Reading Time: 2 minutes
The Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission at Gandhinagar recently heard a petition filed by Juniper Green Kite Private Limited against Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Limited (GUVNL). The petition was filed under various provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003, read with the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) signed on 8 February 2024 for the supply of 70 MW of wind power from the company’s project in Gujarat. The company requested an extension of the Scheduled Commercial Operation Date (SCOD), citing several force majeure events that have delayed the project. The project is being developed across villages in Devbhoomi Dwarka district, including Bamanasa, Kuranga, Okha Madhi, and Hadmatiya, with the SCOD initially fixed for 7 February 2026 under the PPA.
During the hearing, the petitioner highlighted multiple force majeure events that impacted project progress. These included delays in land allotment and approvals, disruptions during the general elections in Gujarat, right of way issues, supply chain bottlenecks caused by a shortage of solid-core insulators, restrictions on vehicle movement imposed by the Superintendent of Police of Devbhoomi Dwarka in March 2025, an indefinite strike across quarries and mines in Gujarat, and the situation arising from the undeclared India-Pakistan war. Additionally, regulatory uncertainty regarding the installation of Remote Terminal Units at each wind turbine generator, as directed in a 2024 Commission order, was also cited as a significant cause of delay.
Juniper Green Kite sought interim protection from the Commission, requesting that GUVNL be restrained from taking coercive steps such as invoking or encashing the performance bank guarantee of ₹14 crores submitted under the PPA. The petitioner also asked that GUVNL be prevented from imposing liquidated damages for failure to meet the timelines, arguing that the delays were caused solely by circumstances beyond its control. The legal counsel for the petitioner emphasized the need for such relief to ensure that the project is not further burdened by penalties while facing uncontrollable disruptions.
The respondent, GUVNL, submitted that the company would file its submissions in the matter and requested two weeks’ time to do so. The petitioner, in response, sought only one week’s time to reply to GUVNL’s submissions. Both parties agreed to request a hearing date around the last week of September or the first week of October.
The Commission, after hearing both sides, directed the respondent to file its submissions within two weeks, with a copy provided to the petitioner. The petitioner has been allowed one additional week to file a rejoinder, if necessary. The Commission also recorded the petitioner’s request for interim relief against coercive measures by GUVNL and stated that the next date of hearing would be intimated separately.
This case highlights the challenges renewable energy developers face in completing projects on time, particularly when multiple unforeseen events disrupt implementation schedules. It also underscores the importance of regulatory clarity and the role of commissions in balancing contractual obligations with ground realities that developers face.
