Nagpur: In a major relief to consumers and renewable energy companies, the Bombay High Court has set aside the Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission’s (MERC) review order issued on June 25, 2025, ruling that it was passed without following due process.
The court observed that MERC had modified its earlier tariff order of March 28, 2025, without giving an opportunity of hearing to consumers, renewable developers, and other stakeholders. It said the commission’s action violated the principles of natural justice and the mandatory procedure prescribed under its own 2022 business regulations.
Gold Rate
04Oct 2025
Several power companies and industry associations had approached the High Court through writ petitions, arguing that the original Multi-Year Tariff (MYT) order was passed only after public notices, objections, and hearings. However, during the review process, MERC only heard from the Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited (MSEDCL), excluding all other affected parties.
Agreeing with the petitioners’ contention, the court remarked that once a tariff is determined through a public process, any subsequent modification cannot be made “behind the backs” of stakeholders. It also pointed out that the review order was not a mere correction but a significant alteration with serious financial implications for both consumers and renewable energy developers.
Terming the review “illegal and arbitrary,” the High Court quashed the June 25 order and directed MERC to restart the review process afresh, strictly adhering to all procedural requirements. The commission must now issue public notices, share copies of the review petition with interested stakeholders, invite objections, and conduct hearings before passing a new order.
Until the fresh review is completed, the original tariff order dated March 28, 2025, will remain in force. The court also clarified that any party dissatisfied with the new order can challenge it before the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL).
Following the verdict, MERC and MSEDCL sought a stay to enable them to approach the Supreme Court. The High Court granted a four-week stay but maintained that its interim order of July 1, 2025, and subsequent extensions would continue to remain effective during this period.
