Lanco Infratech Ltd. Vs. Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission and Others

Decided On : Sep-04-2009

Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL

LAW: Section 63, the Electricity Act, Section 63, Section 63, Guidelines 5.7, Section 63 of the Act, Section 63, the Electricity Act, Section 63, Section 63, the Electricity Act, Section 62, Section 63, Section 63, Section 63, Section 63 of the Act, Section 63, Section 63, Section 63, the Electricity Act, Section 63 of the Act, Section 63, Regulatory Commissions Act, Section 63, Section 63, the Guidelines 5.7, the Electricity Act, Article 226 of the Constitution.&#8221, Section 63, Section 111 of the Electricity Act, the Division Bench of High Court, Article 226 of the Constitution, Article 226 of the Constitution

PERSON: M. Karpaga Vinayagam, Order, Appellant, Procurer, Order, Procurer, accordingly.&#8221, Procurer, Procurer, Procurer, Procurer, Proposal, Reasons, Reasons, Procurer, Procurer, Kiran Singh Vs, Ramdas Shrinivas, Mohinder Singh Gill, Anr, Jai Narain Parasrampuria, Devi Saraf, Kamdhenu Cattle, Kamdhenu Cattle, Ramdas Shrinivas, Har Shankar, Shyam Sunder, Anr, Kamdhenu Cattle Feed Ind., Ramana Dayaram Shetty Vs, Niranjan Singha (, Kamdhenu Cattle Feed Industries, Manminder Singh, Har Shankar, Har Shankar, Har Shankar, Manminder Singh, Order, Order

