Home › Policies & Regulations ›RERC Rejects 3,200 MW Coal Plan, Citing RAP Data and Clean Energy Targets
RERC Rejects 3,200 MW Coal Plan, Citing RAP Data and Clean Energy Targets
Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission (RERC) has rejected the RUVITL's 3,200 MW coal proposal, ruling that its demand projections overshoot the CEA’s RAP 2025 estimates and ignore upcoming nuclear, renewable and policy-driven additions that are expected to ease future load.
November 26, 2025. By EI News Network
In a significant ruling, the Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission (RERC) has rejected a proposal to procure 3,200 MW of round-the-clock coal-based power, directing the state utility to reassess its long-term demand in line with national planning assessments and the state’s clean-energy commitments.
In its order, the commission dismissed a petition filed by Rajasthan Urja Vikas and IT Services Ltd. (RUVITL), which had sought approval to set up four 800-MW thermal units on a Design, Build, Finance, Own and Operate basis. The plan involved coal allocation under the Centre’s SHAKTI policy and a 25-year power-purchase commitment, potentially making it one of the state’s largest thermal additions in decades.
RERC found that the proposal rested on a flawed demand assessment and violated key statutory requirements. The state’s Energy Assessment Committee, the regulator noted, had exceeded its mandate by projecting needs over a 25-year horizon despite being authorised only for five-year planning. Crucially, RUVITL had not consulted the Central Electricity Authority (CEA) while preparing its long-term projections, a mandatory requirement under the Electricity Act.
The commission highlighted sharp inconsistencies between RUVITL’s projections and the CEA’s latest Resource Adequacy Plan (RAP) 2025. While the utility claimed a requirement of 3,200 MW by 2031-32, the updated RAP shows Rajasthan needing only about 1,905 MW of additional coal-based capacity by 2035-36. RUVITL’s rejection of the updated RAP, the commission said, was unsupported by data or analysis. “The mere assertion that the CEA’s projections are conservative (on the lower side) cannot be considered,” the order stated.
RERC also noted that RUVITL failed to incorporate major upcoming capacities in its planning. These include multiple MoUs between the Rajasthan government and central PSUs adding 3,325 MW of thermal capacity, as well as the 1,400 MW nuclear plant coming up at Banswara. Had these been factored in, the commission observed, the projected requirement for additional long-term thermal procurement would have been considerably lower or potentially eliminated.
The regulator’s findings underscored a broader misalignment with the state’s policy direction. The Rajasthan Integrated Clean Energy Policy, 2024 prioritises renewable energy and energy-storage technologies over new coal additions. The commission highlighted that it has already approved 11,527 MW under the KUSUM scheme, alongside 2,000 MW of rooftop solar and a significant pipeline of battery-storage projects. It also noted that new regulations such as Green Energy Open Access, Virtual Net Metering and Group Net Metering are expected to moderate long-term demand by accelerating distributed renewable generation.
Economic considerations weighed heavily in the decision. With recent coal-based tariffs discovered in other states already above INR 6 per unit, and Rajasthan’s costs likely rising to INR 7 per unit due to long-distance coal transport, the commission questioned the financial prudence of locking consumers into a 25-year contract. Firm renewable-plus-storage power, it noted, is now available in the INR 3–4 per unit range and offers a cleaner, more cost-effective alternative.
The commission also criticised the petitioner’s claim that locating the plants within Rajasthan would yield socio-economic benefits, stating that no comparative analysis or quantification had been provided. This contrasted with detailed stakeholder submissions showing that transporting coal over 1,200–1,700 km would inflate costs by an estimated 15–20 percent.
Directing a full reassessment, RERC ordered RUVITL to approach the CEA with all relevant data, especially regarding proposed retirements of existing thermal units, and then file a fresh petition if any genuine capacity requirement emerges.
In its order, the commission dismissed a petition filed by Rajasthan Urja Vikas and IT Services Ltd. (RUVITL), which had sought approval to set up four 800-MW thermal units on a Design, Build, Finance, Own and Operate basis. The plan involved coal allocation under the Centre’s SHAKTI policy and a 25-year power-purchase commitment, potentially making it one of the state’s largest thermal additions in decades.
RERC found that the proposal rested on a flawed demand assessment and violated key statutory requirements. The state’s Energy Assessment Committee, the regulator noted, had exceeded its mandate by projecting needs over a 25-year horizon despite being authorised only for five-year planning. Crucially, RUVITL had not consulted the Central Electricity Authority (CEA) while preparing its long-term projections, a mandatory requirement under the Electricity Act.
The commission highlighted sharp inconsistencies between RUVITL’s projections and the CEA’s latest Resource Adequacy Plan (RAP) 2025. While the utility claimed a requirement of 3,200 MW by 2031-32, the updated RAP shows Rajasthan needing only about 1,905 MW of additional coal-based capacity by 2035-36. RUVITL’s rejection of the updated RAP, the commission said, was unsupported by data or analysis. “The mere assertion that the CEA’s projections are conservative (on the lower side) cannot be considered,” the order stated.
RERC also noted that RUVITL failed to incorporate major upcoming capacities in its planning. These include multiple MoUs between the Rajasthan government and central PSUs adding 3,325 MW of thermal capacity, as well as the 1,400 MW nuclear plant coming up at Banswara. Had these been factored in, the commission observed, the projected requirement for additional long-term thermal procurement would have been considerably lower or potentially eliminated.
The regulator’s findings underscored a broader misalignment with the state’s policy direction. The Rajasthan Integrated Clean Energy Policy, 2024 prioritises renewable energy and energy-storage technologies over new coal additions. The commission highlighted that it has already approved 11,527 MW under the KUSUM scheme, alongside 2,000 MW of rooftop solar and a significant pipeline of battery-storage projects. It also noted that new regulations such as Green Energy Open Access, Virtual Net Metering and Group Net Metering are expected to moderate long-term demand by accelerating distributed renewable generation.
Economic considerations weighed heavily in the decision. With recent coal-based tariffs discovered in other states already above INR 6 per unit, and Rajasthan’s costs likely rising to INR 7 per unit due to long-distance coal transport, the commission questioned the financial prudence of locking consumers into a 25-year contract. Firm renewable-plus-storage power, it noted, is now available in the INR 3–4 per unit range and offers a cleaner, more cost-effective alternative.
The commission also criticised the petitioner’s claim that locating the plants within Rajasthan would yield socio-economic benefits, stating that no comparative analysis or quantification had been provided. This contrasted with detailed stakeholder submissions showing that transporting coal over 1,200–1,700 km would inflate costs by an estimated 15–20 percent.
Directing a full reassessment, RERC ordered RUVITL to approach the CEA with all relevant data, especially regarding proposed retirements of existing thermal units, and then file a fresh petition if any genuine capacity requirement emerges.
If you want to cooperate with us and would like to reuse some of our content,
please contact: contact@energetica-india.net.
please contact: contact@energetica-india.net.
