Petition for extension of date of grid connectivity and commissioning of 7.8 MW Solar Plant for captive use due to occurnance of uncontrollable events – EQ

Summary:

—-

#### 1. Core Dispute: Extension Due to “Uncontrollable Events”
– **The Petition:** Filed under **Section 86 (1) (c), (e), and (f)** of the Electricity Act, 2003, and Clause 3.9 of GERC Order No. 06 of 2024.
– **Relief Sought:** Extension of the date for **grid connectivity and commissioning** for a 7.8 MW solar plant (captive use).
– **Grounds:** The developer cites the occurrence of **”uncontrollable events”** as the reason for the delay.
– **Business Implication:** “Uncontrollable events” or force majeure is a common legal ground for seeking time extensions in power projects. Developers must prove that delays were caused by factors beyond their control (e.g., natural disasters, government actions, utility delays) to avoid penalties or cancellation of connectivity.

#### 2. Interlocutory Application (IA No. 41 of 2025)
– **Purpose:** The developer filed a separate **Interlocutory Application** along with the main petition.
– **Relief Sought in IA:** Seeking an **interim stay or injunction** under Section 94(2) of the Electricity Act.
– **Likely Intent:** The developer probably wanted to prevent the respondents (DGVCL/GETCO) from taking any adverse action (like canceling connectivity or invoking bank guarantees) while the main petition was pending.
– **Business Implication:** Filing an IA is an aggressive legal tactic to secure immediate, temporary relief. It indicates the developer’s project timeline was under immediate threat, prompting them to seek protective orders from the regulator.

#### 3. Procedural Status and Final Order
– **Hearing Date:** The final hearing took place on **February 26, 2026**.
– **Arguments Concluded:** Both the petitioner’s counsel (Ms. Kiran Joshi) and the respondents’ counsel (Mr. Aneesh Bajaj) completed their final arguments.
– **Commission’s Order (dated March 6, 2026):** The Commission noted that arguments are complete and the matter is now **”reserved for appropriate Order.”**
– **Business Implication:** This is a standard procedural step. “Reserved for order” means the regulator has heard both sides and will now deliberate and issue a final written judgment on both the main petition and the IA. The business must now wait for the final verdict, which will dictate the fate of the project’s timeline.

—-

For more information please see below link: