In a recent case before the Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission (GERC), Saanika Polytex Private Limited requested a six-month extension to commission its 3.948 MW solar power project along with the associated evacuation infrastructure. The company, registered as a generating company under the Electricity Act, 2003, cited several reasons for the delay, including challenges in land acquisition, changes in government banking policy, and delays in receiving approvals for the transmission line from various authorities. The petitioner described these delays as “inadvertent” and due to “unforeseen circumstances” beyond its control. The project was being developed under the Gujarat Renewable Energy Policy, 2023, and was governed by GERC’s Tariff Order dated August 31, 2024, which stipulated timelines for project completion.
Saanika Polytex faced significant hurdles in securing land for the project. The company initially planned to lease the land, but an internal dispute among the landowners forced them to purchase the land outright. This required a fresh application for non-agricultural land use. The first application was rejected in May 2024 due to a canal running through the property. After resolving land division issues, a new application was submitted in September 2024 and received approval in December 2024. The company also highlighted “regulatory uncertainty” as a factor in the delay, referencing a government clarification letter issued on August 31, 2024, which limited banking facilities to 30% of net consumption from the distribution company. This necessitated a re-evaluation of the project’s capacity and temporarily halted project activities.
The respondent, Dakshin Gujarat Vij Company Ltd (DGVCL), opposed the petition, arguing that the extension request lacked merit. DGVCL stated that the petitioner had not approached them for the payment of supervision charges for the distribution line, indicating the company was not prepared to proceed with the work. The respondent also pointed out that the project was to be completed within 12 months of receiving the Technical Feasibility Report on February 5, 2024, meaning the commissioning deadline was February 4, 2025. DGVCL noted that failure to meet these deadlines would normally lead to cancellation of connectivity and encashment of the bank guarantee. The respondent further argued that the reasons cited by Saanika Polytex were not valid “force majeure” events, and developers were responsible for adhering to the project timelines. DGVCL also mentioned that a sister concern of the petitioner had successfully commissioned a similar project within the prescribed timeline, suggesting that the deadlines were feasible.
GERC, in its final order dated September 16, 2025, rejected the petition. The commission found that the petitioner had not taken essential steps, including approaching DGVCL for distribution line development and payment of supervision charges. The commission also noted that the petitioner had not provided adequate documentation to substantiate claims regarding delays caused by land acquisition or government approvals. GERC concluded that the reasons provided by Saanika Polytex did not justify an extension, and the prayers for a six-month delay were dismissed.
The decision underscores the importance of timely project execution and adherence to regulatory timelines, highlighting that delays due to internal disputes or administrative issues may not be sufficient to grant extensions in renewable energy projects under Gujarat’s regulatory framework.
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
