On January 6, the Supreme Court's division bench, led by Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar, requested that the Supreme Court Registry file a report detailing how Adani Power Rajasthan Ltd's Miscellaneous Application seeking modification in a 2020 judgment was listed before the Court.

The direction was issued by a bench after taking note of a letter addressed by Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. (Jaipur Discom) to the Supreme Court's Secretary General, which questioned how Adani Power's Miscellaneous Application was cleared by the Registry for listing before the bench.

The Court did not appear to be pleased with the letter and expressed its displeasure during the hearing. In the brief hearing, Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave represented Jaipur Discom.

The issue concerns the listing of Adani Power's application in the case Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd v. Adani Power Rajasthan Ltd, despite the case's final disposition on August 31, 2020. The Jaipur Discom asked the Supreme Court's Secretary General in a letter how Adani Power could file a Miscellaneous Application in an already disposed of matter when it had not filed a review petition against the judgement.

The Supreme Court upheld the orders of the Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission and the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) in the 2020 judgement, holding that Adani Power was entitled to compensatory tariffs under the Power Purchase Agreements with the Rajasthan Distribution Companies. It did, however, rule that Adani Power was not entitled to the payment of the claimed Late Payment Surcharge (LPS) under the Power Purchase Agreement.

Adani Power's 2022 application requested that the Respondents pay an LPS of Rs. 1376.35 Crores that was due on June 30, 2022, in accordance with the terms of the Power Purchase Agreement dated January 28, 2010.

The letter, which questioned the MA, was filed through the Chambers of Advocate Karthik Seth and argued that "while my clients had moved applications for review, which came to be dismissed by an order dated 02.03.2021, APRL (Adani Power) did not file any Review petition," which is contrary to the Supreme Court Rules, 2013. The Rules state that no application for review of a judgment or order will be considered.

"This letter raises an extraordinarily serious question going to the very root of the institutional integrity of the Registry of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India", stated the letter sent on behalf of Jaipur Discom with Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave's advice.

Case Title: Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. Versus Adani Power Rajasthan Ltd
Diary No. 21994-2022 XVII