LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
⚖️ Ask the AI about your situation:🚗 Car Accident💼 Work / Job🏠 Housing / Eviction👪 Family / Divorce📋 Contract Dispute💰 Money Owed

NABHA POWER LIMITED & ANR. versus PUNJAB STATE POWER COROPORATION LIMITED & ANR.

Citation: [2024] 11 S.C.R. 445 · Decided: 05-11-2024 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 10 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

[2024] 11 S.C.R. 445 : 2024 INSC 833
Nabha Power Limited & Anr. 
v. 
Punjab State Power Coroporation Limited & Anr.
(Civil Appeal No. 8478 of 2014)
05 November 2024
[B.R. Gavai, Prashant Kumar Mishra 
and K.V. Viswanathan,* JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Issue arose as to whether the press release of 01.10.2009 
announcing the decision of the Union Cabinet about approval of 
certain modifications envisaged in the then existing mega power 
policy, is covered within the meaning of the expression “law as 
defined in Clause 1.1 of the Request For Proposal-RFP/Power 
Purchase Agreement-PPA and if so did the extant legal regime as 
on 01.10.2009 undergo a change from the said date.
Headnotes†
Electricity Act, 2003 – s. 63 – Customs Act – s. 25 – Mega Power 
Policy of 2006 – Press release 01.10.2009 – Effect – Change 
in law, when – Notification dated 01.03.2002 whereby goods 
imported for setting up a Mega Power Project granted certain 
exemptions from customs duty – Issuance of Request For 
Proposal (RFP) by appellant no. 1 for selection of developers 
through tariff-based bidding process for procurement of 
power from the power station to be set up – Second appellant 
emerged as successful bidder – Meanwhile issuance of Press 
Release of 1.10.2009 under the heading “Modification of Mega 
Power Policy” – Thereafter, on 11.12.2009, an amendment 
to Notification dated 01.03.2002 issued – Entry  400 from 
the notification of 2002 was substituted wherein there 
was no reference to the thermal plant being an inter-State 
thermal plant – Thereafter, on 14.12.2009, issuance of office 
memorandum under the subject “revised Mega Power Policy”– 
Power purchase agreement between the appellants and the 
respondent – Series of correspondences ensued regarding 
the issuance of Essentiality Certificate to allow customs duty 
exemptions based on the amended entry in the notification 
* Author
446
[2024] 11 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
dated 11.12.2009 – Disputes between the parties regarding 
the passing on the benefits – Appellant’s case, that with the 
press release on 01.10.2009, a new legal regime commences 
and on that basis, the appellant in its bid of 09.10.2009 
factored the altered position including the fiscal benefits due 
to customs duty exemptions – Respondent’s case that the 
press release of 01.10.2009 only sets out the proposal for 
modification and the real modification happened on 11.12.2009 
and 14.12.2009; and since the change of law having happened 
on 11.12.2009/14.12.2009 the benefits that have accrued to the 
appellant ought to be passed on:
Held: 01.10.2009 Press Release not law under Clause 1.1 of the 
PPA – Press release did not alter/amend/repeal the existing law 
as on 01.10.2009 – It was at best the announcement of a proposal 
approved by the Cabinet which had to be given shape after fulfilment 
of the conditions mentioned therein – Notifications constituting 
change in law happened on 11.12.2009 and 14.12.2009 and thus 
no basis in the contention that on 01.10.2009 the old legal regime 
had given way – Press release of 01.10.2009 certainly does not fulfil 
the meaning of the word “order” as understood in legal parlance – 
Press Release with all its future eventualities and conditionalities is 
only a proposal and it is only after the undertakings were agreed to 
be given by the State Government that a final shape was given in 
the form of a customs notification on 11.12.2009 and by the policy 
document of 14.12.2009 – Press release announcing the cabinet 
approval of certain modifications envisaged in the existing Mega 
Power Policy is not law as defined in Clause 1.1 – Change in law 
occurred only on 11.12.2009/14.12.2009, and the respondent no. 1 
rightly held entitled to the benefits, which ultimately would go to 
the consumers – Words of clause 13.1.1 read with the definition 
of law in Clause 1.1 are plain and clear – For a change in law to 
occur, the certain events ought to have happened seven days prior 
to the bid deadline – Law, as it stood prior to the press release 
of 01.10.2009 insofar as the financial implications for the matter is 
concerned, was the notification issued on 01.03.2002 and entry 400 
thereof – That notification, subject to the conditions mentioned 
thereon in entry 400 granted exemption from customs duty for 
import of goods required for setting up of any Mega Power project 
if such Mega Power project was an inter-State power plant and if 
it fulfilled the other conditi

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.