In Short
Power and energy practice covers the regulatory and contractual framework behind electricity generation, transmission and distribution — power purchase agreements, open-access arrangements, and tariff disputes adjudicated by the Central and State Electricity Regulatory Commissions, with appeals to the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL). S&S Co. advises generators, discoms and large industrial consumers across Delhi NCR and Kolkata.
What This Practice Covers
India's electricity sector is governed by the Electricity Act, 2003, with tariff determination, open-access approvals, and regulatory disputes handled by the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) and State Electricity Regulatory Commissions, and appeals routed to the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL). Disputes commonly arise over power purchase agreement performance, force majeure claims, cross-subsidy surcharges on open-access power, and operation & maintenance norm relaxations for transmission assets.
APTEL's 2026 rulings continue to sharpen the framework: the tribunal has reinforced that force majeure clauses in power contracts must be construed strictly, rejecting reliance on foreseeable events, while the Supreme Court has confirmed that even large institutional consumers such as Indian Railways remain liable for cross-subsidy and additional surcharges when procuring power through open access.
Forums We Appear Before
Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC)
State Electricity Regulatory Commission — UP & West Bengal
Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL)
Delhi High Court — energy regulatory writ matters
Calcutta High Court — energy regulatory writ matters
Supreme Court of India — electricity law appeals
Our Power, Energy & Mining Services
- Power purchase agreement drafting & disputes — structuring and litigating PPAs between generators and discoms.
- Open access & cross-subsidy surcharge advisory — for industrial consumers procuring power through open access.
- Tariff dispute representation — before State/Central Electricity Regulatory Commissions and APTEL.
- Force majeure & non-performance disputes — representing generators and discoms in contract performance disputes.
- Transmission & O&M norm disputes — representing transmission licensees in tariff and cost-recovery matters.
- Regulatory approvals — advisory on generation, transmission and distribution licensing requirements.
- Mining sector contracts — advisory on mining lease, royalty and regulatory compliance matters.
Pursuing a Regulatory or Tariff Dispute
-
Regulatory Filing
We prepare petitions before the relevant State or Central Electricity Regulatory Commission, supported by technical and financial data.
-
Commission Hearing
We represent the client through hearings before the regulatory commission.
-
APTEL Appeal
Where the Commission's order is adverse, we appeal to APTEL, India's specialised electricity appellate tribunal.
-
Supreme Court Appeal
In appropriate cases involving substantial questions of law, we pursue further appeal to the Supreme Court.
-
Compliance & Enforcement
We advise on compliance with regulatory orders and pursue enforcement where a counterparty fails to comply.
Illustrative Scenarios
The following are hypothetical, illustrative scenarios prepared for educational purposes. They are not descriptions of actual client matters, and no outcome is guaranteed in any specific case.
Illustrative Scenario
Discom Invoking Force Majeure After a Supply Disruption Near Noida
A discom serving the Noida industrial belt seeks to invoke force majeure under its PPA following a supply disruption. Given APTEL's insistence on strict construction, the discom's position is far stronger if the disruption was genuinely unforeseeable and adequate mitigation steps were documented in real time, not asserted after the fact.
Illustrative Scenario
Industrial Consumer Contesting a Cross-Subsidy Surcharge in Kolkata
A large industrial consumer in Kolkata procuring power through open access is billed a cross-subsidy surcharge it believes should not apply to its category of consumption. Given confirmed Supreme Court authority that such surcharges apply broadly to open-access procurement, a viable challenge must be grounded in the specific regulatory computation, not a blanket exemption claim.
Illustrative Scenario
Renewable Energy Developer Disputing a Delayed Grid Connectivity Approval
A solar developer in the Delhi NCR region faces revenue loss due to delayed grid connectivity approval from the state transmission utility, beyond the timeline the PPA contemplated. Where delay is attributable to the utility rather than the developer, a claim for compensation or PPA timeline extension before the State Electricity Regulatory Commission is the appropriate route, rather than absorbing the loss silently.
Illustrative Scenario
Industrial Consumer Challenging a Retrospective Tariff Revision in West Bengal
An industrial consumer in the Kolkata region is billed under a retrospectively revised tariff order. Retrospective tariff revisions are subject to significant regulatory and judicial scrutiny, and a well-grounded challenge before APTEL can succeed where the revision lacks clear statutory authorisation for retrospective effect.
Notable Judgments
APTELMay 11, 2026
NTPC Ltd. v. West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. & Ors.
Force Majeure Clauses in Power Contracts Are Construed Strictly — Foreseeable Events Do Not Qualify
APTEL reinforced that force majeure clauses in power purchase and supply agreements must be construed strictly, holding they cannot be invoked to excuse non-performance where the triggering event was reasonably foreseeable or where the affected party failed to take adequate mitigating steps before and during the event.
Key Takeaway — Discoms and generators in West Bengal and across the power sector should audit force majeure clauses and mitigation obligations in existing PPAs — foreseeability will defeat a force majeure defence at APTEL.
Supreme CourtMay 8, 2026
Indian Railways Cross-Subsidy Surcharge Appeals
Indian Railways Remains Liable for Cross-Subsidy Surcharge on Open-Access Power Procurement
A two-judge bench dismissed all appeals filed by Indian Railways, upholding APTEL's February 2024 order that Railways must pay Cross-Subsidy Surcharge and Additional Surcharge when procuring power through open access, rejecting Railways' claim to a blanket exemption from these regulatory charges.
Key Takeaway — Large open-access power consumers, including quasi-governmental entities, cannot assume exemption from CSS/additional surcharge — liability turns on the regulatory framework, not the consumer's public character.
See all Legal Updates for this practice area →
Our Approach to Power, Energy & Mining
- Regulatory and tribunal experience — from Commission filings through APTEL and Supreme Court appeals.
- Current on APTEL's 2026 jurisprudence — force majeure, O&M norms, and surcharge rulings tracked closely.
- Dual-city coverage — Delhi NCR and Kolkata energy regulatory representation.
- Founders with 20 years combined experience across commercial litigation, arbitration and regulatory practice.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL)?
APTEL is India's specialised tribunal for hearing appeals from orders of the Central and State Electricity Regulatory Commissions, resolving legal, technical, commercial and regulatory disputes in the power sector.
Can a force majeure clause excuse non-performance under a PPA?
Only where the triggering event was genuinely unforeseeable and the affected party took adequate mitigating steps — APTEL has held that force majeure clauses in power contracts are construed strictly.
Who has to pay cross-subsidy surcharge on open access power?
Consumers procuring power through open access generally remain liable for cross-subsidy and additional surcharges as determined by the applicable regulatory framework, regardless of the consumer's public or private character.
Where do power sector regulatory disputes get filed first?
Before the relevant State or Central Electricity Regulatory Commission, with appeals to APTEL and, on substantial questions of law, to the Supreme Court.