Ms Radiance KA Sunrise Three Pvt Ltd vs Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited

Hearing History (7)

• 28OCT 2025
  Case called for hearing on 28.10.2025. Counsel for petitioner Sri. Sakya Singha Chaudhuri for Neeti Niyaman present through video conferencing along with counsel Ms. Shreya Dubey present on physical mode. Counsel for Respondent Sri. Shahbaaz Husain for Precinct Legal present and filed statement of objections on the alternative methodologies proposed by the petitioner for relaxation on the applicability of the Regulation 12(a)(ii)(1) of KERC Terms and Conditions for Open Access Regulations 2025 with a copy to petitioner. Sri. K.V. Subramanyam, Sr. Vice President for Radiance Renewables Pvt. Ltd., and Sri. K.R. Sreenivas, Vice President, Enerfra Projects Pvt. Limited present. Both counsels and party-in-persons made their respective submissions on the merits of the issue and the alternative methodology proposed in support of citation of higher court order. Petitioner counsel prays to file rejoinder. Commission heard the parties, noted their suggestions/submissions and granted time to file rejoinder to the petitioner within a weeks’ time. Next date of hearing will be intimated later in due course.

  Judge: Full Bench - PRK(C)+HKJ(L)+JA(M)

  Stage: FOR HEARING

• 14OCT 2025
  Case called for hearing on 14.10.2025. Counsel for petitioner Sri. Saakya Singh Chaudhuri for petitioner present. Sri. Shahbaaz Hussain for Precinct Legal present for Respondent and prays time to file comments on methodology for relaxation on the applicability of Regulations 12(a)(ii)(1) for reducing the transmission charges in respect of solar power project as proposed by the petitioner. Meanwhile, petitioner counsel filed notes of submission and placed the record of proceedings in WP No. 26874/2025 and prays for directions to the respondent to collect 50% in the transmission charges. Counsel for the respondent has opposed for any directions, since they have filed an application for clarification on the order before the Hon’ble High Court. Commission heard both counsels, granted time to the respondent to file comments on the methodology of reducing transmission charges on the solar power projects as a last chance. Further, directed the respondent counsel to keep present the technical team of the respondent on the next date of hearing. Call on 28.10.2025.

  Judge: Full Bench - PRK(C)+HKJ(L)+JA(M)

  Stage: FOR STATEMENT OF OBJECTIONS

• 2SEP 2025
  Case called for hearing on 02.09.2025. Counsel for petitioner Sri. Sakya Singha Chaudhuri for Neeti Niyaman along with Aadesh Rajkrishna, Sr. Manager, Business Development, M/s. Radiance Renewables present, made submissions, suggesting alternate methodology for relaxation on the applicability of Regulation 12(a)(ii)(1), since the power to reduce the transmission charges in respect of solar power projects vested with the Commission. Further, he placed reliance on the prevailing Regulations of Tamilnadu Transmission Corporation, Maharashtra Regulatory Commission and prays to reduce the transmission charges by 50% through interim order. Further, he made a submission to the effect that the petitioner is ready to execute an undertaking with regard to using the transmission network only during Solar hours. Counsel for Respondent Sri. Sumanth K. Gowda for Precinct Legal present, objected for any interim order, since similar writ petitions are still pending before the various Benches of the Hon’ble High Court and seeks four weeks’ time for filing statement of objections. Commission heard both the parties, noted their submissions and granted time for Respondent to file objections with a copy to petitioner for filing response if any. Call on 14.10.2023.

  Judge: Full Bench - PRK(C)+HKJ(L)+JA(M)

  Stage: FOR STATEMENT OF OBJECTIONS

• 22JUL 2025
  Case called for hearing on admission on 22.07.2025. Counsel Sri. Sakya Singha Chaudhuri for Neeti Niyaman present for petitioner, submits that amendments are carried out in the main petition and filed the amended petition in the registry. Further filed relevant citations of CERC on the issue, made submissions on the merits of the case duly explaining the surge in transmission cost per unit and prays for reduction of 50% of the transmission charges by way of interim order. Counsel Sri. Sumanth K. Gowda for Precinct Legal present for Respondent(KPTCL), made submissions on the merits of the case, objected for extension of interim order granted to the petitioner in view of pending similar writ petition No. 20907/2025 (GM KEB) before the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka duly filing the daily orders and prays time to file statement of objections. Commission heard the counsels, noted their submissions. Since many RE generators are before the Hon’ble Court on the similar issue, extending interim order to the petitioner at this stage is not proper. However, Respondent is granted time to file statement of objections with a copy to petitioner. Call on 19.08.2025.

  Judge: Full Bench - PRK(C)+HKJ(L)+JA(M)

  Stage: FOR APPEARANCE OF RESPONDENT(S)

• 1JUL 2025
  Case called for hearing on 01.07.2025. Counsel for petitioner Ms. Shreya Dubey for Neeti Niyaman present, submits that necessary amendments are carried out in the main petition and filed amended petition in the registry on 10.06.2025. Further, placed the copy of daily order status dated 08.05.2025 in WP 13865/2025 filed by National Solar Energy Federation of India against KERC & Another before the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka and demand notice dated 19.04.2025 issued by CEE (Ele), SLDC is and prays to stay the demand notice till further directions of the Commission on the methodology to be followed as sought in the petition. Respondent not present despite service of notice. Commission heard the petitioner counsel, noted the submissions and stayed the operation of demand notice dated 19.04.2025 issued by the CEE (Ele), SLDC till the next date of hearing. Further directed the registry to issue notice to the Respondent. Call on 22.07.2025.

  Judge: Single Member Bench - JA(M)

  Stage: FOR ADMISSION AND APPEARANCE OF RESPONDENT(S)

• 3JUN 2025
  Case called for hearing on 03.06.2025. Petitioner counsel Ms. Shreya Dubey present, made submissions that necessary application is filed to amended the petition as submitted on the last date of hearing and prays to allow the application for amendment of petition. Commission heard counsel, allowed the amendment application and directed the petitioner counsels to carry out the amendments in the petition and to file amended petition in the registry within two weeks. The registry is directed to issue notice to the respondent after amendment has been carried out by the petitioner. Call on 01.07.2025.

  Judge: Two Members Bench - HKJ(L)+JA(M)

  Stage: FOR HEARING ON IA

• 6MAY 2025
  Case called for admission on 06.05.2025. Counsel for petitioner Ms. Shreya Duby for Neeti Niyaman and Party-in-person Sri. K.V. Subramanyam, Senior Vice President, Radiance Renewables present, made submissions for relaxation on the applicability of Regulation 12(a)(ii)(1) of KERC (Terms and Conditions for Open Access) Regulations 2025 for reducing the transmission charges for their solar power project duly explaining the increase in cost per unit for their solar project which is higher than for conventional sources of energy and prays for amendment of Tariff Order of KPTCL for FY 2025-26 to FY 2027-28 notified on 26.03.2025 and further prays for admission of the petition. Commission heard the counsel and party-in-person, noted their submissions and perused the petition. During the hearing it is noticed by the Commission that though the petitioner has come up with a plea that the formula adopted for determination of transmission charges of the petitioner unit is not correct, the petition is silent about the mistake in the formula or the formula that ought to have been applied. Further, the Commission has also noticed that a few RE Generators have approached the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka challenging the KERC (Terms and Conditions for Open Access) Regulations 2025, wherein the issues similar to the present issue are under consideration. At this stage, petitioner counsel tried to convince this Commission that the issues pending before Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka are not same as that of the present issues. But, the Commission expressed its view to the effect that unless the details of the writ petitions pending before the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka are examined, it is not correct to admit this petition. At this juncture, petitioner counsel prays for time to file amendment application suggesting the formula to be adopted and to verify whether similar issues have been raised before the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka and to report the same on the next date of hearing. Commission granted time to the petitioner to file amendment application, pending admission of the petition. The registry is directed to list this matter after due compliance.

  Judge: Full Bench - PRK(C)+HKJ(L)+JA(M)

  Stage: FOR ADMISSION