APTEL Upholds HPPTCL Liability For Delayed Transmission Asset Charges

The Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) has upheld an order of the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC), directing Himachal Pradesh Power Transmission Corporation Limited (HPPTCL) to pay transmission charges for two 220 kV line bays at the Hamirpur substation. The Tribunal ruled that HPPTCL is liable to bear the charges from March 31, 2019, until the commissioning of its associated downstream transmission line.

The case relates to CERC’s order dated November 21, 2019, which approved the commercial operation date (COD) of assets developed by Power Grid Corporation of India Limited (POWERGRID) under the “Augmentation of Transformers in Northern Region-Part B” scheme. POWERGRID had completed the construction of the two 220 kV line bays at the Hamirpur substation. However, these bays could not be fully utilized because HPPTCL’s downstream Hamirpur–Dehan transmission line was not ready for operation. As a result, the bays could only be charged on a no-load basis, preventing their intended commercial use.

Since the delay in commissioning the downstream transmission line was attributed to HPPTCL, CERC held the state transmission utility responsible for paying the transmission charges during the period when the bays remained underutilized. HPPTCL challenged this decision before APTEL.

In its appeal, HPPTCL argued that it should not be required to pay the charges because no formal Implementation Agreement (IA) had been signed between the parties, as required under the 2016 amendments to the Indian Electricity Grid Code (IEGC). The utility also claimed that earlier regional planning discussions had specified that the line bays would only be constructed after a two-year advance notice from the state transmission utility, which it said had never been issued. HPPTCL further relied on an earlier APTEL judgment involving Punjab State Transmission Corporation Limited (PSTCL), where similar financial liability had been set aside.

However, APTEL rejected all of HPPTCL’s arguments. The bench, comprising Officiating Chairperson Seema Gupta and Judicial Member Virender Bhat, observed that the facts of the present case were different from the earlier PSTCL case. The Tribunal noted that HPPTCL had actively participated in meetings of the Standing Committee and the Northern Region Power Committee (NRPC), where it had specifically requested the construction of the Hamirpur line bays to facilitate connectivity for its downstream transmission network.

The Tribunal further clarified that the requirement of a two-year advance notice applied only to other future line bays and not to the Hamirpur bays, which had already been approved with HPPTCL’s consent. It also ruled that the 2016 amendment to the IEGC requiring an Implementation Agreement could not be applied retrospectively because the project had already been approved and execution had begun before the amendment came into force.

Reaffirming the principle that the entity responsible for delaying the commercial utilization of transmission assets must bear the resulting financial burden, APTEL dismissed HPPTCL’s appeal and upheld CERC’s order, confirming HPPTCL’s liability to pay the transmission charges for the specified period.