Reading Time: 2 minutes
The Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission (RERC) has rejected a petition filed by Intech Systems Chennai Pvt. Limited seeking payment for electricity supplied after the expiry of its Power Purchase Agreement (PPA). The Commission ruled that the distribution companies were not liable to pay for energy injected into the grid without a valid and existing contract.
The petitioner operates a 7.5 MW wind power plant in Jaisalmer, Rajasthan. Its 20-year PPA expired on March 13, 2024. After the agreement ended, the company continued to inject power into the grid between April 2024 and August 2024. It later raised invoices amounting to around ₹1.38 crore for this period and approached the Commission seeking payment directions against the respondent Discoms.
Intech Systems argued that it had taken timely steps before the expiry of the PPA. According to the company, it had applied for a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from Rajasthan Renewable Energy Corporation Limited (RRECL) nearly five months before the agreement ended. The NOC was granted in February 2024 to enable the company to shift to Open Access and sell electricity in the open market.
However, the required Commercial Agreement with the Discom was signed only on August 20, 2024. The petitioner claimed that the delay in signing this agreement was intentional. It alleged that the Discom delayed the process to benefit from free power during the peak wind season. The company also cited earlier Commission orders where generators were compensated for electricity supplied during similar intervening periods.
On the other hand, the respondent, Rajasthan Urja Vikas and IT Services Limited (RUVITL), opposed the petition. It argued that once the original PPA expired, there was no “privity of contract” between the parties. Therefore, the Discom had no legal obligation to purchase or pay for any power injected into the grid after March 13, 2024.
RUVITL also submitted evidence showing that it had issued a letter to the petitioner on February 26, 2024, clearly stating that the Discom would not continue to procure power after the PPA expiry date. This notice, according to the respondent, was sent well in advance and removed any expectation of continued purchase.
In its final order dated February 23, 2026, the Commission described the petitioner’s claims as “misconceived.” It observed that the Discom had clearly communicated its intention not to renew the agreement. The Commission further clarified that the NOC issued by RRECL was meant to facilitate future open market transactions and did not extend the validity of the expired PPA.
As a result, the Commission dismissed the petition and ruled that the Discom was not liable to pay for electricity supplied without a valid contractual arrangement. It also noted that the reasons behind the delay in executing the Open Access agreement were outside the scope of the present proceedings.
