Haryana's regulator refuses the state transmission utility's attempt to reopen a full year clearance for 100 MW of round the clock renewable supply

The Haryana Electricity Regulatory Commission has dismissed the state transmission utility's attempt to reopen an order compelling it to clear 100 MW of round the clock renewable supply to a single industrial consumer. The review petition, reported as No. 11 of 2026 and filed by Haryana Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited, was decided on 22 September 2026, and the Commission again directed HVPNL to issue a full year no objection certificate to Jindal Stainless Limited.

The underlying facts are simple and the procedural history is the story. Jindal Stainless wanted to supply its Hisar plant with 100 MW of round the clock power from captive wind and solar hybrid capacity in Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh, across state lines. HVPNL and the Grid Coordination Committee declined to issue a full certificate, pointing to transmission constraints and peak summer demand. On 23 June 2026 the Commission told the utility to settle the operational procedures within two weeks and then issue the complete certificate. Rather than issue it, HVPNL asked the Commission to review the conditions in paragraph 19 of that order, which required operational protocols and a compensation framework to be established before the certificate went out. That request has now been refused.

The company was not asking for a free ride. As part of the arrangement it accepted curtailment of up to 100 MW during severe grid constraints without compensation, and agreed to carry deviation settlement mechanism costs and the associated risk. In other words the consumer conceded the grid's operational objection in advance, and the certificate was still not issued.

This is what makes a no objection certificate worth writing about. Green open access in India is a right that exists in regulation and is administered by the incumbents it takes revenue from. The gate is not usually closed by a refusal, which can be appealed, but by a clearance that arrives for part of the year, or after the project's financing window, or subject to conditions that are themselves litigated. Days ago this register recorded a Haryana dispute of almost identical shape, over deemed connectivity and HVPNL delay affecting a casting unit. Two cases do not make a finding, but they describe a mechanism: the state transmission utility is the party that decides how fast an entitlement becomes electricity.

The uncomfortable part belongs in the piece rather than in a footnote. The edge in this story is a stainless steel plant with regulatory counsel, not a household with a roof. Large consumers are the ones with the standing, the money and the patience to force a gate open, and the orders they win become the precedent everyone smaller relies on without ever being able to generate one. That is how participation rights have historically widened, and it is also why they widen slowly.

What is not established: the order itself could not be read. The HERC website refused the connection, so the petition number, the decision date and the bench all rest on a single trade report, and the second report obtained covers only the June order. The two reports also disagree on the curtailment condition, one describing curtailment during severe grid constraints and the other during peak months, which is a material difference in what the consumer actually agreed to. This item should not be published with the curtailment term stated until the order text settles it.