase Centre (HPPC) over the tariff applicable for solar energy supplied under a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA). The petitioner, operating a solar plant with a capacity of 5 MW in Haryana, entered into a 25-year PPA in 2014. According to the agreement, HPPC was to pay the lowest tariff discovered through a competitive bidding process or as determined by the Haryana Electricity Regulatory Commission (HERC).
The plant was commissioned in December 2014, and the tariff applicable was initially ?6.44 per kWh, as per the lowest bid discovered in the tender process. However, disputes arose when HPPC reduced the tariff to ?5.68 per kWh in 2018, based on a Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) order that applied to other solar developers, not Siwana Solar. This reduction led to non-payment of bills and the petitioner filing multiple legal proceedings.
HERC, in 2016, had upheld the ?6.44 tariff and directed HPPC to pay on a year-to-year basis, but this was not implemented. The matter escalated to the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL), which supported the ?6.44 rate in 2019. Despite these rulings, HPPC continued paying the reduced tariff. Further litigation included settlements, review petitions, and appeals up to the Supreme Court, which dismissed the petitioner’s appeal in January 2024, seemingly affirming the ?5.68 tariff for the disputed period.
The petitioner now seeks enforcement of the original ?6.44 tariff for the remaining PPA term and payment of the deficit accrued from the reduced tariff. They argue that their tariff was wrongly linked to unrelated cases and maintain that the original terms of the PPA must prevail. Conversely, HPPC argues that the case is time-barred and that the reduced tariff is legally justified. The resolution of this matter will impact financial agreements under long-term renewable energy contracts. |
