| Work Detail |
The Solar Energy Corporation of India (SECI) filed a petition to place on record certain developments after the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) had already adopted the tariff for 9,234 MW of solar power projects. These projects were awarded under a tariff-based competitive bidding process for setting up 7 GW of ISTS-connected solar PV power plants linked with 2 GW per annum of solar manufacturing capacity. Initially, a capacity of 12,000 MW was awarded, out of which 8,900 MW had PPAs and PSAs signed, including 4,667 MW with Adani Green Energy and 2333 MW with Azure Power. However, Azure Power later terminated its PPAs related to 2,333 MW through a letter dated 16 October 2023 and filed a writ petition in the Andhra Pradesh High Court. As a result, SECI explored alternative options at the request of Andhra Pradesh Discoms, which was keen to procure the full 7,000 MW of solar power. Adani offered to take over the 2,333 MW capacity that Azure had relinquished, agreeing to the same tariff of ?2.42 per unit and other terms, with only the commissioning schedule revised. Following this, SECI signed 11 PPAs on 26 December 2023 with Adani for 1,799 MW and entered into a supplemental PSA with Andhra Pradesh Discoms and the state government on 29 December 2023 to reflect this change. The remaining 534 MW was also allocated to Adani through 3 additional PPAs signed on 13 March 2024, and a supplemental PSA-2 was executed on 1 March 2024. SECI also signed a manufacturing contract with Adani on the same date to set up 583 MW of solar module manufacturing capacity. Later, SECI amended the PPA with Adani Renewable Energy Fifty-Five Limited, reducing the project capacity from 150 MW to 67 MW. The 83 MW shortfall was then allocated to Adani Green Energy Twenty-Five B Limited through a new PPA signed on 10 October 2024. SECI submitted these changes to the Commission and requested that they be taken on record. In its defence, SECI argued that the bidding guidelines and RfS documents did not prohibit such a substitution, especially since Azure had repudiated its contractual obligations. SECI stated that the substitution did not affect the tariff or other critical terms, and the decision was made in the public interest to ensure uninterrupted power supply to Andhra Pradesh, particularly for agricultural consumers. However, the Commission noted that SECI did not seek any tariff adoption or regulatory approval under Sections 63 or 79(1)(b) of the Electricity Act, but only requested the changes to be placed on record. Since tariff adoption had already occurred for the full capacity and SECI’s request did not fall under any regulatory or adjudicatory functions of the Commission, CERC held that no further action was necessary. The petition was thus disposed of without intervention. |
