Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

2.5 The 2010 REC Regulations also provided for the floor price (minimum price) and the forbearance price (maximum price) within which the RECs could be traded in Power Exchanges. The floor price (minimum price) and the forbearance price (maximum price) would be determined by the Central Judgment of Appeal No. 209 of 2015 Commission for the entire country guided by various principles, inter alia, variations in pooled cost of purchase across the States. 2.6 On 30.01.2010, the State Commission passed Order No. 1 of 2010 for determination of tariff for Procurement of Power by Distribution Licensees from Wind Energy Generators and also deciding on the other commercial issues for wind energy generators set up under preferential mechanism. The Order provided for a preferential levelized tariff of Rs. 3.56 per kWh for supply of energy to distribution licensee for meeting its Renewable Power Purchase Obligation (RPO). The Control Period of Order dated 30.1.2010 was for the period from 11.08.2009 to 10.08.2012. The Order, inter alia, also provided the following promotional benefits for wind generators set up for third party sale under preferential mechanism :

2.18 On 10.12.2013, the Respondent No. 1 along with Respondent No. 2 filed the Petition before the State Commission being Petition No. 1363 of 2013 and raised objections on specific terms of the PPA executed between the parties on the basis of alleged coercion and duress and sought relief on those terms of the PPA dated 29.03.2012 as well as Wheeling Agreement dated 24.05.2012.

2.19 The Appellant No. 1 specifically raised an objection on the locus of the Respondent No. 2 being an association pleading coercion and duress on Judgment of Appeal No. 209 of 2015 behalf of wind generators. The State Commission vide Order dated 01.07.2015 allowed the Petition filed by the Respondents No. 1 and 2 and further directed that the Order is a generic order applicable to all similarly situated wind generators.

Judgment of Appeal No. 209 of 2015 5.13 In case the Appellants are obliged to purchase the electrical component at the prevailing APPC rates instead of the fixed tariff as agreed in the PPA, there may arise a situation wherein a wind generator under preferential mechanism would receive a tariff for the electrical and renewable component lower than the wind generator under REC mechanism for only its electrical component which is completely contrary to the intention of the 2010 REC Regulations. A Wind Generator being set up in a particular Control Period would be entitled to the tariff determined in accordance with the prevailing project cost of that control period. Such tariff would be applicable for the entire life of the project. As against which, the Average Power Purchase Cost of the distribution licensee is bound to be change year on year basis, in general there would be an increase in tariff. Accordingly, there may be a case that APPC in a future year may be more than preferential tariff determined by the State Commission for that particular Control period.

7.7 Lastly, the State Commission in the impugned judgment has granted the relief to the similarly placed wind generators including to the members of the Respondent No. 2 and has held that "7.30. Before the parting with the judgment/order, we observe that in the present case, the Wind Energy Association is a co-petitioner and have prayed for similar reliefs for all the similarly placed the Wind Power Generators. The aforesaid prayers are generic in nature. We, therefore, decide that the decision pronounced in the present petition shall be applicable to all similarly placed wind generators."