In the matter of determination of project specific tariff for Solar PV power plant at Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh – EQ

Summary:

—

1. **Reference to APTEL Direction:** The Respondent (CSPDCL) informed the CERC about proceedings conducted on April 15, 2026, before APTEL in **Appeal No. 340 of 2026**. APTEL directed CERC to issue an order in this Review Petition **”at the earliest and preferably within two days”** from the current hearing date (i.e., by April 18, 2026).

2. **Status of APTEL Order:** When queried by CERC, CSPDCL confirmed that APTEL had not yet issued a written order for that hearing.

3. **Arguments Submitted:** Both SECI (Review Petitioner) and CSPDCL (Respondent) confirmed that they have filed their respective notes of arguments. The matter was then heard at length by the CERC bench.

4. **CERC’s Decision:** Taking into account:
– The submissions made by both parties, and
– The observation/direction issued by APTEL on April 15, 2026,

**CERC reserved its order** in the Review Petition.

—

### Business & Legal Points

| Aspect | Implication / Detail |
| :— | :— |
| **Nature of Proceeding** | This is a **Review Petition** – a legal mechanism to seek reconsideration of a prior CERC order (dated Sept 8, 2025) on tariff determination for a specific solar plant. Review is typically granted only on grounds of error apparent on the face of the record. |
| **Higher Appellate Pressure** | APTEL has **directed CERC to expedite** its decision (within 2 days). This indicates that the tariff dispute is time-sensitive, likely impacting project commissioning, power procurement, or financial closure. |
| **No Fresh Evidence or Opposition Summary** | The summary does not indicate any new evidence or settlement. Both parties have filed arguments, and CERC heard them fully before reserving order. |
| **CERC’s Reserved Order** | By reserving order, CERC has concluded the hearing and will now deliberate internally before issuing a written order. The direction from APTEL may accelerate this. |
| **Business Risk / Uncertainty** | Until CERC issues the final order on the review petition, the original tariff (set on Sept 8, 2025) remains under challenge. This creates uncertainty for: <br> – **SECI** (as the tendering agency) <br> – **CSPDCL** (as the off-taker) <br> – **Project developer** (not a party to this review but financially impacted by tariff) |
| **Strategic Takeaway** | When APTEL sets a tight deadline (2 days) for a lower forum like CERC, it signals that the appellate tribunal views the matter as urgent, possibly to unblock a stuck project or avoid regulatory delay affecting power supply or tariff finality. |

—-

For more information please see below link: