The Haryana Electricity Regulatory Commission has held that three 1 MW solar power generators, directly connected to the distribution network and operating under fixed-tariff PPAs, are entitled to relaxation from LTOA and QCA/scheduling requirements on parity with the relief granted in the Sunphotonics case.
The Commission also directed HVPNL, DHBVNL and HPPC to withdraw the compliance notices issued to the generators and discharged any coercive proceedings or threat of grid disconnection initiated pursuant to those notices.
Case Details
Court/Commission: Haryana Electricity Regulatory Commission, Panchkula
Order dated: 06 October 2026
Date of hearing: 13 August 2026
Petitioners: M/s Utrecht Solar Pvt. Ltd.; M/s Subhash Infraengineers Pvt. Ltd.; and M/s Balarch Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd.
Respondents: Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited (HVPNL); Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited (DHBVNL); and Haryana Power Purchase Centre (HPPC)
Coram: Shri Mukesh Garg, Chairman, and Shri Shiv Kumar, Member
Background: Three Small Solar Generators Sought Exemption from LTOA and QCA Requirements
The petition was filed by three solar power developers, each operating a 1 MW solar power plant in Haryana.
M/s Utrecht Solar Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Subhash Infraengineers Pvt. Ltd. operate their respective plants at Village Bhankhari, Tehsil Narnaul, District Mahendergarh, while M/s Balarch Renewable Energy Pvt. Ltd. operates its plant at Narwana Road, Tohana, District Fatehabad.
The petitioners had executed Power Purchase Agreements with HPPC in June 2015 and their plants were commissioned in October 2016. The plants were connected directly to DHBVNL's distribution network at 11 kV.
Following the notification of the HERC (Forecasting, Scheduling and Deviation Settlement for Solar and Wind Generation) Regulations, 2019, and approval of the corresponding procedure dated 08 March 2021, the generators were called upon to comply with the applicable connectivity, open access, forecasting, scheduling and QCA requirements.
HVPNL issued compliance notices dated 22 April 2022, 01 June 2022 and 12 January 2023, requiring the generators to take steps towards compliance with the applicable regulatory framework, including registration as a standalone generator/QCA and obtaining open access.
The petitioners had earlier approached HERC through HERC/PRO-21 of 2023, seeking exemption from the relevant requirements. That petition was dismissed by the Commission vide order dated 17 October 2023.
Subsequently, HERC passed an order dated 20 August 2025 in HERC/Petition No. 43 of 2025, titled M/s Sunphotonics Private Limited & Anr. v. Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited & Ors., granting relaxation from LTOA and scheduling/QCA requirements to the project developers covered under the PM-KUSUM Scheme.
Relying on the subsequent order, the three generators approached the Commission again, seeking similar relief on the ground that their plants were also small, decentralised solar generating units connected directly to the distribution network and operating under fixed-tariff PPAs.
Issues Before the Commission
The principal question before HERC was whether the petitioners could be granted relaxation from the requirements of Long-Term Open Access and forecasting, scheduling and deviation settlement through a QCA, on parity with the relief granted in the Sunphotonics case.
The Commission also considered the respondents' objection that the earlier dismissal of HERC/PRO-21 of 2023 barred the petition under the principles of res judicata and finality of adjudication.
Submissions of the Petitioners
The petitioners submitted that their solar plants were functionally and operationally similar to the projects covered by the Sunphotonics order.
They emphasised that:
Each plant had an installed capacity of 1 MW.
The plants were directly connected to DHBVNL's distribution network at 11 kV.
The power generated was supplied to HPPC under fixed-tariff PPAs.
The State Transmission Utility's transmission network was not being utilised for evacuation of power from these plants.
The requirements of LTOA and QCA imposed additional compliance and financial burdens on small generators.
The petitioners further argued that the order dated 20 August 2025 in Sunphotonics constituted a subsequent regulatory development and gave rise to a fresh cause of action. Therefore, the earlier dismissal of their petition in 2023 could not prevent consideration of their subsequent claim for equal treatment.
They also relied on the practical difficulties associated with forecasting solar generation, the financial implications of engaging a QCA and installing the required infrastructure, and the absence of corresponding accountability for grid interruptions attributable to the utilities.
Objections Raised by the Respondents
HVPNL opposed the petition and contended that the earlier proceedings in HERC/PRO-21 of 2023 had already dealt with the same reliefs. Since the petitioners had not challenged the order dated 17 October 2023, the findings therein had attained finality.
It was further argued that the relaxation granted in Sunphotonics was specific to PM-KUSUM Component-A projects and could not automatically be extended to private solar generators operating under different arrangements.
The respondents also relied on the binding nature of the PPAs and the obligations imposed under the applicable DSM framework. They contended that financial or infrastructural hardship could not, by itself, justify exemption from statutory regulatory requirements.
The reply filed by HVPNL was adopted by HPPC and DHBVNL, as recorded in the Commission's order.
HERC's Findings and Reasoning
1. Subsequent Sunphotonics order gave rise to a fresh cause of action
The Commission considered the objection based on res judicata in the context of the earlier order dated 17 October 2023.
It noted that the Sunphotonics order dated 20 August 2025 had been passed after the earlier petition was decided. The subsequent regulatory determination, granting relaxation to another category of small solar generators, gave rise to a fresh claim based on parity and equal treatment.
The Commission consequently held that the subsequent order could constitute a fresh cause of action and that the objection of res judicata was not sustainable in the facts of the present case.
2. Functional and operational similarity with Sunphotonics projects
HERC found that the petitioners' plants possessed the relevant functional and operational characteristics of the projects covered by the Sunphotonics order.
The Commission took note of the fact that the plants were decentralised 1 MW solar generating units, connected directly to DHBVNL's distribution network at 11 kV, and supplied electricity to HPPC under fixed-tariff PPAs.
The Commission considered that these generators did not utilise the State Transmission Utility's transmission network for evacuation of their power. It also considered the nature of the compliance burden arising from LTOA, QCA appointment and the DSM framework.
On this basis, the Commission found that the petitioners had established a case for similar regulatory treatment.
3. Contractual obligations and financial hardship
The respondents had relied on the relevant PPA provisions and the DSM Procedure to contend that generators were responsible for compliance-related infrastructure and obligations.
The Commission, while taking note of the contractual provisions relied upon by the respondents, observed that the petitioners' PPAs did not contain a specific requirement for execution of LTOA agreements or engagement of a QCA.
It also considered the financial implications of imposing additional operational, communication and compliance requirements on the small generators without corresponding tariff adjustment.
4. Exercise of power to relax under the HERC Regulations
The Commission exercised its power to relax under Regulation 20 of the HERC (Forecasting, Scheduling and Deviation Settlement for Solar and Wind Generation) Regulations, 2019, read with Regulations 55, 58 and 59 of the HERC (Terms and Conditions for Grant of Connectivity and Open Access for Intra-State Transmission and Distribution System) Regulations, 2012.
The Commission concluded that the petitioners had made out a case for relief on parity with the Sunphotonics order.
Final Decision: Petition Allowed
HERC allowed the petition and issued the following directions:
1. Relaxation from LTOA: The requirement of executing Long-Term Open Access agreements under the HERC Open Access Regulations, 2012, was relaxed in respect of the petitioners' 1 MW solar power plants.
2. Exemption from QCA and scheduling requirements: The requirements relating to forecasting, scheduling and power settlement, either independently or through a Qualified Coordinating Agency, under the HERC DSM Regulations, 2019 and the approved DSM Procedure dated 08 March 2021, were relaxed and exempted for the petitioners' 1 MW generating units.
3. Withdrawal of compliance notices: HVPNL, DHBVNL and HPPC were directed to withdraw and treat as cancelled Memo No. Ch-99/ISB-77 dated 22 April 2022, along with the subsequent compliance notices dated 01 June 2022 and 12 January 2023 issued to the petitioners.
4. Discharge of coercive proceedings: Any coercive proceedings or threat of grid disconnection initiated pursuant to the aforesaid notices stood completely discharged.
5. Change in Law relief: Since the primary relief of relaxation from LTOA and QCA/DSM requirements had been granted, the alternative prayer seeking liberty to raise Change in Law claims for tariff adjustment or cost recovery was disposed of as infructuous.
Legal Significance and Practical Implications
The order is significant for small-scale solar generators in Haryana who are connected directly to the distribution network and operate under fixed-tariff PPAs.
First, HERC has extended the benefit of the regulatory relaxation granted in Sunphotonics beyond the PM-KUSUM projects involved in that case, after examining the functional and operational characteristics of the petitioners' plants.
Second, the Commission has recognised that a subsequent regulatory order granting relief to similarly situated generators may give rise to a fresh cause of action, notwithstanding an earlier decision concerning the petitioners, where the subsequent regulatory development was not in existence at the time of the earlier proceedings.
Third, the order demonstrates the Commission's exercise of its statutory power to relax regulatory requirements under the applicable HERC Regulations, having regard to the nature and operational characteristics of the generating units.
Importantly, the relief in this case has been granted to the three petitioners in respect of their identified 1 MW solar generating units. The order should not be read as an automatic or blanket exemption for every solar generator in Haryana. Other generators seeking similar relief would need to establish that their factual and operational circumstances justify such relaxation under the applicable regulatory framework.
For small solar generators facing compliance notices concerning LTOA, QCA registration and scheduling requirements, the order may provide a relevant regulatory precedent, subject to the facts of their respective cases.
Original Order
Haryana Electricity Regulatory Commission
Case No. HERC/Petition No. 100 of 2025
Order dated: 06 October 2026
Editorial Note: This article is based on the order dated 06 October 2026 passed by HERC in HERC/Petition No. 100 of 2025. The observations and directions have been summarised for legal information and should be read with the original order.
Arun Kumar Gupta Takes Charge as New Chairman of Haryana Electricity Regulatory Commission