MERC partly allows AEML-D's review of its 28-Mar-2025 MYT Order: corrects a bad-debt NTI computation error and confirms green energy from non-obligated/over-RPO consumers counts toward AEML-D's RPO; rejects ADSM and IDC review claims
Case of Adani Electricity Mumbai Limited - Distribution (AEML-D) seeking review of the Multi Year Tariff Order dated 28 March 2025 in Case No. 211 of 2024 And Interlocutory application seeking amendment of the Petition in Case No. 99 of 2025.
AEML-D filed a Review Petition on 9 May 2025 under Section 94(1)(f) EA 2003 read with Regulation 28 of MERC's Transaction of Business Regulations 2022, seeking review of the MYT Order dated 28 March 2025 (Case 211/2024) covering truing-up of FY22-23/FY23-24, provisional truing-up FY24-25, and ARR/Tariff for FY25-26 to FY29-30. Via IA 93/2025 (filed 14 July 2025), AEML-D added a fourth issue on RPO treatment of green energy. Four issues were argued: (1) disallowance of Additional DSM charges, (2) disallowance of IDC for delayed capex schemes, (3) treatment of recovered bad debt as Non-Tariff Income, and (4) non-consideration of green energy purchased by non-obligated/over-RPO entities toward AEML-D's own RPO compliance.
- Review Petition (Case 99/2025) along with IA 93/2025 partly allowed
- ADSM charges: review not admissible - disallowance upheld since ADSM is not a pass-through under MYT Regulations 2019; no error or new facts found
- IDC for delayed schemes: review not admissible - disallowance of Rs 0.79 Cr (FY22-23) and Rs 0.74 Cr (FY23-24) upheld as delays were not proven uncontrollable
- Bad debt recovery/NTI: review allowed on a computation error - FY23-24 bad debt recovery should be Rs 9.90 Cr, not Rs 10.05 Cr (Rs 0.15 Cr correction), to be reconciled with carrying cost in AEML-D's next MTR Petition
- Green Energy RPO treatment: review allowed - per GEOA Rules 2022 (Rule 4(C)(f)) and MERC RPO Regulations (Regulation 7.6(c)(vi)), green energy purchased from the distribution licensee by non-obligated entities, and green energy purchased by obligated entities in excess of their own RPO, shall count toward AEML-D's RPO compliance
- Commission clarified prior MYT Order's contrary finding on RPO/green energy was inconsistent with extant Rules/Regulations, mirroring its ruling in MSEDCL's review (Case 75/2025)
- AEML-D to submit the corrected bad-debt recovery figure (Rs 9.90 Cr for FY23-24) with associated carrying cost in its next MTR Petition for ARR reconciliation
- AEML-D to implement RPO compliance treatment per GEOA Rules 2022/MERC RPO Regulations, crediting green energy bought by non-obligated and over-RPO obligated entities toward its own RPO
- No further relief on ADSM and IDC within this review; those disallowances stand as per the 28 March 2025 MYT Order
- Petitioner retains any separate appellate remedy before APTEL on issues not covered/decided in this review (subject to its earlier submission of not pursuing appeal on these specific issues)
- • C&I/open access consumers and RE developers selling green power to AEML-D consumers get regulatory clarity: any green energy purchased beyond a consumer's own RPO obligation (or by non-obligated consumers) will count toward AEML-D's RPO, aligning with national GEOA Rules 2022 - this could support Green Energy Tariff uptake and reduce AEML-D's own RE procurement burden
- • No relief on ADSM/IDC pass-through means these costs won't flow into AEML-D's ARR/tariffs via this review - marginal negative for AEML-D but no upside/downside directly for C&I tariffs from this order
- • Sets a cross-DISCOM precedent (referencing MSEDCL Case 75/2025) that other Maharashtra utilities' RPO/green energy treatment could similarly be corrected, relevant for open access and green tariff structuring statewide
- • Bad debt NTI correction is a minor ARR true-up item; C&I consumers should watch AEML-D's next MTR Petition for the reconciled impact with carrying costs
For developers and C&I buyers transacting green power with AEML-D, the RPO ruling is the most actionable takeaway - it removes ambiguity that discouraged non-obligated consumers or entities buying beyond RPO from procuring green energy, since that surplus now demonstrably helps the DISCOM's compliance. Expect AEML-D to potentially sweeten Green Energy Tariff terms or push volumes since it directly aids their RPO math. The ADSM/IDC rejections are process wins for consumers (costs stay disallowed, no tariff pass-through), though quantum is immaterial (<₹2 Cr) relative to AEML-D's overall ARR. Track the next MTR Petition for the bad-debt true-up mechanics.
Growthifye does not take responsibility for the accuracy of this information. Values are compiled from tariff orders published on the websites of State Electricity Regulatory Commissions and distribution licensees (plus CEA / MoP / Grid-India), parsed automatically and shown with their source. Always verify against the signed order before any commercial decision. This one-pager is a Vidura-assisted summary of the official order; the signed order prevails.