SC upholds Himachal Pradesh's demand for 18% free power from JSW plant
Himachal Pradesh
government's demand for 18 per cent
free electricity supply
from
JSW Hydro Energy
's 1,045-megawatt
Karcham Wangtoo hydroelectric power plant
in the state.
While setting aside the
Himachal Pradesh High Court
's order for allowing maximum 13 per cent of free electricity to the state government, a bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar held that the
CERC Regulations 2019
do not prohibit JSW from supplying free power beyond 13 per cent to the State, and the Implementation Agreement does not stand overridden by the operation of these Regulations,' the top court said.
'Once the Regulation does not prohibit the supply of free power beyond 13 per cent, JSW cannot rely on it to wriggle out of its
contractual obligations
. Such an interpretation is necessary to recognise and enforce the generating company's freedom of contract, which includes its choice of business dealings,' the apex court said, adding that the Regulatory Commissions, APTEL, and the courts must enforce these contractual obligations and ensure that their interpretation of regulations does not allow the party to circumvent and breach its contractual undertakings when the same is not intended by the regulation itself.
As per agreements executed between JSW Hydro and the Himachal Pradesh government, the former's plant was supposed to supply free power at 18 per cent of the net generation for 28 years to the state after the completion of 12 years of commercial operations of the project that commenced in 2011. However, CERC (Terms and Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2019 capped the maximum free supply at 13 per cent of the net generation on the ground that contractual agreements, to the extent that they are inconsistent with the applicable regulations, shall stand overridden by their operation.
The HC had accepted the CERC's findings and directed that the implementation agreement stood modified.
Coming down of JSW for its contradictory positions, Justice Narasimha said that the company cannot be allowed to approbate and reprobate, or blow hot and cold at the same time to secure relief under the law.
'The regulator has the expertise, specialisation, and institutional memory to conduct such an interpretative exercise to further the objective of the regulatory regime and systematically lay down legal principles. In this light, the High Court should not have entered into the domain of interpreting these Regulations which deal with tariff determination, as the same falls within the exclusive domain of the CERC,' the SC said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
3 minutes ago
- The Hindu
President reference ‘misleading', wants SC to sit on appeal against its own verdict in TN Governor case: Kerala to SC
The State of Kerala on Monday (July 28, 2025) urged the Supreme Court to dismiss the Presidential Reference seeking clarity on whether judiciary can fix timelines for the President and State Governors to clear State Bills, saying it is a ruse to make the apex court sit in appeal of its own authoritative pronouncement in the Tamil Nadu Governor case. The Constitution, the State said, does not allow the apex court to sit in appeal of its own judgments, nor can the President vest appellate jurisdiction in the court through a Presidential Reference. The State said the Reference was 'misleading' and 'suppressed facts'. Kerala, represented by senior advocate K.K. Venugopal and C.K. Sasi, said the President can only refer questions to the Supreme Court under its advisory jurisdiction of Article 143 of the Constitution if they had not been decided by the apex court. Quoting judicial precedents, including the 1993 Reference in the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal, the State said powers of the Governors and the President under Article 200 and 201 of the Constitution have been the subject of three separate authoritative judgments in the cases filed by the States of Telangana, Punjab and, finally, Tamil Nadu on April 8. 'When the Supreme Court in its adjudicatory jurisdiction pronounces its authoritative opinion on a question of law, it cannot be said that there is any doubt about the question of law or the same is res integra so as to require the President to know what the true position of law on the question is. The decision of this court on a question of law is binding on all courts and authorities. Hence, the President can refer a question of law only when this court has not decided it,' Kerala submitted. The State pointed out that the Tamil Nadu Governor case judgment authored by Justice J.B. Pardiwala on April 8 has already addressed in detail the questions raised in the Presidential Reference in May. If the government wanted to challenge the April 8 judgment, it should have filed a review or a curative petition in the apex court, and not take the route of Presidential Reference, Kerala said. The State argued the very fact the government has not sought a review of the April 8 judgment, establishing it as settled law. 'The Union of India has not filed any review or curative petition against the judgment delivered by the court in the Tamil Nadu case, and has thus accepted the judgment…The judgment, having not been assailed or set aside in any validly constituted proceedings, has attained finality and is binding on all concerned under Article 141, and cannot be challenged obliquely in collateral proceedings such as in the instant reference. The President and the Council of Ministers have to act in aid of the Supreme Court under Article 144 of the Constitution,' the State of Kerala reasoned. EOM
Mint
33 minutes ago
- Mint
What are End-of-Life Vehicles? Why does SC's hearing on Delhi's blanket ban on overage diesel, petrol vehicles matter?
