The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has dismissed allegations of anti-competitive practices in a solar power tender floated by the Solar Energy Corporation of India (SECI), providing relief to companies including Adani Group entities and Azure Power.
In its order issued on Thursday, the fair trade regulator rejected a complaint that had accused Adani Enterprises Ltd, Adani Green Energy Four Ltd, Azure Power India Pvt Ltd, along with several state utilities and individuals including Gautam Adani and Sagar Adani, of violating competition norms.
No evidence of dominance or market abuse
The CCI stated that there was no prima facie evidence to support claims of anti-competitive conduct. It noted that India’s power generation market consists of several major public and private players, limiting the possibility of dominance by a single entity.
“As such and in view of the fact that power generation market in India is comprised of many significant players viz. National Thermal Power Corporation, Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd., Tata Power Co. Ltd., Torrent Power and Reliance Power etc., the Adani Group, prima facie, does not seem to be a dominant player in the power generation market in India,” the Commission said in its order.
Allegations on tender clauses and conduct rejected
The complaint brought up concerns about certain tender terms, like the “Green Shoe Option,” changes to tariffs, and other conditions that were said to make it hard for smaller players to get in.
However, the regulator observed that the complainant failed to provide cogent evidence to substantiate these claims. It emphasised that tender structures are typically aligned with the requirements of the procuring entity and do not inherently indicate anti-competitive intent.
The CCI also looked into claims of bribery, cross-subsidization, exclusionary practices, and entry barriers in power sale agreements. It came to the conclusion that these claims did not meet the standard for abusive behaviour set by Section 4 of the Competition Act.
Case closed under Competition Act
The Commission further noted that there was no evidence to suggest that the Request for Selection (RfS) documents were designed to favour large players. Consequently, it found no prima facie violation of Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, which deal with anti-competitive agreements and abuse of dominant position.
“Therefore, the matter is directed to be closed forthwith under Section 26(2) of the Act,” the regulator stated.
The ruling reinforces confidence in the transparency and competitiveness of India’s evolving SECI solar tender framework. It also strengthens regulatory clarity for developers and investors participating in the country’s rapidly expanding renewable energy market.
Electrify your feed! Click here to join our Whatsapp group and to get the latest updates, expert insights, and innovations driving India’s energy storage revolution.
