GERC Reviews Settlement On 400 MW Solar Plant SCOD Extension In Gujarat

In a recent proceeding before the Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission (GERC) in Gandhinagar, an application filed by M/s Enren Energy Pvt. Limited against Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Limited (GUVNL) was discussed. The application, IA No. 41 of 2024, was filed as part of a larger Petition No. 2341 of 2024, which sought an extension of the Scheduled Commercial Operation Date (SCOD) for a 400 MW solar power plant. Enren Energy cited certain Force Majeure events that had affected the timely implementation of the project as the reason for requesting the extension.

During the hearing held on February 28, 2025, Mr. Nitin Gupta, advocate for Enren Energy, informed the Commission that both parties had reached a mutual settlement. As a result, the petitioner no longer wished to contest the matter and requested permission to withdraw the petition. The advocate for GUVNL, Mr. Utkarsh Singh, confirmed the settlement and supported the request for withdrawal.

The Commission, however, sought clarity on the nature of the settlement. Mr. Singh clarified that the withdrawal was not unconditional. Instead, it was based on specific terms outlined in a letter from GUVNL dated February 17, 2025, which had been accepted by Enren Energy through an undertaking dated February 26, 2025. This clarification highlighted that the withdrawal depended on certain agreed-upon conditions rather than being an outright dismissal of the petition.

The Commission further requested the parties to submit detailed documentation explaining the settlement terms and their justification. This included addressing several key points, such as the reasons for the extension of the SCOD, the status and conditions of any Liquidated Damages imposed, and how the extension was evaluated. Additionally, the Commission asked whether the extension complied with the terms of the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) and the bid documents.

Another important issue raised by the Commission was whether the extension and any relaxation of Liquidated Damages were granted due to Force Majeure events or for other reasons. The parties were also required to clarify if they had waived their rights to claim or impose penalties under the PPA. Any changes in law that occurred during the extended period were to be accounted for in the settlement as well, ensuring that all legal and contractual obligations were considered.

Both parties jointly requested an adjournment to submit the required affidavits and documents addressing the Commission’s queries. The Commission noted that the critical documents, including the GUVNL letter and Enren Energy’s undertaking, had not yet been formally placed on record. Acknowledging the request, the Commission granted the adjournment and allowed one week for the submissions to be filed, with copies to be shared between the parties.

The Commission concluded the hearing by stating that a new date for the next session would be communicated separately. The order on this matter was issued on September 22, 2025, by Members S. R. Pandey and Mehul M. Gandhi. The case highlights the importance of detailed procedural documentation and the need for clarity in settlements involving large-scale renewable energy projects. It also underscores the Commission’s focus on ensuring that extensions and adjustments are in line with contractual obligations, Force Majeure provisions, and regulatory requirements.

This hearing reflects ongoing efforts in Gujarat to facilitate the timely completion of renewable energy projects while balancing the rights and obligations of project developers and distribution companies. The resolution of such petitions through mutually agreed settlements indicates a collaborative approach to addressing project delays in the solar power sector.