Petition of the CERC (Conduct of Business) 2023 review of order – EQ
Summary:
—-
### Case Overview
– **Review Petition No.**: 1/RP/2026
– **Date of Hearing**: 17th February, 2026
– **Subject**: Review Petition under **Section 94(1)(f) of the Electricity Act, 2003** read with Regulation 52 of the CERC (Conduct of Business) Regulations, 2023, seeking review of order dated **12.11.2025** in Petition No. 3/TT/2023.
– **Petitioner**: Power Grid Corporation of India Limited (PGCIL)
– **Respondents**: Madhya Pradesh Power Management Company Limited and 5 Others
– **Coram**: Shri Jishnu Barua (Chairperson), Shri Ramesh Babu V., Shri Harish Dudani (Members)
### Background of the Dispute
– **Impugned Order**: The Commission, vide order dated **12.11.2025** in Petition No. 3/TT/2023, allowed tariff for PGCIL’s transmission assets from the Commercial Operation Date (COD) to 31.03.2024.
– **Grievance**: PGCIL is seeking review on the grounds that the Commission **did not condone the entire time over-run** for two specific transmission assets:
– **Asset 1**: The Commission did not condone the **entire 2452 days** of time over-run.
– **Asset 2**: The Commission condoned only **2439 days** out of the total delay of **3090 days** in commissioning the asset.
### Key Business Implications
– **Tariff Impact**: Condonation of time over-run is critical for PGCIL to be allowed to include the full capital cost in its tariff base. Any delay not condoned may result in the disallowance of associated capital costs, directly impacting the company’s revenue and return on investment.
– **Regulatory Precedent**: The outcome of this review could set a precedent for how transmission asset delays are treated in tariff petitions, influencing future project planning and execution strategies for transmission licensees.
### Proceedings and Directions (17.02.2026)
1. **Submission by Petitioner**: Learned counsel for PGCIL presented the grounds for seeking review regarding the non-condonation of the full delay period for both assets.
2. **Commission’s Order**:
– **Admission**: The Commission **admitted** the Review Petition.
– **Notice Issued**: Directed that notice be issued to all Respondents.
– **Reply Schedule**: Respondents are to file their respective replies, if any, within **two weeks**, with a copy to the Review Petitioner. PGCIL may file its rejoinder within **one week** thereafter.
3. **Next Hearing**: The Review Petition has been listed for the next hearing on **19.03.2026**.
—-
For more information please see below link:
