APTEL Gives SCOD Extension To Kranthi Ediffice For Telangana Solar Project

APTEL Gives SCOD Extension To Kranthi Ediffice For Telangana Solar Project. Photo: Pexels

In a case about seeking an extension in the Scheduled Commercial Operation Date (SCOD) for a solar photovoltaic power project in Telangana, the petition filed by Kranthi Ediffice Private Limited was upheld, and the firm got an extension of 90 days by the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL). The company was a successful bidder through open competitive bidding in 2012 and an open offer route in 2013 to set up the solar photovoltaic power project of 10 MW capacity at Nagarkurnool village in Mahabubnagar, Telangana.

It entered into a PPA with the Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited on January 8 2015, for the sale of power to Discom at a tariff of Rs.6.49 per unit. The project was to be commissioned by January 7 2016. The date for SCOD was already extended by the Telangana government, first to March 2016 and then to December 31, 2016. However, as alleged by Kranthi Ediffice Private Limited, the SCOD was not achieved in the stipulated timeframe due to the demonetization of high-value currency by the Centre.

After that, the firm approached the Telangana High Court, challenging the Commission’s order on January 19, 2017, refusing to extend the SCOD. However, it was dismissed as withdrawn on the ground that only the Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited i.e. the Commission was empowered to extend the SCOD.

Accordingly, Kranthi Ediffice Private Limited approached the Commission with prayers, seeking to extend the SCOD beyond the time stipulated. The Commission on December 19 2018, allowed the petition of Kranthi Ediffice Private Limited and passed orders directing the respondent to amend the PPA within 90 days for achieving SCOD from the date of signing the PPA with a fixed tariff of Rs. 5.52 per unit on the lines of relief granted to Oberon Power Corporation Pvt. Ltd.. Still, then it was argued by the counsels of Southern Power Distribution Company of Telangana Limited that Kranthi Ediffice Private Limited had failed to complete the project by December 31, 2016 despite two extensions granted by the State Government. Therefore, it would not be entitled to any further extension of the SCOD. It was also argued that the Commission has erroneously compared the case with the case of Oberon Power Corporation Pvt. Ltd.

The counsel of Kranthi Ediffice Private Limited argued that due to the crises created by the demonetization of high-value currency notes by the Centre, they suffered a liquidity crunch to meet the expenditure and was unable to pay for the services of about 200 workmen, which it had engaged for the project. It was submitted that the firm had incurred about 30 crores towards capital expenses on the project in procuring the land, fencing it, and installing various types of machinery on it but was unable to complete it due to reasons beyond its control and, therefore, the Commission was justified in extending the COD by a further period of 90 days.

The Appellate Tribunal for Electricity held that the case of Kranthi Ediffice Private Limited stood on a better footing than the case of Oberon Power Corporation Pvt. Ltd. and that it saw no reason why any different treatment should be meted out to Kranthi Ediffice by not giving it similar relief as was granted to the project of Oberon Power Corporation Pvt. Ltd reiterating that the State is bound to treat similarly placed projects on equal footing and that Article 14 of the Constitution of India provides the legal basis for equal treatment under the law.