The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear the Chief Minister Rekha Gupta-led government's plea challenging the blanket ban on overaged vehicles. As per the top court's October 29 directive, diesel vehicles older than 10 years and petrol vehicles older than 15 years are illegal in Delhi-NCR. It's time to learn more about End-of-Life Vehicles. 'End-of-Life Vehicles (ELV)' is a term that refers to waste vehicles and is used for overage motorcars in Delhi-NCR as per the state laws. According to the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), ELV refers to vehicles that are no longer legally valid as per state law and are declared unfit by the Automated Fitness Centres. Vehicles whose registrations have been cancelled under Chapter IV of the Motor Vehicles Act or have been declared waste vehicles by a Court order also fall into this category and are not allowed to ply on roads. Following directions of the National Green Tribunal, Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) revised End-of- Life Vehicles (ELV) guidelines in 2018. These guidelines were amended again in 2023 to align with Motor Vehicles Rules 2021. The NGT said in its November 26, 2014, order, 'All vehicles, diesel or petrol, which are more than 15 years old shall not be permitted to ply on the roads and wherever such vehicles of this age are noticed, the concerned authorities shall take appropriate steps in accordance with law, including seizure of the vehicles in accordance with the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Act.' The petition moved by Delhi government will reportedly be heard by a three-judge bench. Chief Justice BR Gavai is likely to preside over the hearing. Seeking to recall the top court's October 29, 2018, order upholding the National Green Tribunal's initial directive, the plea urges a comprehensive study focused on scientific methods using emission-based criteria in contrast with the environmental benefits of age-based restrictions. The petition submitted before the Supreme Court on Friday states, 'To tackle pollution in the NCR region, a comprehensive policy is required which gives vehicle fitness based on actual emission levels of individual vehicles as per scientific methods rather than implementing a blanket ban based solely on age." The government argues that Bharat Stage VI (BS-VI) engines emit less pollution compared to BS-IV vehicles that were standard when the original order was passed.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
India planted 1.78 lakh hectares under CAMPA from 2019 to 2023, but report flags gaps in fund use
India raised 1,78,261 hectares of compensatory afforestation against a target of 2,09,297 hectares between 2019-20 and 2023-24, achieving 85 per cent of the planned area, the Supreme Court-mandated Central Empowered Committee has said in a report. The report filed earlier this month revealed that utilisation of funds under the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) varies sharply across states. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Data Analytics Artificial Intelligence MCA MBA Product Management others PGDM Operations Management Design Thinking Digital Marketing Finance Data Science Degree CXO Management Cybersecurity Others Leadership Data Science Public Policy healthcare Project Management Technology Skills you'll gain: Data Analysis & Visualization Predictive Analytics & Machine Learning Business Intelligence & Data-Driven Decision Making Analytics Strategy & Implementation Data Analysis & Visualization Predictive Analytics & Machine Learning Business Intelligence & Data-Driven Decision Making Analytics Strategy & Implementation Duration: 12 Weeks Indian School of Business Applied Business Analytics Starts on Jun 13, 2024 Get Details Skills you'll gain: Data Analysis & Visualization Predictive Analytics & Machine Learning Business Intelligence & Data-Driven Decision Making Analytics Strategy & Implementation Duration: 12 Weeks Indian School of Business Applied Business Analytics Starts on Jun 13, 2024 Get Details According to the report, Gujarat, Chandigarh, Mizoram and Madhya Pradesh recorded full achievement of their targets. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like AirSense 11 – Smart tech for deep sleep ResMed Buy Now Undo Madhya Pradesh planted 21,746.82 hectares, fully achieving its target of 21,107.68 hectares. Karnataka also met nearly its entire target, covering 2,761.26 hectares against 2,775.12 hectares. Arunachal Pradesh planted 20,719.46 hectares against 21,478.03 hectares, achieving 96.6 per cent. Uttar Pradesh reported 96.4 per cent achievement, planting 5,877.16 hectares against 6,096.7 hectares. Assam covered 1,149.64 hectares against 1,191.82 hectares, achieving 93.8 per cent. Live Events Sikkim planted 609.52 hectares, achieving 92.3 per cent, while Punjab achieved 4,019.72 hectares against 4,471.94 hectares, about 89.9 per cent. In contrast, Meghalaya had one of the lowest coverage, achieving only 114.56 hectares against a target of 514.76 hectares or 22.3 per cent. Manipur planted 666.94 hectares against 1,759.84 hectares, achieving 37.9 per cent. Kerala covered 171.80 hectares against 433.06 hectares, achieving 39.7 per cent. West Bengal achieved only 748.25 hectares against 1,911.74 hectares, about 39.2 per cent. Tamil Nadu planted 84.76 hectares against 262.39 hectares, achieving 32.3 per cent. Andhra Pradesh reported 3,471.88 hectares against 8,663.46 hectares, covering only 40.1 per cent. The report also reviewed the use of CAMPA funds during this period. National CAMPA approved Rs 38,516 crore for state annual plans between 2019-20 and 2023-24. States released Rs 29,311 crore to their forest departments, of which Rs 26,001 crore was utilised. This means only 67.5 per cent of the approved outlay was spent. Utilisation varied widely, with Manipur, Andhra Pradesh and Arunachal Pradesh utilising 100 per cent, 100 per cent and 97.8 per cent of the funds released to them, respectively. Mizoram reported utilisation above 91 per cent, Sikkim 97.7 per cent, Karnataka 96.6 per cent and Odisha 87.9 per cent. Chhattisgarh recorded 95 per cent utilisation of the funds released, and Gujarat spent more than it released, utilising 116 per cent due to carryover balances. Several states lagged behind. Tamil Nadu used only 67.9 per cent of the funds released, while Jammu and Kashmir spent 62.5 per cent. Haryana also underperformed, using 57.4 per cent. West Bengal spent 81.1 per cent and Delhi just 26.9 per cent, the lowest among all states. Telangana reported 60.4 per cent utilisation, and Andaman & Nicobar Islands spent 53.1 per cent of the released funds. The CEC said that "delays in submission of annual plans by states, late release of funds, and the lack of dedicated CAMPA offices affect seasonal forestry operations". Monitoring of survival rates remains weak, and multiple layers in the fund release process contribute to underutilisation, it said. Despite these shortcomings, it said progress under the statutory framework has been "significant" given initial difficulties, including disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. With thousands of hectares of natural forests lost each year to development projects, the report warns that gaps in plantation survival and underutilisation of funds undermine the very purpose of the CAMPA mechanism. The compensatory afforestation regime originated from a series of orders in the landmark TN Godavarman Thirumulpad vs Union of India case of 1995. In these orders, the Supreme Court mandated that when forest land is diverted for non-forest purposes, user agencies must provide funds to compensate for the loss through afforestation on non-forest land or degraded forest land. To formalise and regulate the management of these funds, Parliament enacted the Compensatory Afforestation Fund (CAF) Act, 2016. The Act established the National and State CAMPA to manage the money collected from user agencies. The CAF Rules, 2018, provided the framework for how these funds should be used. The Act and Rules specify that the money transferred to states and union territories can only be used for afforestation, regeneration of degraded forests, wildlife protection and other activities aimed at ecological restoration.
