The Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission (GERC) has dismissed Petition No. 2278 of 2023 filed by the President of the SKY Scheme Committee on behalf of farmers connected to the 11 kV Trambovad Feeder in Anand district. The petition raised concerns over the implementation and operation of the State Government’s Suryashakti Kisan Yojna (SKY) pilot project.
Launched in June 2018, the SKY scheme was designed to provide daytime solar power to farmers for irrigation and allow them to earn additional income by selling surplus electricity to the grid. Under the scheme, farmers were required to contribute five percent of the project cost upfront. The remaining cost was supported through a 30% central subsidy, a 30% state subsidy structured as a loan through Evacuation Based Incentives, and a 35% low-interest loan repayable over seven years.
Farmers participating in the Trambovad feeder alleged that Madhya Gujarat Vij Company Limited (MGVCL) and Gujarat Urja Vij Nigam Limited (GUVNL) had failed to meet several commitments under the scheme. One of the major complaints concerned the levy of fixed charges of ₹20 per horsepower per month, despite government clarifications that metered agricultural consumers were exempt from such charges.
The petition also raised concerns about poor solar generation. According to the farmers, the systems were unable to consistently achieve the guaranteed 18.3% Capacity Utilization Factor (CUF). Delays in regular billing, incorrect interchange of generation and consumption readings, and inadequate incentive credits allegedly created financial difficulties for participating farmers. The farmers also claimed that loan recovery deductions, billing discrepancies, and power disconnections had caused further hardship.
MGVCL opposed the petition on the ground that it was not maintainable before GERC. The utility argued that individual billing, meter reading and operational disputes should be handled through the Consumer Grievance Redressal Forum (CGRF) and the Electricity Ombudsman under the Electricity Act, 2003.
On the low generation issue, MGVCL stated that reduced CUF was largely linked to factors such as dust accumulation, inadequate panel maintenance and tree shading at farmers’ premises rather than equipment defects. The utility also said that billing-related technical errors had been audited and corrected, while penalties had been imposed on the solar vendor wherever delays were established.
After examining the submissions, GERC accepted MGVCL’s preliminary objection and dismissed the petition. The Commission held that matters relating to individual billing, fixed charges, meter readings and system maintenance constitute consumer grievances. It directed the affected farmers to pursue their remaining complaints through the appropriate CGRF and Electricity Ombudsman mechanisms, reinforcing the separation between regulatory proceedings and individual consumer dispute resolution.
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
