Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

20.01.2006 In pursuance of the MOU entered between Appellant and PTC, PTC further entered into MOU's with other State Utilities including HPGCL (R-2) for onward sale of power of 200 MW power generated from the Appellant project on 20.01.2006. Thus, HPGCL had been identified as the ultimate beneficiary prior to the execution of the PPA between the Appellant and Haryana Power (R-2).

21.03.2006 Power Purchase Agreement entered into between the Appellant and PTC India. With a condition precedent as follows:

21.9.2006 Power Sale Agreement between Haryana Power (R-2) and PTC India for onward sale of power from the Appellant's Project.

21.06.2007 HERC vide its letter dated 21.6.2007 issued to HPGCL approved the PSA as was required under law and as envisaged under Article 3.1.3 (iv) of the PPA.

HERC had approved the PSA for supply of 200 MW JUDGMENT IN APPEAL NO.130 OF 2011 Power contracted by the HPGCL for the benefit of the people of Haryana and therefore, in terms of Section 86 (1) (b) read with Section 86 (1) (f) of the Electricity Act, 2003, the HERC has exclusive jurisdiction for regulating the PPA/PSA.

(vii) MOU dated 20.1.2006 between PTC and HPGCL Since an MOU between the Appellant and PTC had already been executed on 18.6.2003 under which the Appellant was to supply power to PTC and PTC could sell any part of that power to any power utility etc, it JUDGMENT IN APPEAL NO.130 OF 2011 was well in order that on 20.1.2006, PTC itself entered into an MoU with HPGCL. Thereafter, when the PPA namely a firm agreement with all relevant conditions was entered into between the Appellant and PTC on 21.3.2006, a regular PSA on 21.9.2006 with all relevant clauses was also entered into between PTC and HPGCL although only for part of the power i.e. 200 MW.

JUDGMENT IN APPEAL NO.130 OF 2011 However, HPGCL objected to this suggestion for the change by its reply dated 25.5.2007 and mentioned the following as reasons for its objections:

"No privity of contract should be created between the Company and the Purchaser, HPGCL in this case. Hence direct supply during the consultation period has not been provided for. After termination of agreements, the purchaser and generating company shall be free to enter into an agreement".