SECI Announces Winners of 6 GWh Peak Power Supply Auction

IREDA’s Q1 Revenue Up 15% on Higher Loan Interest Accruals

ABRen Secures $1.6 Billion from MUFG to Fund Sprng Energy Acquisition

Coal India Seeks ₹7 Billion Term Loan for 750 MWh Battery Storage Project

GMIDC Tenders 150 MW Floating Solar Plus 150 MWh Battery Storage Project

GAIL Invites Bids to Augment 5 MW Solar Project in Rajasthan

PFC Consulting Awards Project to Evacuate 14 GW of Renewables in Gujarat

PFC Consulting Tenders Transmission Project for 400 kV Substation in Rajasthan

Grid India Issues New Procedure for Secure Operation of National Grid

Madhya Pradesh Lays Out Banking SOP for Green Energy Open Access Consumers

<table id="amazon-polly-audio-table">
						<tr>
						<td id="amazon-polly-audio-tab">
							<div id="amazon-ai-player-label">Listen to this article</div>
							<div id="amazon-ai-player-container">
			<audio class="amazon-ai-player" id="amazon-ai-player" preload="none" controls controlsList="nodownload" >
				<source type="audio/mpeg" src="https://cms.mercomindia.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/amazon_polly_103469.mp3?version=1787380788">
			</audio>
		</div>
							<div id="amazon-polly-subscribe-tab"></div>
							<div id="amazon-polly-by-tab"></div>
						</td>
						</tr>
					</table>The government recently told Parliament that over 5,400 power sector cases are pending before electricity sector regulators and the courts.
Cases involving the Ministry of Power (<a href="https://www.powermin.gov.in/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">MoP</a>) numbered 1,303, while 2,911 and 1,193 petitions are pending before the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (<a href="https://aptel.gov.in/en" target="_blank" rel="noopener">APTEL</a>) and the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (<a href="https://cercind.gov.in/index-en.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CERC</a>), respectively, bringing the total to 5,407, as of June 30, 2026. Two legal experts Mercom India spoke with attributed the pendency to limited bench strengths and vacancies at State Electricity Regulatory Commissions (SERCs), repeated litigation over similar issues, regulatory changes, and the absence of mechanisms to collectively resolve standardized claims.
Shri Venkatesh, Founding Partner at <a href="https://skvlawoffices.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">SKV Law Offices</a>, said the actual number of pending cases nationwide was several times higher. “The 5,407 cases exclude every SERC docket across 28 states, every state-level tariff, open access and consumer petition, and every High Court writ not involving the MoP.”
Vacancies, Limited Bench Strength
Divya Chaturvedi, Partner at <a href="https://www.khaitanco.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Khaitan &amp; Co</a>., said the vacancies and weak bench strength were among the most immediate constraints. APTEL’s structure requires both judicial and technical expertise, making vacancies particularly disruptive. APTEL currently has two Technical Members and one Judicial Member, while the Chairperson’s position remains unfilled.
“This effectively limits the Tribunal to one functioning bench at a time,” she said.
Vacancies at SERCs only compound the problem. Without a quorum or legal member, matters can stall at the first instance even before reaching the appellate stage.
All three posts at the Tamil Nadu Electricity Regulatory Commission recently became vacant following the Chairperson’s resignation in June 2026. The Chairperson and Judicial Member positions at the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission are also vacant, with the regulator functioning with two temporary members.
Venkatesh agreed that though judicial strength was a problem,  increasing sanctioned strength alone would not resolve the backlog, as appointments can take months or years.
Repetitive Nature of Cases
Repeated litigation over similar disputes is another major source of congestion.
Venkatesh said appeals against tariff orders across states and control periods often raise recurring questions, while change-in-law claims arising from a single statutory event can be nearly identical across dozens of projects.
Both experts highlighted how common events such as changes in the Goods and Services Tax regime, Approved List of Models and Manufacturers (ALMM) restrictions, force majeure, and other change-in-law events can generate numerous similar petitions.
A single policy event can affect an entire developer portfolio, yet each special purpose vehicle may have to establish its claim separately. “This duplicates effort and risks inconsistent outcomes,” Chaturvedi said.
She added that tariff, connectivity, and change-in-law orders can affect generators, licensees, procurers, consumers, and lenders. This can lead to intervention applications, cross-appeals, reviews, and implementation disputes involving stakeholders who were not parties to the original proceeding.
Procedural matters also consume APTEL’s time. Chaturvedi said issuing notices and completing pleadings take up significant bench time.
Although the Electricity Act provides for APTEL to endeavor to dispose of appeals within 180 days, the timeline is not enforceable.
Venkatesh said statutory timelines should have consequences for the party benefiting from delay. If a change-in-law or payment matter remains undecided after 180 days, he suggested making the undisputed amount provisionally payable with interest, subject to final adjustment.
Strict timelines could be applied to admitted liability claims, late-payment surcharge cases, connectivity and General Network Access (GNA), and curtailment compensation.