ORG: Lanco Infratech Ltd., The Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission, Order, Application, the Punjab State Electricity Board, the Lanco Infratech Ltd., the Lanco Infratech Ltd., The State of Punjab, R4, MW, the State of Punjab, the State Electricity Board, the State Electricity Board, the State Commission, the Electricity Board, the State Commission, the State Electricity Board, the State Electricity Board, the Evaluation Committee, Commission, Commission, the Electricity Board, KWH, the Evaluation Committee, the Evaluation Committee, the State Electricity Board, Nabha Power Ltd., State Electricity Board, Nabha Power Ltd., the State Government, Negotiation Committee, the Negotiation Committee, the State Government, Committee, Appellant, The High Level Committee, the Council of Ministers, the Council of Ministers, the State Commission, the State Electricity Board, the State Commission, the Council of Ministers, The State Commission, the Evaluation Committee, the Evaluation Committee, Commission, Committee, the Council of Ministers, the Evaluation Committee, the State Commission, Order, Appellant, Tribunal, The Learned Senior Counsel, Order, The State Commission, the Council of Ministers, The State Commission, The State Commission, The State Electricity Board, Guidelines, Commission, Commission, Guidelines, the State Commission, The State Commission, the Power Finance Corporation, Commission, the Learned Counsel, the Learned Counsel, the State Commission, Guidelines, the State Electricity Board, Guidelines, the State Commission, The State Commission, the State Electricity Board, Commission, the Evaluation Committee, Guidelines, the State Commission, the Electricity Board, the Council of Ministers, the Evaluation Committee, the State Commission, the State Commission, Guidelines, the Learned Counsel, the State Commission, the Negotiation Committee, the Council of Ministers, Guidelines, the Appropriate Commission, Guidelines, the Central Government, the Learned Senior Counsel, the State Commission, the Evaluation Committee, the Negotiation Committee, Appropriate Commission, Central, the Central Government, Commission, Guidelines, the Central Government, Guidelines, Commission, Guidelines, Commission, the State Commission, Guidelines, Commission, the Council of Ministers.&#8221, Clause 5.7, Guidelines, the Central Government, RFQ, Appropriate, This Clause 5.7, Guidelines, the State Commission, Guidelines, State Commission, the State Commission, the State Commission, Clause 5.7, Guidelines, the State Commission, the State Commission, Clause 5.7, Guidelines, the State Commission under Clause 5.7, Guidelines, Guidelines, the State Commission, the State Commission, the State Commission, the State Commission, The State Commission, the State Commission, the State Commission, Guidelines, RFQ, the Appropriate Commission, Project, PSEB, Commission, Commission, RFP, Lanco Infratech Limited, Guidelines, Commission, the Evaluation Committee, Guidelines, Commission, LOI, Commission, Guidelines, Commission, Commission, Guidelines, Commission, the Evaluation Committee, NPL, PSEB, the State Government, Commission, LOI, Commission, the State Commission, the Evaluation Committee, The Petitioner/Procurer, the State Commission, the Evaluation Committee, Board, Commission, the State Commission, the State Commission, the State Commission, Clause 5.7, Guidelines, Commission, Appellant, the State Commission, the State Commission, the State Commission, State Commission, the State Commission, Guidelines, the State Commission, the Council of Ministers, the State Commission, the Evaluation Committee, the Evaluation Committee, the Evaluation Committee, Commission, Guidelines, the Power Finance Corporation, the Negotiation Committee, the Negotiation Committee, the Negotiation Committee, the Negotiation Committee, the Negotiation Committee, the Negotiation Committee, The Council of Ministers, the State Government, Guidelines, the Central Government, Commission, the State Government, the Council of Ministers, the State Commission, Commission, Government, the State Government, the State Commission, the State Commission, Guidelines, Commission, the State Government, the State Commission, the State Commission, the Evaluation Committee, the Negotiation Committee, the Council of Ministers, the Negotiation Committee, the State Commission, Commission, State, Negotiation Committee, the State Commission, the State Commission, the State Commission, the State Commission, Guidelines, the State Commission, Clause 5.7, the State Government, the State Commission, the State Commission, The State Commission, Commission, the Statement of Objects, State Electricity Boards, the State Electricity Boards, the State Governments, the Electricity Regulatory Commissions Act, Regulatory Commissions, Government, Commission, Commission, Talwandi Sabo, the State Electricity Board, Guidelines, the Central Government, Guidelines, Guidelines, Guidelines, Guidelines, the Appropriate Commission, Guidelines, the Evaluation Committee, the Evaluation Committee, the Evaluation Committee, Guidelines, the Evaluation Committee, Lanco Infratech Ltd., the Evaluation Committee, Guidelines, the State Commission, Commission, the Council of Ministers, the Evaluation Committee, the Evaluation Committee, Commission, the Evaluation Committee, the Council of Ministers, the Evaluation Committee, Guidelines, Guidelines, the Evaluation Committee, the Negotiation Committee, the Council of Ministers, Commission, the Council of Ministers, Commission, State, Commission, Government, Commission, the Council of Ministers, Commission, Guidelines, Guidelines, Commission, the Government under Section 63 of the Act, Commission, Guidelines, Guidelines, Guidelines, Appropriate Commission, Commission, Guidelines, Commission, Clause 5.7 and Clause, Guidelines, the State Commission, Guidelines, Commission, the Evaluation Committee, the Departments of the Government, Guidelines, Commission, Guidelines, the State Commission, the State Commission, the Learned Counsel, the Learned Counsel, Power Purchase Agreement, the State Commission, the State Commission, the Council of Ministers, the State Commission, Appellant, the State Commission, The Learned Senior Counsel, UC Bank Vs, AIR 951 SC 230 (iii, Chaman Paswan &, AIR 1954, Maharashtra Vs, Hindustan Cooperative Insurance Society Ltd., Shyam Sunder &#, AIR 1952 Cal, Nandlal Jaiswal &#, Union of India Vs, Ors, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Pushpalaya Printers &, Raunaq International Ltd., IVR Construction Ltd. &, Food Corporation of India Vs, The Learned Senior Counsel, AIR 951 SC 230 - UC Bank, AIR 1954, SC, the Electricity Board, the State Commission, the State Commission, State, Nandlal Jaiswal &#, Food Corporation of India Vs, State, Maharashtra Vs, Commission, Commission, AIR 1952 Cal, Learned Senior Counsel, Commission, The Learned Counsel, Commission, ELR, SC, Tata Power Co. Ltd., Commission, the Learned Counsel, Authority of India, Ramchandra Murarilal Bhattad Vs, Maharashtra, International Airport Authority, the Electricity Board, Commission, Citations, the Learned Senior Counsel, The Learned Senior Counsel, the State Commission, the Learned Counsel, Commission, Government, the Learned Counsel, Commission, him&#8221, the Learned Senior Counsel, Guidelines, the State Commission under Clause 5.7, Guidelines, the Supreme Court, the Electricity Board, the State Commission, the Supreme Court, the High Court, the Supreme Court, the State Commission, Commission, the Central Government, the State Commission, the Council of Ministers, the State Commission, Guidelines, the State Commission, Guidelines, the Evaluation Committee, the Evaluation Committee, the State Commission, State, the Negotiation Committee, the Council of Ministers, Guidelines, the Central Government, the Electricity Board, the State Commission, Guidelines, the State Commission, the Evaluation Committee, the Evaluation Committee, the Council of Ministers, the State Commission, the State Commission, the State Commission, the Council of Ministers, the State Commission, the State Commission, the State Commission, the State Commission, the State Commission, the State Commission, Tribunal, Tribunal, Haryana High Court, the State Commission, Tribunal, Tribunal, the Writ Petition, the High Court, Appellant, the High Court, the High Court, the High Court, the Bid Evaluation Committee, the High Court, Appellant, Tribunal, Appeal, the High Court, the Learned Counsel, Appeal, Tribunal, Tribunal, the High Court, Tribunal, the High Court, the Bid Evaluation Committee Report, the High Court, the High Court, Tribunal, Tribunal, the Notice Board, Judicial, Technical, Registry, Tribunal, High Court, Tribunal, the High Court, Tribunal, the High Court, the Evaluation Committee Report, the High Court, Tribunal, High Court, Tribunal, Tribunal, Appellant, The Learned Counsel, Tribunal, Appeal

