Studying Time: 2 minutes
Sitac Kabini Renewables Non-public Restricted has filed a petition beneath Part 79(1)(f) of the Electrical energy Act, 2003, searching for adjudication of a dispute arising from Energy Grid Company of India Restricted’s (PGCIL) revocation of Lengthy-Time period Open Entry (LTOA) granted to the petitioner for evacuating 300 MW from its Wind Energy Venture. The revocation was based mostly on the delay in submitting a Financial institution Assure, a requirement beneath the Lengthy-Time period Entry Settlement dated 23.01.2019.
The petitioner, following MNRE pointers, gained a bid from SECI for a 300 MW ISTS-connected Wind Energy Venture. Initially planning to hook up with the Current Bhuj GSS, the petitioner confronted a change within the supply level to Bhuj-II PS (GIS) (New) on account of connectivity problems. Regardless of uncertainties, the petitioner proceeded, securing Stage II Connectivity and LTA at Bhuj-II PS. Nevertheless, points arose, together with the delayed disclosure of the substation’s location, impacting undertaking viability.
PGCIL, on 09.01.2019, granted LTA for evacuation from Proposed Bhuj-II S/s, and the petitioner entered into agreements with PGCIL and SECI. Delays within the Bhuj-II undertaking, ensuing from regulatory compliance points, additional sophisticated issues. The petitioner requested an extension for submitting the Connectivity BG however confronted challenges on account of uncertainties concerning the substation’s location.
PGCIL, on 03.06.2019, revoked the LTA, citing the petitioner’s failure to submit the required Financial institution Assure. The petitioner, subsequently, filed a contemporary utility for LTOA on 28.12.2019, which was granted on 19.02.2020, together with a brand new Lengthy-Time period Entry Settlement. The petitioner sought a refund of the Software Financial institution Assure of ₹30 lakh, conceding different prayers.
PGCIL argued that the petitioner’s non-compliance led to the revocation, emphasizing the significance of well timed submission of the LTAA Financial institution Assure. The petitioner, nevertheless, pointed to uncertainties arising from modifications within the supply level and delays in regulatory processes.
The regulatory framework, together with the Connectivity Rules 2009 and Detailed Process, outlines circumstances for encashing the Software Financial institution Assure. The petitioner, citing a Fee order dated 30.12.2019, sought leisure, however the Fee famous distinctions between the circumstances.
The Fee rejected the petitioner’s request for a refund, emphasizing the readability within the regulatory framework concerning the circumstances for encashment. The failure to furnish the LTAA Financial institution Assure throughout the stipulated interval resulted within the revocation of LTA and encashment of the Software Financial institution Assure.
This case highlights the challenges confronted by renewable power initiatives in navigating regulatory complexities and underscores the significance of adherence to timelines and compliance necessities. The choice emphasizes the necessity for clear communication and transparency between stakeholders to keep away from uncertainties that may impression the monetary viability of such initiatives.
Please view the doc under for extra particulars.