Renewables Add New Disputes
The rapid <a href="https://www.mercomindia.com/renewable-energy-capacity-in-indias-power-mix-reaches-48-3-in-q2-2025" target="_blank" rel="noopener">expansion</a> of renewable energy is creating new categories of disputes as regulation evolves alongside technologies and project development.
GNA, deviation settlement, transmission charges, curtailment, storage, hybrid projects, land acquisition, scheduled commissioning dates, and ALMM requirements are among the areas generating new questions.
Chaturvedi said renewable energy projects have greater “interface risk.” Projects may require land aggregation, renewable energy park permissions, GNA approvals, transmission readiness, forecasting and scheduling compliance, open access approvals, storage integration, and central or state offtake arrangements.
Shorter development schedules also make delays in connectivity, transmission, or land availability more consequential for renewable projects.
Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) could add another layer, Chaturvedi said. Standalone BESS is treated as a delicensed activity, while co-located storage can be considered part of generation, distribution, or consumer assets depending on its configuration. Scheduling, deviation settlement, augmentation, degradation, and transmission charge waivers could emerge as areas of dispute.
In January 2025, CERC <a href="https://www.mercomindia.com/cerc-rejects-tariff-for-secis-1000-mwh-bess-project" target="_blank" rel="noopener">allowed</a> the cancellation of Solar Energy Corporation of India’s 500 MW/1,000 MWh standalone BESS tender after prolonged delay in signing project agreements, a dispute about contracting and execution timelines rather than generation performance.
Venkatesh, however, said renewables are not necessarily more exposed to prolonged litigation than conventional generation. Thermal generators have faced disputes over imported coal, change-in-law, tariff recovery, and carrying costs for considerably longer.
Renewable disputes are more visible because the sector is expanding rapidly and the issues are newer, he said. “In terms of duration and value, thermal remains the heavier burden.”
Delays Raise Project Costs
Long-drawn regulatory disputes can affect project execution and financing.
Venkatesh said unresolved connectivity, transmission access, right-of-way, or land disputes can prevent developers from confidently sequencing construction. Delays can subsequently trigger disputes over scheduled commissioning dates, liquidated damages, performance bank guarantees, and time extensions.
“A single unresolved upstream matter can therefore generate a downstream one,” he said.
If connectivity, transmission bays, GNA commencement, or storage-charging rights remain disputed, even completed projects can end up commercially stranded.
Such delays increase interest during construction, working capital requirements, and carrying costs while postponing revenue and compensation.
Venkatesh said change-in-law recovery can take several years, while the carrying-cost component can itself become subject to litigation.
Chaturvedi noted that prolonged uncertainty also affects investment decisions. Developers may add price litigation risk in bids, while lenders demand higher contingencies and equity investors seek higher returns, potentially increasing tariffs or reducing competition.
“Each month of delay adds debt service and ties up working capital. The effect is sharper for competitively bid RE projects, whose tariffs leave little room for unplanned finance costs,” she said.
Reforming Dispute Resolution
The experts called for a combination of higher institutional capacity and measures to prevent repetitive disputes from entering the system.
Chaturvedi suggested beginning appointment processes six to nine months before expected vacancies. She proposed permanent regional or circuit benches in Bengaluru, Mumbai, Chennai, Hyderabad, and Kolkata to lower access costs and align adjudicatory capacity with the geographical distribution of projects and disputes.
Common cases could also be clubbed. When multiple proceedings arise from the same notification, regulation, tender clause, or policy event, a lead case could decide the common legal question, leaving project-specific issues for separate determination.
Venkatesh proposed a formulaic and self-executing mechanism for change-in-law claims, with defined events and indices, computation by a nodal agency, and settlement within 60 days. Appeals could then be largely limited to disputes over quantum.
He also suggested a stronger costs regime and greater precedential discipline to prevent issues already settled by APTEL from being repeatedly litigated before SERCs.
Chaturvedi said pre-litigation mechanisms and arbitration could divert suitable contractual disputes away from regulatory forums. Tariff-affecting regulatory disputes could remain with the commissions, while bilateral contractual matters could be resolved through expedited arbitration.
The proposed reforms suggest that increasing bench strength can ease the immediate backlog, but reducing litigation over the longer term will require addressing repetitive disputes, vacancies, procedural delays, and regulatory uncertainty at their source.
Subscribe to Mercom’s <a href="https://www.mercomindia.com/product/q2-2026-renewable-energy-policy-impact?utm_source=chatgpt.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Q2 2026 Renewable Energy Policy Impact Report</a> for insights into key policy developments shaping India’s renewable energy sector.
Track the latest clean energy developments and market trends with <a href="https://www.mercomindia.com/research/mercom-view" target="_blank" rel="noopener">MERCOM View</a>.

