38.6c New Delhi, India, Thursday, October 09, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

SC approves tarrif based bids for waste to energy plant in Delhi [Read Judgment]

By Jhanak Sharma      06 January, 2025 08:29 PM      0 Comments
SC approves tarrif based bids for waste to energy plant in Delhi

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has approved the Municipal Corporation of Delhi's authority to issue the tariff based bid and request for proposal for setting up the Waste to Energy project at Narela Bawana, Delhi.

The top court said the power of State Electricity Regulatory Commission to adopt a particular tariff can't be curtailed by interpreting a provision of the Electricity Act to hold that this can be invoked by the Discoms or power generating companies.

Supreme Court Ruling on Waste to Energy Tariff Bids in Delhi

A bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Vishwanathan said when the provisions of Section 63 (determination of tariff by bidding process) of the Act are read in harmony with the provisions of Section 86(1)(b) (function of the State Commission on regulating electricity purchase and procurement) of the Act, the powers of the State Commission cannot be curtailed by interpreting that the same can be invoked only by the Discoms or the generating companies.

The court, in its judgment on January 2, 2025, found no infirmity in the orders by the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission, allowing the bid tarrif for the project.

MCD’s Waste to Energy Project: Legal Backing and Tariff Approval

It allowed MCD's appeal against August 31, 2023 judgment by Appellate Tribunal for Electricity at New Delhi, which has set aside the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission's March 6 and 7, 2023 order.

The DERC had dismissed a plea by Waste to Energy Research & Technology Council, questioning the authority of the MCD and approved the bid tariff of Rs 7.38/KWh for the project. It had directed the distribution licensee to negotiate the terms of the power purchase agreement with the MCD.

After examining the matter on MCD's appeal, the bench found the APTEL upset the DERC's orders on hyper technical ground, and also failed to consider the project in question was in the larger public interest, providing for disposal of the huge quantity of waste generated in the city of Delhi.

"The APTEL has grossly erred in treating the MCD as a total stranger. The project was on Design, Build, Finance and Operate basis. The ownership of the said project was always to be with the MCD and the operation of the facility is required to be transferred back to the MCD after 25 years," the bench said.

The court found as factually not correct the reasoning given by the APTEL, that if the application of the MCD for adoption of tariff was held to be tenable, then it would amount to permitting any stranger to apply under Section 63 of the Electricity Act.

It also said the APTEL failed to take into consideration that the MCD was establishing the said project in order to perform its statutory obligations as it is mandated under the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016, to construct, operate and maintain solid waste processing facilities.

"The plain reading of Section 63 of the Act would reveal that the appropriate Commission has to adopt the tariff only after being satisfied that such a tariff has been determined through a transparent process of bidding in accordance with the guidelines issued by the central government," the bench said.

Following the applications filed by Gagan Narang and others, the APTEL held that since the MCD was neither a distribution licensee nor a generating company, it had no jurisdiction to file an application under Section 63 of the Act for adoption of tariff.

"Under Section 63 of the Act, the appropriate Commission is entitled to adopt the tariff if such tariff has been determined through a transparent process of bidding in accordance with the guidelines issued by the central government. It could be seen that a plain reading of Section 63 of the Act would reveal that it does not restrict invoking of the provisions of Section 63 only to Discoms or generating companies," the bench said.

The bench held the APTEL could not have read the provisions of Section 63 of the Act in isolation. The provisions of Section 63 will have to be read in harmony with the provisions of Section 86(1)(b) (functions of the state commission) of the Act, it said.

Under Section 86(1)(b) of the Act, a duty is cast upon the State Commission to regulate electricity purchase and procurement process of distribution licensees including the price at which electricity should be procured from the generating companies or licensees or from other sources through agreements for purchase of power for distribution and supply within the State, the bench added.

[Read Judgment]



Share this article:

About:

Jhanak is a lawyer by profession and legal journalist by passion. She graduated at the top of her cl...Read more

Follow:
FacebookTwitterLinkedinInstagram


Leave a feedback about this
Related Posts
View All

Another CBI Officer Investigating Rakesh Asthana Moves SC Against Transfer, Makes Startling Revelations Another CBI Officer Investigating Rakesh Asthana Moves SC Against Transfer, Makes Startling Revelations

After A.K. Bassi, another CBI officer who was investigating corruption allegations against Special Director Rakesh Asthana moved the Supreme Court.

Ayodhya verdict: SC rules in favour of Ram Lalla, Sunni Waqf Board gets alternate land Ayodhya verdict: SC rules in favour of Ram Lalla, Sunni Waqf Board gets alternate land

SC bench led by CJI Ranjan Gogoi has allotted the dispute site to Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas, while directing the government to allot an alternate 5 acre land within Ayodhya to Sunni Waqf Board to build a mosque.

Supreme Court: Money Spent On Judiciary Less Than 1% In All States Except Delhi Supreme Court: Money Spent On Judiciary Less Than 1% In All States Except Delhi

The court guided all states to document their response to the commission's report within four weeks. If any of the states fail to file a response, it will be presumed that they have no objections to the recommendations made by the commission, the court said.

Supreme Court Top Panel Names Chief Justices for Bombay, Orissa and Meghalaya High Courts Supreme Court Top Panel Names Chief Justices for Bombay, Orissa and Meghalaya High Courts

On April 18, 2020, the Supreme Court Collegium recommended new Chief Justices for three High Courts. Justice Dipankar Datta was proposed as Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court, succeeding Justice B.P. Dharmadhikari. Justice Biswanath Somadder was nominated as Chief Justice of Meghalaya High Court, while Justice Mohammad Rafiq was recommended for transfer as Chief Justice of Orissa High Court.

TRENDING NEWS

pmla-appellate-tribunal-orders-immediate-release-of-seized-bmw-x7-in-hemant-soren-land-scam-case
Trending Crime, Police And Law
PMLA appellate tribunal orders immediate release of seized BMW X7 in Hemant Soren land scam case [Read Order]

PMLA tribunal orders ED to release seized BMW X7 in Hemant Soren land scam case, citing lack of proof linking the luxury car to money laundering.

08 October, 2025 08:06 PM
offence-under-category-of-upholding-family-prestige-sc-orders-release-of-man-on-remission
Trending Judiciary
'Offence under category of upholding family prestige,' SC orders release of man on remission [Read Judgment]

SC orders immediate release of life convict who served 22 years for a murder committed to uphold family honour, citing Maharashtra remission guidelines.

08 October, 2025 08:19 PM

TOP STORIES

allahabad-hc-refuses-interim-protection-to-sambhal-mosque-asks-petitioners-to-approach-appellate-court
Trending Judiciary
Allahabad HC Refuses Interim Protection to Sambhal Mosque, Asks Petitioners to Approach Appellate Court [Read Order]

Allahabad High Court refused interim protection to Sambhal mosque, directing petitioners to seek remedy before the appellate court under UP Revenue Code.

06 October, 2025 04:48 PM
calling-off-marriage-after-courtship-not-a-crime-or-breach-of-promise-delhi-hc
Trending Judiciary
Calling Off Marriage After Courtship Not A Crime Or Breach Of Promise: Delhi HC [Read Order]

Delhi High Court grants bail, ruling that ending marriage plans after courtship is not a breach of promise or offence under false promise to marry.

06 October, 2025 05:03 PM
celebrating-bail-on-social-media-not-ground-for-cancellation-without-specific-threat-to-complainant-delhi-hc
Trending Judiciary
Celebrating Bail On Social Media Not Ground For Cancellation Without Specific Threat To Complainant: Delhi HC [Read Order]

Delhi HC rules that celebrating bail on social media isn’t grounds for cancellation unless a specific threat or intimidation is proven.

06 October, 2025 05:25 PM
woman-cannot-claim-maintenance-after-securing-rape-conviction-against-live-in-partner-jammu-and-kashmir-hc
Trending Judiciary
Woman Cannot Claim Maintenance After Securing Rape Conviction Against Live-In Partner: Jammu & Kashmir HC [Read Order]

J&K High Court held that a woman who secured a rape conviction against her live-in partner cannot claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC.

06 October, 2025 06:08 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email