RELIANCE INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

Citation: [2019] 1 S.C.R. 886 · Decided: 21-01-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.Y. CHANDRACHUD · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 5 judgment(s) · cites 3 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
886
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 1 S.C.R.
RELIANCE INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED
v.
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 879 of 2019)
JANUARY 21, 2019
[DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD
AND HEMANT GUPTA, JJ.]
MERC (Multi Year Tariff) Regulations, 2011 – Regn. 44.2(d) –
Jurisdiction to decide validity of regulations – The grievance of the
appellant arises from the fact that regn. 44.2(d) prescribed a tighter
standard for its thermal generating station Dahanu TPS as compared
to other generating stations in the State – Petition filed by the
appellant before Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission
(MERC) – Appellant requested for relaxation of the norms and to
bring it in the line with the normative Station Heat Rate (SHR) –
MERC held that it had considered the norms for SHR based on the
MYT regulations and it did not find any merit in altering the MYT
norms for SHR – The appellant filed an appeal u/s.111 of the
Electricity Act 2003 before the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity
(APTEL) – Also, appellant instituted a Writ petition u/Art.226 of the
Constitution before the Bombay High Court for the purpose of
challenging regn 44.2(d) which specifies a separate SHR for the
Dahanu TPS as compared to other generating stations in the State
– The High Court dismissed the Writ petition and imposed costs of
Rs. 1 lakh on the appellant, and held that having approached the
Appellate Tribunal for Electricity, the appellant was not justified in
moving the High Court u/Art.226 “on the same issue” when the
Tribunal was in a position to provide adequate relief – On appeal,
held: The position in law is established by the judgment of
Constitution Bench in PTC India Limited case that while the Tribunal
may decide upon a dispute involving the interpretation of a
regulation, for which an appeal under Section 111 of the Act would
be maintainable, no appeal can lie before the Tribunal on the validity
of a regulation – Thus, High Court was not right in holding that the
Writ petition u/Art.226 was not maintainable – Indeed, a challenge
to the validity of the regulations framed by the MERC could lie only
before the High Court – Thus, the imposition of costs for having
[2019] 1 S.C.R. 886
886
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
887
adopted the remedy u/Art.226 was unjustified – However, there is
no infirmity in the impugned regulation and accordingly ultimate
conclusion of the High Court to dismiss the Writ petition u/Art.226
affirmed – Electricity Act, 2003 – ss.61, 82, 111 and 181 – MERC
(Terms and Conditions of Tariff) Regulations, 2005 – National Tariff
Policy, 2006 – Constitution of India – Art.226 – Jurisdiction.
MERC (Multi Year Tariff) Regulations, 2011 – Regn. 44.2(d)
– Validity of – Plea of discrimination by the appellant – The grievance
of the appellant arises from the fact that a tighter standard or norm
has been prescribed for its thermal generating station Dahanu TPS
as compared to other generating stations in the State – The
discrimination, according to the appellant, lied in a statutory
regulations determining the Station Heat Rate (SHR) – Held: The
power to frame regulations is of a legislative nature – The Central
Power Research Institute (CPRI) report was an input before the
Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (MERC) in carrying
out that exercise – MERC followed the statutory procedures laid
down for the determination of tariffs – It took into account factors
which it is mandated by the statute to consider – The National Tariff
Policy, suggestions of stakeholders as well as the assessment carried
out by the CPRI were duly considered – Thus, the present case does
not fall in the paradigm of manifest unreasonableness or
arbitrariness to warrant the interference of  the Supreme Court –
Regulation 44.2(d) of the MERC (Multi Year Tariff) Regulations,
2011 does not suffer from any constitutional or statutory infirmity –
National Tariff Policy, 2006.
On 04.02.2011, the MERC (Multi Year Tariff) Regulations,
2011 were notified. Regulation 44 provides norms for the
operation of thermal generating stations. Regulation 44.2
stipulates gross station heat rates for existing generating stations.
The above regulation indicated that save and except for the
excluded categories set out in clauses (b), (c) and (d), the Station
Heat Rate (SHR) for existing coal based thermal generating
stations is pegged at a uniform level of 2450 kCal/kWh (for 200/
210/250 MW sets) and 2425 kCal/kWh (for 500 MW sets and
above). As opposed to the uniform c

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