Over 5,400 Power Sector Cases Pending, Delaying Projects and Raising Costs

<table id="amazon-polly-audio-table">
						<tr>
						<td id="amazon-polly-audio-tab">
							<div id="amazon-ai-player-label">Listen to this article</div>
							<div id="amazon-ai-player-container">
			<audio class="amazon-ai-player" id="amazon-ai-player" preload="none" controls controlsList="nodownload" >
				<source type="audio/mpeg" src="https://cms.mercomindia.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/amazon_polly_102125.mp3?version=1785845448">
			</audio>
		</div>
							<div id="amazon-polly-subscribe-tab"></div>
							<div id="amazon-polly-by-tab"></div>
						</td>
						</tr>
					</table>India&#8217;s power sector is undergoing a rapid transformation with the share of renewables surging, the emergence of new technologies, and evolving business models. The country’s regulatory framework has adapted well to the changing trends, although there is a need for an enhancement of institutional capacity.
In an interview on the sidelines of the Mercom India Renewables Summit 2026 held in New Delhi on July 1 and 2, Divya Chaturvedi, Partner at <a href="https://www.khaitanco.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Khaitan &amp; Co.</a>, discusses how India&#8217;s electricity regulators have adapted to the energy transition, while highlighting the urgent need to strengthen institutions such as the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity and the state electricity regulatory commissions. She also shares her views on transmission bottlenecks, data center regulations, parallel distribution licensing, and the legal and policy challenges that will shape the next phase of India&#8217;s clean energy growth.
Excerpts from the interview:
How do you assess India&#8217;s renewable energy regulatory landscape today?
The regulatory framework has evolved significantly. Even the Electricity Act, 2003, had a clear focus on promoting renewable energy, demonstrating that policymakers recognized its importance early on. Over the past decade, the biggest positive has been the regulators&#8217; responsiveness. They have shown the ability to quickly adapt regulations to changing market requirements instead of taking years to introduce reforms. From our experience, policymakers and regulators remain closely aligned with industry concerns and have generally responded constructively to emerging issues.
Stakeholders often point to the multiplicity of regulatory forums such as the CERC, State Commissions, APTEL, High Courts, and the Supreme Court. Does this create delays?
The legal framework is quite clear. Supreme Court judgments over the years have defined when disputes should be taken before regulatory commissions and when constitutional courts can be approached.
The real bottleneck is not jurisdictional confusion but institutional capacity, particularly at the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL). The tribunal still operates with a structure designed when India&#8217;s installed power capacity was just over 100 GW. Today, the system supports more than 500 GW of capacity, significantly increasing the number and complexity of disputes.
APTEL is currently handling over 1,500 pending matters, with some cases pending for more than a decade. As electricity markets become more sophisticated with battery storage, data centers, and artificial intelligence driving new business models, the dispute resolution framework has not expanded at the same pace.
What reforms would help reduce these delays?
The foremost priority is strengthening institutional capacity. Regulatory commissions can recruit consultants and technical experts under their regulations. Some, including CERC, have done this effectively. In the case of APTEL, increasing the tribunal&#8217;s institutional strength, expanding membership, and bringing in more young professionals would help considerably.
Regional benches could also improve accessibility, as the system has become highly Delhi-centric. Stakeholders from distant states still have to approach Delhi for appellate proceedings.
In addition, there should be a more structured mechanism through which the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE) regularly engages with industry stakeholders. Today, policy interventions often happen on an ad hoc basis after issues arise.
Has the regulatory system kept pace with the rapid growth of renewable energy?
Despite the challenges, I believe regulators have done a commendable job. They have generally been solution-oriented, balancing legal requirements with commercial realities faced by developers. We have also seen disputes gradually shift from state commissions to CERC because electricity transactions increasingly involve interstate power flows.
That naturally increases pressure on central institutions, reinforcing the need for additional benches, more members, and greater institutional capacity.
Renewable energy now includes hybrid projects, battery storage, and firm dispatchable renewable energy. Have regulators developed sufficient technical expertise?
The Electricity Act always envisioned technically qualified members serving on regulatory commissions and APTEL, and that has helped.
