Supreme Court of India
Digital Supreme Court Reports
The Official Law Report Fortnightly ISSN: 3048-4839 (Online)
Home
Full Text

ENERGY WATCHDOG vs. CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION AND ORS. ETC.

SCR Citation: [2017] 3 S.C.R. 153
Year/Volume: 2017/ Volume 3
Date of Judgment: 11 April 2017
Petitioner: ENERGY WATCHDOG
Disposal Nature: Others
Neutral Citation: 2017 INSC 338
Judgment Delivered by: Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.F. Nariman
Respondent: CENTRAL ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION AND ORS. ETC.
Case Type: CIVIL APPEAL /5399-5400/2016
Order/Judgment: Judgment
1. Headnote

Electricity Act, 2003 - ss. 63, 79 - Determination of tariff by bidding process - Supply of power from power project - Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) between State Government Utilities and power generating companies - State Commission adopted tariff u/s. 63 for supply of power to Slate Government Utilities - However, few years later, change in Indonesian law which increased the export price of coal from Indonesia to international market - Petition by power generating companies before Ce171ral Electricity Regulatory Commission seeking relief due to change in Indonesian law - Commission held that the claim of power generating companies on the grounds of force majeure and/or change in law not admissible, however, in exercise of regulatory power u/s. 79 granted . compensatory tariff- Tribunal set aside the order of the Commission - On appeal, held: PPA makes it clear that changes in the cost of fuel, or the agreement becoming onerous to perform, are not treated as force majeure events under the PPA itself-As such force majeure would not apply so as to enable the grant of compensatory tariff - PPA does not state that coal is to be procured only from Indonesia at a particular price - Price payable for the supply of coal is entirely for the person who sets up the power plant to bear - Unexpected rise in the price of coal would not absolve the generating companies from performing their part of the contract since this was a risk they knowingly took - Also, expression 'any law' in Cl.13 of P PA refers to law of India - In view thereof. though change in Indonesian law would not qualify as a change in law under the guidelines read with the PPA, change in Indian law certainly would - CERC to go into the matter afresh and determine the relief to be granted to those power generators who fall within Cl.13 of the PPA. 

s. 79 - Regulatory powers of Central Commission u/s. 79(l)(b)  - Interpretation of - Held: General regulatory power of the Commission u/s. 79(1)(b) is the source of the power to regulate, which includes the power to determine or adopt tariff- In a situation where the guidelines issued by the Central Government u/s. 63 cover the situation. the Central Commission is bound by those guidelines and must exercise its regulatory functions, only in accordance with those guidelines - It is only a situation where there are no guidelines framed at all or where the guidelines do not deal with a given situation that the Commission's general regulatory powers uls. 79(1J(b) call then be used. Power Purchase Agreement - Clause of force majeure - Application of

2. Case referred
3. Act
      No Data Found!!!!!
4. Keyword
  • Electricity Act
  • 2003
5. Equivalent citation
    Citation(s) 2017 (6) JT 161 = 2017 (6) Suppl. JT 161 = 2017 (4) SCALE 580