CERC Allows Removal Of Former Power Buyers From Solar Change In Law Dispute

The Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) has passed an order allowing the removal of BSES Yamuna Power Limited (BYPL) and BSES Rajdhani Power Limited (BRPL) from a legal petition related to “Change in Law” compensation for solar power projects. The order was issued on December 24, 2025, and relates to a dispute involving several ACME solar subsidiaries and the Solar Energy Corporation of India (SECI).

The original petition was filed by ACME group companies, including ACME Phalodi and ACME Raisar. The developers are seeking a declaration that the mandatory undergrounding of 33 kV transmission lines amounts to a “Change in Law.” This requirement was imposed following directions from the Supreme Court to protect the habitat of the Great Indian Bustard (GIB). According to the developers, this directive led to additional costs, and they are seeking compensation under the Change in Law provisions of their contracts.

The issue became more complex due to changes in the power sale arrangements. In February 2024, BYPL and BRPL, which were the original buyers of the solar power, issued termination notices for their Power Sale Agreements (PSAs). These terminations were later accepted by SECI in October 2024. After the termination, the 500 MW solar power capacity was reallocated to Bihar discoms under a new agreement, which was approved by the Bihar Electricity Regulatory Commission (BERC).

ACME argued before the CERC that since the PSAs with the Delhi-based utilities had been terminated and the power was now being supplied to Bihar, BYPL and BRPL no longer had any legal interest in the case. The developers stated that they were not seeking any relief from the Delhi utilities and, as the dominus litis, they should not be compelled to continue litigation against parties who are no longer connected to the dispute.

BYPL and BRPL opposed their removal from the petition. They claimed that they were still necessary and proper parties because they had challenged SECI’s acceptance of the termination before the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (DERC). They argued that SECI’s actions were malicious and bad in law. The Delhi utilities also stated that they had withdrawn their termination notices and had expressed their willingness to continue under the original contracts. In addition, they alleged that the developers were trying to remove them from the case to avoid questions related to possible windfall gains arising from a significant drop in solar module prices.

After examining the arguments, the CERC referred to a similar decision it had issued in October 2025. The Commission observed that although the termination is being challenged before the DERC, there is no stay on SECI’s decision to reallocate the power. At present, the power is being scheduled to Bihar, and the Bihar discoms are paying the applicable tariffs. If the Change in Law claim is allowed in the main petition, the liability to pay compensation would fall on the Bihar discoms.

Based on this reasoning, the CERC concluded that BYPL and BRPL’s interest in the matter depends on future events, namely the outcome of the proceedings before the DERC. This, the Commission said, does not make them necessary parties at the current stage. The application to delete BYPL and BRPL from the petition was therefore allowed. The main petition is scheduled for further hearing on February 12, 2026.