In practice, lawyers and project developers also play an important role in explaining emerging technologies during proceedings. What stands out is the willingness of regulators to learn and adapt. Over two decades of practice, I have found the power sector to be remarkably receptive to technological change.
Technical capability has not been the primary constraint. Capacity and workload have.
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Interview with Divya chaturvedi, Partner Khaitan &#038; Co" src="https://player.vimeo.com/video/1210082911?h=56ad886592&amp;badge=0&amp;autopause=0&amp;player_id=0&amp;app_id=58479" width="100%" height="500" frameborder="0">﻿﻿﻿﻿</iframe>
What services does Khaitan &amp; Co. provide to the renewable energy sector?
We provide comprehensive legal support across the renewable energy value chain.
Apart from electricity litigation and regulatory matters, we advise on project development, land acquisition, real estate due diligence, financing, banking documentation, capital markets, technology, and artificial intelligence-related issues.
As a full-service firm with 19 offices across India and over a century of experience, we combine expertise from multiple practice areas to deliver integrated solutions for clients.
Renewable energy companies have increasingly accessed capital markets. Is this also an area where you advise clients?
Yes. Capital raising has become an important part of renewable energy growth, whether through IPOs or other financing routes. We have a strong capital markets practice and often bring together specialists from multiple teams to develop solutions tailored to clients&#8217; requirements.
How do you see the next stage of evolution of India&#8217;s renewable energy sector?
Developers have made remarkable progress, and India is close to achieving its renewable energy ambitions. The next major challenge is transmission infrastructure. Transmission capacity continues to lag generation capacity, and qualification requirements often make it difficult for private players to participate in transmission projects.
Cybersecurity is another emerging concern. Much of the equipment continues to be imported from a limited number of countries, and as the grid becomes increasingly digital, cyber resilience will become critical.
Transmission projects continue to face land acquisition and right-of-way challenges. How does your firm support clients in this area?
We regularly advise transmission companies on land-related issues, right-of-way disputes, regulatory approvals, and litigation.
Land remains a state subject, which means every state follows different policies and procedures. Greater policy harmonization would improve regulatory certainty and facilitate investment.
Ultimately, India needs to function more like a unified electricity market rather than a collection of separate state-level systems.
Several states are considering distribution licenses for data centers. How do you view these developments?
State governments are actively exploring different regulatory models. Uttar Pradesh, for instance, has introduced policies that facilitate parallel distribution licensing under certain conditions. Many data center developers are also evaluating captive and commercial &amp; industrial procurement models.
At the same time, distribution companies remain concerned about losing high-value consumers, creating resistance in some states. While there is ongoing debate, governments recognize the economic importance of attracting data center investments and are generally trying to accommodate these developments within the existing legal framework.
Could these models face legal challenges, particularly after the Supreme Court&#8217;s judgment in the Indian Railways case?
The Railways judgment addressed a different issue: whether the Railways qualified as a distribution licensee.
Data center structures differ depending on whether they involve captive consumption, commercial procurement, or distribution to third parties. Developers are carefully structuring projects within the existing regulatory framework, although debates continue.
It would be premature to predict litigation outcomes because many of these models are still evolving.
With AI, green hydrogen, and data centers expected to drive electricity demand, what regulatory challenges do you anticipate?
Environmental issues, particularly water consumption by data centers, are likely to become increasingly important.
Another key issue is the need for a highly reliable electricity supply. Many large consumers continue to rely partly on captive power because distribution utilities cannot always provide the level of reliability they require.
For now, however, the sector remains largely in the investment and transaction phase rather than the litigation phase. Both central and state governments appear keen to facilitate AI and data center investments rather than allow regulatory disputes to slow their growth.

India Needs Stronger Power Regulators as Energy Transition Accelerates: Interview

khaitan-co

Get the most relevant India solar and clean energy news.

RECENT POSTS