RERC Allows Change-in-Law Relief to Apraava Renewable Over Bird Diverter Costs

The Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission (RERC) has ruled that the mandatory installation of bird flight diverters on transmission lines for protecting the Great Indian Bustard (GIB) qualifies as a “change in law” event, granting relief to Apraava Renewable Energy Pvt Ltd for additional costs incurred in its wind projects in Rajasthan.

Apraava Renewable Energy had filed a petition against Rajasthan Urja Vikas & IT Services Ltd (RUVITL) and state distribution companies seeking compensation of about ₹12.27 crore spent on installing bird flight diverters on transmission lines linked to its Tejuva and Sipla wind projects. The installations were carried out to comply with a series of directions issued by the Supreme Court aimed at protecting the critically endangered Great Indian Bustard.

Cost Not Factored Before

The company argued that the court’s orders—issued in April 2021, April 2022 and November 2022—came after the execution of its power purchase agreements and the determination of tariffs. As a result, the cost of installing diverters was not factored into the approved tariffs and should therefore be treated as a change-in-law event under the terms of the agreements and the 2021 Change in Law Rules.

Apraava also invoked the principle of restitution, stating it should be restored to the same economic position as if the change in law had not occurred. The developer sought reimbursement of the expenditure along with carrying costs. It further said technical specifications for the diverters were finalised only in late 2022, making the cause of action continuing in nature. In a rejoinder, the company added that thousands of LED-based diverters had to be removed due to military security concerns and replaced with non-LED versions, increasing costs.

Discoms Opposed Plea

RUVITL and the Rajasthan discoms opposed the petition, arguing it was filed nearly four years after the initial Supreme Court order and was therefore time-barred. They also said the power purchase agreements did not explicitly provide for restitution or financial compensation and that the 2021 Change in Law Rules could not be applied retrospectively to events predating their notification. The respondents further alleged procedural lapses, including the absence of the required prior notice and impact assessment.

The commission rejected the limitation argument, stating that an enforceable obligation arose only after technical standards for the diverters were approved on Nov. 30, 2022. Since the petition was filed on May 30, 2025, it fell within the three-year limitation period.

RERC Declares GIB Row As Change of Law Event

RERC declared that the Supreme Court’s orders on the protection of the Great Indian Bustard constitute change-in-law events under the power purchase agreements. It noted that the capital cost assumptions used while determining tariffs did not include the installation of bird flight diverters.

As relief, the regulator allowed the developer to recover the additional expenditure through monthly annuity payments spread over 15 years, or the remaining tenure of the power purchase agreements, using a 9% discount rate.

However, the commission limited the carrying cost payable to the developer. It ruled that interest would apply only from the date of filing of the petition—May 30, 2025—and not from the date the expenditure was incurred, citing delays in approaching the regulator.

RERC also directed the parties to reconcile the actual costs. Apraava Renewable Energy must submit auditor-certified details establishing project-wise correlation of expenditure incurred between May 30, 2022 and March 21, 2024, the order said.