Follow India Renewable Energy News on WhatsApp for exclusive updates on clean energy news and insights

MERC Directs MSEDCL to Refund Rs1.43 Cr to Wind Power Generator

The Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (MERC) has ordered the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company (MSEDCL) to refund Rs1.43 Cr to Sahyadri Industries,a wind power generator, for excess wheeling and transmission charges levied between April 2016 and May 2023.

The Commission also directed MSEDCL to refund Rs45.1 lakh in excess penalties imposed on the company for alleged demand violations in April 2016 and February 2017. MSEDCL must complete the refunds, including interest calculated at the Reserve Bank of India’s bank rate, within one month of the ruling.

Sahyadri Industries, a partial open-access consumer and wind power generator, filed a petition against MSEDCL, alleging incorrect billing practices. The company claimed that MSEDCL had levied wheeling and transmission charges based on power generation rather than the energy consumed at the consumption point, violating the Distributed Open Access Regulations, 2016.

These regulations mandate that charges be calculated based on energy drawn at the consumer end.

Additionally, Sahyadri sought a refund of Rs4.51 million in penalties imposed by MSEDCL for failing to meet maximum demand requirements at its Chinchwad project in April 2016 and February 2017. The company argued that it had met the required demand threshold and that the penalties were unjustified. Despite earlier regulatory directions in March 2017 and subsequent orders, MSEDCL had failed to reimburse the excess charges.

Sahyadri also accused MSEDCL of discriminatory practices, alleging that refunds were issued only to consumers who approached the Commission, while others with similar claims were ignored.

MSEDCL argued that claims before December 8, 2020, were time-barred under the Limitation Act, 1963. The discom also stated that it had already refunded undisputed amounts of Rs45.2 lakh and Rs2.62 lakh to Sahyadri in November 2024. MERC rejected MSEDCL’s time-barred argument, citing the principle of continuing cause of action. The Commission emphasized that incorrect billing practices constituted an ongoing wrong, making Sahyadri eligible for a refund from April 2016.

The Commission found that MSEDCL had incorrectly applied wheeling and transmission charges under the open access regulations. It also criticized MSEDCL for selectively issuing refunds only to consumers who approached the Commission, calling the practice discriminatory. Regarding the penalties, MERC noted that Sahyadri had maintained the required maximum demand in April 2016 and February 2017. Under the regulations, penalties apply only when the maximum demand falls below 70% of the threshold for two consecutive months. Therefore, the penalties imposed on Sahyadri were deemed unjustified.