Petition with CERC (Procedure, Terms and Conditions for Grant of Transmission License and other related matters) Regulations to NERGS-I Power Transmission Limited – EQ
Summary:
—
### **1. Basic Case Information**
* **Petition No.:** 322/TL/2024
* **Date of Hearing:** December 3, 2025
* **Coram (Bench):** Shri Jishnu Barua (Chairperson), Shri Ramesh Babu V., Shri Harish Dudani, Shri Ravinder Singh Dhillon (Members)
* **Petitioner:** **NERGS-I Power Transmission Limited (NREGSPTL)** – A Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) likely set up to build, own, and operate a specific transmission project.
* **Key Respondents:** Central Transmission Utility of India Limited (CTUIL), Assam Power Distribution Company Limited (APDCL), and Others.
—
### **2. Subject Matter of the Petition**
The petition is an **application for the grant of a Transmission License**. It is filed under:
* **Sections 14, 15, and 79(1)(e) of the Electricity Act, 2003:** These sections deal with the grant, suspension, and revocation of transmission licenses, and the powers of the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) in this regard.
* **CERC (Procedure, Terms and Conditions for Grant of Transmission License…) Regulations, 2009:** The detailed procedural framework for such applications.
**In essence, NREGSPTL is seeking CERC’s formal authorization to establish, operate, and maintain a dedicated inter-state power transmission system.**
—
### **3. Key Issues & Submissions in the Hearing (03.12.2025)**
The hearing centered on **procedural compliance and a side issue related to bank guarantees**:
1. **APDCL’s Submission (Respondent – Discom):**
* **Main Grievance:** Claimed that CTUIL holds its Bank Guarantees (BGs) worth **₹214.5 Crore**, which exceed the financial claims of NREGSPTL and CTUIL in this case.
* **Request:** Asked for these BGs to be returned, offering to furnish fresh BGs matching the actual claim amounts.
* **Context:** These BGs are likely related to **General Network Access (GNA)** regulations, which govern connectivity and transmission access.
2. **CTUIL’s Submission (Respondent – CTU):**
* **Defended its Position:** Stated that the BGs from APDCL were submitted under GNA regulations and must be processed accordingly.
* **Sought Permission:** Requested liberty to upload a pending **compliance affidavit** on the e-filing portal.
3. **NREGSPTL’s Submission (Petitioner – License Applicant):**
* **Objected to APDCL’s Issue:** Argued that the matter of APDCL’s BGs with CTUIL is **extraneous to this license application petition**. APDCL should file a separate petition if it has a grievance.
* **Criticized CTUIL’s Affidavit:** Pointed out that despite previous orders (RoP dated 28.10.2025), CTUIL’s compliance affidavit still fails to clearly state its **stand or views** on the core license application.
—
### **4. Commission’s Order & Directions**
The CERC issued the following procedural directions:
1. **To CTUIL:** **Strictly comply** with the previous order (28.10.2025) and **file a proper compliance affidavit within 3 days**, serving a copy to NREGSPTL.
2. **Sequential Filing of Pleadings:**
* **NREGSPTL (Petitioner)** may file its response to CTUIL’s affidavit **within 1 week**.
* **APDCL (Respondent)** may then file its response **within 1 week** after NREGSPTL’s filing.
* **NREGSPTL** is permitted to file a final rejoinder **within 1 week** after APDCL’s response.
3. **Next Hearing Date:** The case is adjourned and will be listed next on **January 8, 2026**.
—
For more information please see below link:
