Death of the sustainability poster child: What does it teach us?
Agencies
On the face of it, this was a startup that was at the right place at the right time. And no one could have anticipated the headlines that have greeted us lately.
The year 2019 can be recalled for two events that today give rise to interlinked questions about green ventures in the Indian transportation sector. 2019 was the year when Blu Smart was launched. It was also the year that the government rolled out the National Mission on Transformative Mobility and Battery Storage.
BluSmart started in January 2019 with an exciting green mandate, prepared to take on the duopoly that Uber-Ola firmly commandeered in India's top three megacities. Here was a cab service that used electric vehicles while the customers had transparency and surety, largely due to their fixed pricing model. It caught attention and grew into a cab service with its own loyal customers that demonstrated a preference towards its pocket-friendly, reliable rides. At the height of its success, Blu Smart managed close to 10,000 electric vehicles utilising about 6300 charging points across the three cities of Delhi NCR, Bengaluru, and Mumbai. Here was an aspiring environment-friendly startup that resonated with its urban commuters as an attractive alternative, one which did not pollute the air they breathed. And it wasn't just the environmentally-conscious commuters who flocked towards the service. The business model with its zero-cancellation policy, friendly drivers, and clean vehicles filled the market gap.
Around the same time, the Indian Government rolled out the National Mission on Transformative Mobility & Battery Storage. It contained two phases of the Faster Adoption and Manufacturing of (Hybrid &) Electric Vehicles in India (FAME) scheme. FAME, in its first phase, subsidised prices and incentives for electric vehicles and their infrastructure. Green companies could avail a reduction in GST (5% to 12%), exemption from permit requirements and a reduction in costs under its second phase. Bring in this mix, the Delhi EV policy in 2020, with many such other incentives, such as favourable tariffs and a pollution cess.
On the face of it, this was a startup that was at the right place at the right time. And no one could have anticipated the headlines that have greeted us lately. Except that there were signs. In 2024, there was the introduction of surge-pricing. There also lurked in the shadows whispers of mismanagement and lack of corporate governance. These problems lingered beneath the surface for years and culminated in a SEBI investigation after significant defaults on payment by the company. The fairytale came to an abrupt halt with services suspended, employees suddenly jobless, and customers uncertain of whether they will get back the money in their wallet option. The reasons were plenty. Gensol Engineering, the entity where BluSmart leased its cabs, had been facing its own liquidation crisis, heavily impacting the former's operations. But the final nail in the coffin of public opinion was the co-founders diverting funds towards luxury real-estate and other personal indulgences from a loan intended for purchasing more vehicles for the fleet. BluSmart's abrupt closure was brought on by alleged violations of SEBI's anti-fraud (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices relating to Securities Market) Regulations, 2003 and potential breaches of corporate governance under the Companies Act, 2013. Investigations revealed that funds previously earmarked for EV fleet expansion were diverted for personal use by the co-founders, seemingly a case of criminal misappropriation. Additionally, the company's abrupt shutdown left partners like Gensol Engineering stranded, triggering contractual disputes and worsening liquidity crises. SEBI's scrutiny highlighted misleading disclosures to investors, possibly violating green bond compliance if the company raised sustainable financing.
The BluSmart tragedy raises significant questions about the future of electric vehicles in India. A startup that was taken as a poster child by those keen to demonstrate the ease and viability of the green transportation sector has instead done the opposite. BluSmart's misuse of FAME-II subsidies and Delhi's EV incentives raised questions about oversight in green funding, with this collapse being seen as one that could prompt stricter due diligence for EV startups seeking subsidies or green investments and thus slowing sectoral growth. Startups starting out with the same kind of vision will have greater difficulty attracting investors. The EV system will, in the future, invite reduced investor trust and therefore hinder adoption. The mismanagement and irresponsibility of the startup spell caution for others geared towards bringing about a better future for the planet. Lofty goals for the environment and consumer-friendly policies mean little if the basic tenets of corporate governance and financial management are brushed aside. It is time that the policy framework around EVs is not just focused on infrastructure and subsidies, but also introduces checks to prevent advantages being taken for corporate greed and the propensity to misuse enabling policies for short-sighted negligence. The time is ripe for a specialised statutory body to be formed to monitor the utilisation of subsidies and other SOPs offered to companies in the clean energy space. BluSmart may then go down in case studies as a benchmark for how not to scale green ventures—highlighting the need for stronger audits, transparent governance, and regular scrutiny to prevent similar collapses. Talish Ray is an advocate and Managing Partner at TRS Law Offices. Tejaswini Singh contributed to this article as a researcher.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
India seeks exemption from US' 10% baseline tariff
The fate of the 10% baseline tariffs that the Trump administration invoked on imports from all countries on April 2 is among the issues now at the heart of negotiations between New Delhi and Washington as they attempt to hammer out an early tranche of the trade deal, people aware of the matter have said. Delhi is not in favour of replicating, as suggested by the American negotiators, the approach in the trade deal struck between the US and the UK, where British goods are still subject to the baseline tariffs, these people added. According to a person with direct knowledge of the discussions, Indian negotiators are pushing for their American counterparts to remove the baseline 10% rate as well as commit to assurances that the additional 16%, due to be implemented on July 9, will be left off. An American negotiating team led by assistant US Trade Representative Brendan Lynch 4 landed in Delhi on June for what is the fifth time negotiators from either side have gone to the other's capital for face-to-face talks. The American delegation is expected to be in Delhi till June 10, longer than the previously expected two-day visit. ALSO READ | India-US trade negotiations hit top gear, American delegation extends Delhi stay 'Ideally, both the 10% baseline tariff on Indian goods and the additional 16% from July 9 must end simultaneously after an interim deal is signed. Else, India will also have rights to continue proportionately similar tariffs on American goods till the time the US withdraws the entire 26% reciprocal tariff,' one of them said, citing a joint statement by the two countries' leaders issued on February 13 in Washington. While expounding 'Mission-500' to double bilateral trade to $500 billion by 2030 on February 13, the two leaders – Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Donald Trump – in their joint statement mentioned the need for new 'fair-trade terms' that are 'mutually beneficial', the person said. A second person aware of the matter corroborated India's stance: 'Only a mutually beneficial deal would have a long life'. 'Both India and the US are sovereigns. One is the oldest democracy and the other is the largest democracy. While the US is the largest economy, India is the fastest growing major economy of the world. Hence, the deal must be balanced, equitable, fair and acceptable to their people,' the first person said. The second person added that India sees trade interests between both nations as being 'complementary and not competitive', hence New Delhi is open to giving greater market access to the American goods in the Indian market provided Washington reciprocates. 'The trade negotiations continue in New Delhi covering all these matters in a constructive manner as we speak and both sides are hopeful for a win-win,' he said. ALSO READ | Donald Trump claims India willing to cut 100% tariffs on US goods, 'but…' After UK industries faced American tariffs of 25% on all aluminium, steel and derivatives (announced on March 12), 25% tariff on passenger vehicles (announced on April 3), 25% tariff on automobile parts (beginning May 3), and a 10% baseline tariff on all imports (from April 5) – the UK and the US on May 8 announced an economic prosperity deal (EPD). The mini deal secured some concessions for the UK, but the 10% baseline tariff continued. Both partners are racing to conclude an interim, or regarded as an 'early harvest', deal before July 9, which will be followed by a wider first tranche of Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) by September-October 2025. After that a comprehensive BTA will be negotiated, they said. ALSO READ | How Donald Trump decided the tariff for India The current negotiations for an early harvest deal involve greater market access for goods by eliminating tariffs and non-tariff trade barriers, and improving supply chain integration, they said. The current New Delhi round is followed by a face-to-face negotiation between the two teams in the US. During that period, Union commerce and industry minister Piyush Goyal was also in the US from May 17-22 where he held meetings with his counterparts, US commerce secretary Howard Lutnick and USTR Jamieson Greer.
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Local Court Lawyers Up In Arms Over Shifting Of 34 Digital Courts
New Delhi: Lawyers from the district courts decided on Saturday to roll back their decision to abstain from work in protest against the shifting of the judges of the 34 digital Negotiable Instruments Act courts to the Rouse Avenue courts. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now A statement released by the All District Courts Bar Association of Delhi on Saturday said that the lawyers' coordination committee met the chief justice of and was assured that all digital courts would function strictly as digital platforms only. The remaining proceedings and judicial work only would be conducted in the regular local courts, the statement said. "Necessary directions are being issued to all presiding officers instructing them not to insist on the physical appearance of any stakeholders, including parties, counsel, police officers, etc, in c+ourt," the statement added. On May 30, high court chief justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya inaugurated the 34 digital courts at the Rouse Avenue Courts complex to hear cases under the NI Act. Only judges of these courts will operate from Rouse Avenue, while the staff —readers, ahlmads and stenographers — will operate from their respective districts. The association on Friday, June 6 decided to abstain from work opposing the decision of shiftingthecourts. The digital courts deal with cases related to cheque bounces across six court complexes. The Lok Sabha was informed by the Union law minister in Dec 2024 that Delhi ranked fourth among top five Indian states with regard to NI Act cases and has 4.5 lakh pending cases. A judge in a NI Act court, on average, holds 80 hearings every day. According to the National Judicial Data Grid, until June 7, there were 15.1 lakh cases, of which 31% were cheque bounce cases. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Last year, advocate Jagriti Jain filed a public interest litigation, highlighting administrative lapses in the digital NI Act court in North district. The petition pointed out the huge pendency of cases as well as connectivity problems of the portal used for digital hearings. In April 2024, a division bench comprising then acting chief justice Manmohan and justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora directed steps to be taken to address the issue of digital connectivity and network problems. On May 22 this year, the bench disposed of the Jain's PIL, noting that connectivity issues had been resolved after the registrar general of the high court submitted a report on May 9 outlining the remedial measures taken. A second digital NI Act court was established in the North district and all pending matters were evenly distributed between the two courts. Advocate Parthesh Bhardwaj, who appeared for Jain, told TOI, "As of June, with multiple functioning courts, better cause list management and strengthened technical infrastructure, the average time between hearings at digital NI Act courts in all districts has significantly reduced."
New Indian Express
5 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Embed Indian carbon market in global trade context
The PAT experience Though there are several areas where PAT, launched in 2012, could be implemented better, it has created industry familiarity with a measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) mechanism and a good number of accredited energy auditors. The carbon credit trading scheme (CCTS) will reduce the PAT reporting frequency from three years to an annual basisthereby increasing the spend on the MRV as well as speed of emissions reduction. Absent renewable energy, a majority of industrial emissions emerge out of energy consumption. PAT compliance has entailed over ten years of industry efforts to reduce energy consumption. The low hanging fruit of energy intensity has already been picked. Industry majors have invested in best available technology. Without further investment in technology, can the obligated entities reduce emissions further or will they simply bear the cost of purchasing carbon credits from other better performers? Indian carbon market embedded in global decarbonisation PAT was an autonomous measure to discipline industrial energy consumption. It did not function under any multilateral pressure or even context. CCTS on the other hand will have to respond to linkages and contestation with several carbon markets. CCTS will be a tool to defend Indian industry against cheap imports as well as to gain access to carbon conscious export markets. Building the trade dimension into the Indian Carbon market is imperative to create policy and business opportunities. The PAT experience Though there are several areas where PAT, launched in 2012, could be implemented better, it has created industry familiarity with a measurement, reporting and verification (MRV) mechanism and a good number of accredited energy auditors. The carbon credit trading scheme (CCTS) will reduce the PAT reporting frequency from three years to an annual basis thereby increasing the spend on the MRV as well as speed of emissions reduction. Absent renewable energy, a majority of industrial emissions emerge out of energy consumption. PAT compliance has entailed over ten years of industry efforts to reduce energy consumption. The low hanging fruit of energy intensity has already been picked. Industry majors have invested in best available technology. Without further investment in technology, can the obligated entities reduce emissions further or will they simply bear the cost of purchasing carbon credits from other better performers? Indian carbon market embedded in global decarbonisation PAT was an autonomous measure to discipline industrial energy consumption. It did not function under any multilateral pressure or even context. CCTS on the other hand will have to respond to linkages and contestation with several carbon markets. CCTS will be a tool to defend Indian industry against cheap imports as well as to gain access to carbon conscious export markets. Building the trade dimension into the Indian Carbon market is imperative to create policy and business opportunities.
