The disputed two-part start-up tariff was held in abeyance pending TNERC’s decision, subject to 25% interim payment.

The petitioners, power-generating companies, draw electricity from TNPDCL intermittently to start their generating units.

TNPDCL’s circular dated 1 August 2026 directed that start-up power be billed under the two-part HT-I tariff from July 2025, with arrears to be recovered after adjustment of amounts already paid under a single-part tariff.

The tariff issue remained pending before TNERC following appellate remands, and earlier writ proceedings had permitted payment at 125% of temporary-supply energy charges pending TNERC’s decision.

The petitioners challenged the circular and related bills, seeking interim protection against recovery under the two-part tariff.

Whether TNPDCL could enforce the two-part tariff under its 1 August 2026 circular while the applicable start-up-power tariff remained pending determination by TNERC.

Whether interim protection should be granted against coercive recovery, and, if so, on what payment conditions pending TNERC’s decision.

Sections 62 and 64 of the Electricity Act, 2003, place tariff determination within the regulatory framework administered by the appropriate Electricity Regulatory Commission; the parties accepted that the start-up-power tariff was for TNERC/APTEL to determine.

The Court also considered the operative tariff framework, including TNERC’s Tariff Order No. 7 of 2022, which TNPDCL relied on to support a two-part tariff, and the subsequent tariff orders and appellate remands that left the issue pending.

The Court did not finally decide which tariff was legally applicable; it fashioned interim payment and recovery arrangements pending regulatory determination.

The Court noted that repeated remands had left the tariff dispute unresolved and that the competing positions—TNPDCL’s reliance on the 2022 tariff order and the generators’ reliance on the single-part approach—required determination by TNERC and, where appropriate, APTEL.

Rather than finally quash the circular or determine the tariff itself, the Court kept it in abeyance and balanced the parties’ interests through interim payment conditions.

It also directed TNERC to hear the connected matters together and decide them on merits, observing that the dispute should not continue to be prolonged through further remands.

TNERC was directed to take up the connected start-up-power matters together, hear the parties, and decide them on merits within eight weeks of receiving the web copy of the order.

Pending that decision, no coercive steps, adjustment, or retention of dues may be taken if the petitioners have paid 50% of the demand for the period from 2013 through December 2023, the single-part tariff at 125% of temporary-supply energy charges from January 2024 through July 2026, and 25% of the two-part tariff demanded from August 2026 onward.

The circular dated 1 August 2026 was kept in abeyance until TNERC’s decision; connected miscellaneous petitions were closed, with no order as to costs.