In Brief
The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal by Tata Power Company Limited Transmission challenging the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission's (MERC) grant of a transmission licence to Adani Electricity Mumbai Infrastructure Limited for a 1000 MW HVDC link between Kudus and Aarey. The appellant argued the project should have been awarded through competitive bidding (TBCB route) under Section 63 of the Electricity Act 2003, not through the regulated tariff mechanism (RTM) under Section 62. Held: Sections 62 and 63 provide alternative, not hierarchical, methods for tariff determination. The TBCB route is not dominant; both routes have equal standing. The National Tariff Policy 2016, though statutory, serves as a material consideration rather than a binding mandate. MERC, lacking notified threshold limits or prior regulations on choosing modalities, could exercise discretion under general regulatory power. The HVDC project qualifies as an 'existing' project under the Maharashtra Government's 2019 resolution, exempting it from mandatory competitive bidding. MERC's decision to grant the licence under Section 62 was lawful and within reasonable exercise of its powers.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.