Petition with CERC (Procedure, Terms and Conditions for Grant of Transmission License and other related matters) Regulations to NERGS-I Power Transmission Ltd – EQ

Summary:

—-

**1. Reference Details:**
– **Petition Number:** 322/TL/2024
– **Subject:** Application under **Sections 14, 15, and 79(1)(e)** of the Electricity Act, 2003, read with the **Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (Procedure, Terms and Conditions for Grant of Transmission License and other related matters) Regulations, 2009**, seeking grant of transmission licence to **NERGS-I Power Transmission Limited (NREGSPTL)**.

**2. Parties Involved:**
– **Petitioner:** NERGS-I Power Transmission Limited (NREGSPTL)
– **Respondents:**
– Central Transmission Utility of India Limited (CTUIL)
– Assam Power Distribution Company Limited (APDCL) and Others

**3. Bench Details:**
– **Date of Hearing:** 6.1.2026
– **Coram:**
– Shri Jishnu Barua, Chairperson
– Shri Ramesh Babu V., Member
– Shri Harish Dudani, Member
– Shri Ravinder Singh Dhillon, Member

**4. Summary of Proceedings:**

**Petitioner’s Submissions (NREGSPTL):**
– Alleged that CTUIL failed to comply with earlier Commission directions and did not clarify its stand on the Petitioner’s claims regarding **project cancellation**.
– Asserted that **privity of contract** exists only with CTUIL under the Transmission Service Agreement (TSA) dated 30.7.2024, and thus CTUIL is solely liable for compensation.
– Argued that any dispute between CTUIL and APDCL is an **inter-se matter** and should not affect the Petitioner.
– Later, orally requested permission to **withdraw the petition** with liberty to file a fresh one to pursue its claims separately.

**Respondent APDCL’s Submissions:**
– Contended that the Petitioner had earlier agreed to APDCL’s reimbursement proposal and participated in joint meetings.
– Highlighted **inconsistencies** in the Petitioner’s claimed expenses, which increased significantly between February and September 2025 without clear justification.
– Noted that APDCL had already informed about the **suspension of the generation project** by the Assam Government in June 2025.

**Respondent CTUIL’s Submissions:**
– Refuted claims of non-compliance and clarified its role in providing recommendations on transmission schemes.
– Stated that the Petitioner’s claims are **regulatory compensation** against APDCL, not contractual under the TSA.
– Emphasized that the TSA has **not been terminated**, and contractual recovery provisions are not yet applicable.
– Pointed out that the Petitioner is **not a licensed transmission entity** and should not have continued project activities.
– Cited the **Independent Engineer’s Report**, indicating minimal project progress as of October 2025.
– Opposed the Petitioner’s withdrawal request at this stage.

**Commission’s Directions:**
– Allowed the Petitioner to file a **formal withdrawal application** within **one week**.
– Permitted Respondents to file **objections** within **two weeks** thereafter.
– **Next hearing scheduled for 24.2.2026.**

—-

For more information please see below link: