ORDER : 1. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record 2. The bidding process for procurement of 1000 mega watt power was concluded and the result of the evaluation was as follows: Rank Qualified Bidder Name Levelized Tariff (Rs/Kwh) Capacity Offered Cumulative Capacity Offered Average Cumulative Tariff (Rs/Kwh) L­-1 PTC­Maruti Clean Coal and Power Limited 4.517 195 195 4.517 L­-2 PTC­-DB Power Limited 4.811 311 506 4.698 L­-3 LPL­-Lanco Babandh Power Limited 4.943 100 606 4.738 L­-4 PTC­Athena Chhattisgarh Power Limited 5.143 200 806 4.839 L-­5 SKS Power Generation (Chhattisgarh) Limited 5.300 100 906 4.890 L-­6 IPL­Lanco Vidarbha Thermal Power Limited 5.490 100 1006 4.949 L-­7 PTC­-MB Power(Madhya Pradesh) Limited 5.517 200 1206 5.043 L-­8 KSK Mahanadi Power Company Limited 5.572 475 1681 5.193 L­-9 Jindal Power Limited 6.038 300 1981 5.321 L­-10 LPL­Lanco Amarkantak Power Limited 7.110 100 2081 5.407 3. Thereafter, the Rajasthan Electricity Regulatory Commission (“State Commission”, for short) was moved for reduction of the capacity from 1000 mw to 500 mw. Letters of Intent (LOIs) were allotted for different quantity i.e. higher quantities then were bid for, in the case of L-1 to L-3. The State Commission approved the reduction of capacity from 1000 mw to 500 mw. 4. The Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (APTEL) held as follows : “The contention of the Respondents as well as State Commission that even after the bidding process is completed and PPA signed, the stipulated power capacity of 1000 MW for procurement can be reduced is contrary to the provisions of the Act as well as bidding guidelines. Once the petition has been filed on the recommendation of the Evaluation Committee seeking for the adoption of tariff after it is discovered, it is not open for the Respondents(Procurer) and the State Commission to reduce procurement of power stipulated in the bidding documents and PPA(s) already executed between the parties.” 5. In view of above, the APTEL held that reduction of capacity was not permissible after the bidding process was complete. The APTEL further directed as follows: “Hence, the impugned order dated 22.07.2015 is liable to be set aside. The State Commission shall be required to pass appropriate/revised order enabling the Appellants namely DB Power Ltd. And Lanco Power Ltd. to supply the contracted power under the respected PPA (dated 01.11.2013) viz. The APTEL further directed as follows: “Hence, the impugned order dated 22.07.2015 is liable to be set aside. The State Commission shall be required to pass appropriate/revised order enabling the Appellants namely DB Power Ltd. And Lanco Power Ltd. to supply the contracted power under the respected PPA (dated 01.11.2013) viz. 410 MW & 350 MW, respectively expeditiously in the interest of justice and equity.” 6. We are in agreement with the earlier conclusion of the APTEL. We are of the view that the direction of reduction of capacity from 1000 mw to 500 mw by the State Commission was correctly set aside. Since L-1 to L-5 were represented before this Court, we direct that they shall be entitled to supply of power in terms of the originally offered amount, mentioned above, in accordance with para 3.5 of the Request for Proposal. The power supply will now be reduced to a total of 906 mw. The State Commission may now go into the issue of approval for adoption of tariff with regard to L-4 and L-5. All Letters of Intent (LOIs) shall stand modified in terms of the above. 7. All the appeals shall stand disposed of in terms of the above order.