AVAADA Green HN Project Pvt. Ltd. filed a petition with the Haryana Electricity Regulatory Commission (HERC) challenging the cancellation of in-principle feasibility and final connectivity approvals for its 50 MW solar power project at the 132/33 kV Adampur substation in Hisar, Haryana. The petitioner argued that the cancellation by Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Ltd. (HVPNL) and the insistence by Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. (DHBVNL) on submitting captive status documents were arbitrary and contrary to the Electricity Act, 2003, and Electricity Rules, 2005.
The petitioner had applied in 2018 for connectivity under the captive model and submitted the necessary undertaking in 2019. In-principle feasibility was granted in May 2019, and final connectivity in September 2021. However, AVAADA later sought to sell power to Haryana Discoms at a cost-plus tariff. When this proposal was rejected in 2022, the petitioner reverted to the captive model and requested the continuation of connectivity accordingly.
HVPNL canceled final connectivity in March 2024, citing non-fulfillment of conditions tied to power sale agreements. It issued a final notice in November 2024 to submit documents proving captive status. Despite further communication from AVAADA in December 2024 requesting more time, HVPNL canceled the in-principle feasibility in March 2025, stating prolonged non-compliance.
The petitioner argued that the determination of captive status is only required after commissioning, as per the Electricity Rules, and not at the connectivity stage. It also claimed that it never applied under the Haryana Solar Policy and hence should not be bound by HAREDA guidelines. However, HVPNL produced documentation showing AVAADA’s application to HAREDA under the Solar Policy, thereby negating this claim.
The Commission examined whether the connectivity procedure and Solar Policy were applicable, and whether conditions for verifying captive status at the connectivity stage violated the Act and Rules. It upheld the mandatory nature of the Commission-approved connectivity procedure and held that the Solar Policy, along with HAREDA’s guidelines, applied to the project.
Ultimately, the Commission found that AVAADA was in breach of the terms and conditions linked to connectivity, including shareholding requirements and procedural compliance under the Solar Policy. It ruled that the cancellation of both final connectivity and in-principle feasibility by HVPNL was lawful and based on valid grounds. The petition was dismissed.
