/saur-energy/media/media_files/2025/09/18/gerc-order-2025-09-18-11-14-09.jpg)
Gujarat: GERC Blames GETCO, GEDA For Delays In Wind Power Project Photograph: (Sora Shimazaki)
The Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission (GERC), in its latest order, has blamed the state government departments for delaying a wind power project commissioning. The state power regulator, after going through the submissions of a wind power developer and the respondents, gave relief to the developer against the seizure of its bank guarantees due to the delay in the commissioning of the project.
The petitioner in the case, Shivman Wind Energy, had earlier approached the state power regulator pleading to shield the company from financial penalties imposed by the state authorities. It claimed that the delay in commissioning of its 70 MW wind project was owing to institutional bottlenecks and opposition from local communities against the clean energy project.
The petitioner in the case asked the state power regulator to extend the Scheduled Commercial Operation Date (SCOD) for the evacuation infrastructure linked to GETCO’s 220/66 kV Bhatiya substation. The petitioner also sought protection against encashment of its ₹2.1 crore bank guarantee.
The company claimed that it took 192 days to obtain location clearance and final developer permission from GEDA. This was followed by a 92-day delay due to compatibility issues with GETCO’s alleged outdated control relay panel system. The wind power developer also cited local protests and Right of Way (ROW) issues as prime reasons for the same.
GETCO’s Stand
GETCO maintained that project timelines were the sole responsibility of the developer, adding that the petitioner’s late registration with GEDA and delayed technical solutions contributed to the situation. It also argued that the concept of "Force Majeure" did not strictly apply under the regulatory framework.
GERC’s Observations
GERC, in its ruling, held the agencies, namely GEDA and GETCO, responsible for the delays. The commission allowed the extension of SCOD for 361 days and also shielded the company from financial liabilities. The regulator termed these as ‘force majeure’ while relaxing the norms.