LOC: the Appellant herein., Procurer, Procurer, Procurer, Procurer, Respondent, Respondent

CARDINAL: 2, 3, 4, 5, 13, 9, 9, 7, 7, 6, 7, 3.386, 8, 3.386, 3.309, 9, 3, 10, 11, six, 12, more than one, 5.15, six, 5.7, 5.9, 5.15, 13, 5.7, 14, 15, two, 1, 2, two, 16, at least two, less than two, two, 1, less than two, 2, 17, at least two, two, only one, two, 18, 19, 20, more than one, 21, 3, 5.7, at least two, less than two, 5.7, 5.15, 4, 5.7, less than two, 22, 23, 24, 25, two, 3.309, 26, 3.309, six, 3.386, 27, 28, 3.309, three, 29, 3.309, two, three, two, 30, 3.309, 31, 33, one, more than one, one, 38, 39, 40, 5.15, 41, 43, 627, 2, 463, 691, 1, 405, 4, 566, 8), 3, 694, 1, 492, 7, 756, 1, 627, 4, 566, six, 1, 2, 463, 1, 691 - Hindustan Cooperative Insurance Society Ltd., 1, 405, 1, 71, 8), 2, 246, 4, 10, 2, 588, 3, 2, 1, 71, 4, 1, 737, 4, 1, 737, 4, 50, 4, one, 4, 51, one, 7.6.2009, 2.7.2009, 2.7.2009, 26.6.2009, 1.6.2009, 30.6.2009, 2.7.2009, 3, 1.6.2009, 30.6.2009, one, one, 26.6.2009, 57, 59

DATE: 27.5.2009, 8.12.2008, R2, R2, 27.5.2009, 27.5.2009, 2003, 8.12.2008, 5.16, 2003, 2003, 25.11.2008, 4.12.2008, 2003, 8.12.2008, 32, 34, 35, 36, 37, six months earlier, 42, 44, 45, 1980, 1982, 1978, 1986, 2001, 2004, 1999, 2006, 1993, 71 46, 1980, 1986, 1993, 71, 1982, 1975, 1978, 1993, 2001, 47, 1985, 2009, 1996, 2003, 48, 2006, 2007, 1979, 1993, 1983, 49, 1975, 1996, 1975, 1996, 1996, 1983, 52, 53, 27.5.2009, 2003, 2009, summer, the month of June, 8.6.2009, 54, the same day, 8.6.2009, 11.6.2009, that day, 11.6.2009, summer, 55, summer, 27.5.2009, summer, summer, 1.6.2009, 30.6.2009, summer, 11.6.2009, 2.7.2009, 56, 58

WORK_OF_ART: Thermal Power Plant of 1320, the Vacation Bench

GPE: Patiala District, Notwithstanding, New Delhi, New Delhi

PRODUCT: Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, R4, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, R4, R4, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, 340 - Kiran, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant, Appellant

MONEY: 8220;63, 8220;consent&#8221, 8220;adoption&#8221, 8220;consent&#8221, 8220;consent&#8221, 8220;adopt&#8221, 8220;adoption&#8221, 8220;consent&#8221, 8220;adoption&#8221, 8220;ORDER, 8220;Firstly, 8220;negotiated&#8221, 737 &#, 8211, 208 &#, 8220;regulate&#8221, 1 &#, 489 &#, 8211, 318 &#, 208 &#, 208 &#, 8220;even, 208 &#, 318 &#, 8220;Since

ORDINAL: first, second, Secondly, first

FAC: the Procurer R2, Reliance Airport Development, Appellant

TIME: 16.12.2008

PERCENT: 5.16.

QUANTITY: 116 K. Ramanathan

NORP: Punjab