The Supreme Court has directed Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited (MSEDCL) to make a part‑payment of INR 250 crore to JSW Energy in a high stakes tariff dispute related to its Ratnagiri unit. Along-with this, the bench has also set aside an order of the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) that had rejected, without reasons, a plea for interim stay by MSEDCL in the same dispute, and has directed the tribunal to reconsider the stay application afresh.
In an order dated April 30, 2026, a bench of Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan restored MSEDCL’s interim application before APTEL, holding that the tribunal had dismissed the stay plea “in the absence of any reason whatsoever” even though Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (MERC) had directed MSEDCL to pay around INR 600 crore to JSW Energy under a power purchase agreement for its Ratnagiri unit, along with late payment surcharge.
“The reason as to why we have to set aside the impugned order and remand the matter is solely on account of the fact that no reason whatsoever has been assigned by APTEL while dismissing the application seeking interim stay of the order impugned before APTEL,” the bench said.
MSEDCL had argued that, with its appeal against MERC’s 24 December 2025 order still pending before APTEL, denial of interim protection without reasons exposed it to coercive recovery measures by JSW Energy and risked rendering the statutory appeal futile.
JSW Energy, contended that more than INR 600 crore plus interest was due and that APTEL was justified in declining interim relief.
Balancing these positions, the Supreme Court set aside the unreasoned APTEL order and remanded the stay plea to be reheard and decided “on its own merits, in accordance with law”, while stressing the need for a reasoned order on interim relief in such regulatory disputes.
As a condition for interim protection, the bench directed MSEDCL to make a part‑payment of INR 250 crore to JSW Energy within two weeks, requested APTEL to dispose of the reheard interim application preferably within four weeks from the first hearing, and asked the parties to appear before the tribunal on May 18, 2026 without awaiting fresh notices.
