Petition of the CERC (Indian Electricity Grid Code) and (Conduct of Business) Regulation of ARPFPL – EQ
Summary:
—-
**Petitioner and Respondent:**
– **Petitioner:** Ayana Renewable Power Four Private Limited (ARPFPLL), a renewable energy generation company.
– **Respondent:** Western Regional Load Despatch Centre (WRLDC), the grid operator.
**Project Background & Current Status:**
– **Project Type:** A hybrid renewable energy project comprising both solar and wind generation capacity.
– **Commissioned Capacity:** The Petitioner has already commissioned **37.5 MW of solar capacity** and **79.2 MW of wind capacity**.
– **Pending Capacity:** The petition specifically concerns the remaining **13.2 MW of wind capacity**, which consists of **4 Wind Turbine Generators (WTGs)** .
**Core Issue:**
The Petitioner has requested a further extension to inject **”infirm power”** (electricity generated during the trial and testing phase before formal commissioning) into the grid. This is necessary to complete the trial run and achieve full commercial operation of the remaining 4 WTGs.
**Reason for Delay:**
The Petitioner cited **Force Majeure or unavoidable events** as the reason for not being able to commission the remaining 13.2 MW capacity within the extension period previously granted by WRLDC.
**Key Arguments by the Petitioner:**
1. **Readiness:** The 13.2 MW wind capacity is now ready for charging and trial runs.
2. **Legal Precedent:** The Petitioner’s counsel highlighted that a similar issue was recently considered and decided by the Commission in **Petition No. 854/MP/2025 (NTPC Renewable Energy Limited v. WRLDC)** on November 14, 2025, suggesting that a similar order may be applicable.
**Key Business Takeaways:**
– **Project Nearing Completion:** The project is largely operational (116.7 MW already commissioned), with only a small fraction (13.2 MW) pending.
– **Regulatory Relief Sought:** This is a routine, though critical, regulatory filing to resolve the final hurdle in achieving full project commissioning. The lack of opposition from WRLDC is a positive indicator.
– **Precedent-Based Argument:** The petitioner’s reliance on a recent CERC order (NTPC RE vs. WRLDC) strengthens its case, as it demonstrates a consistent regulatory approach to such delay requests.
– **Outcome:** The final order from CERC is pending, but the circumstances suggest a favorable outcome for the petitioner, allowing them to complete the trial runs and move the project to full commercial operation.
—-
For more information please see below link:
