The Patna High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the approval and bidding process of the proposed 2,400 MW Pirpainti Thermal Power Project in Bihar. The Court held that the petition did not meet the standards required for a genuine public interest case and found no material justifying judicial interference in a policy decision.
Background of the Case
The petition was filed by advocate Anmol Kumar, who stated that he had no personal interest in the dispute and had approached the Court in public interest. He questioned the State Government's decision to award the Pirpainti Thermal Power Project to Adani Power Ltd. under a Design, Build, Finance, Own and Operate (DBFOO) model for 33 years.
The petitioner alleged that the tariff fixed through the competitive bidding process was unreasonably high compared to similar projects in other States. He also challenged the decision to lease around 1,020 acres of agricultural land for a nominal annual lease amount of ₹1, sought disclosure of the Power Supply Agreement, and requested an independent audit of the project's planning and implementation.
The State opposed the petition, arguing that the issues raised related to a policy decision and that any grievance regarding electricity tariffs could be addressed before the Bihar Electricity Regulatory Commission.
Take CourtBook Everywhere
Access your account on the go with our mobile app.
The Division Bench observed that a court hearing a PIL must first be satisfied that the information placed before it genuinely warrants judicial examination.
"The Court is to be prima facie satisfied that the information laid before it is of such a nature that it calls for examination," the Bench observed.
The Court noted that the petitioner had not shown any previous involvement in public causes despite claiming to act in public interest. It also recorded that the project had already been approved by the State Cabinet and processed through a tariff-based competitive bidding process in which Adani Power Ltd. emerged as the lowest bidder.
The Bench further found that no unsuccessful bidder had challenged the bidding process or complained of any irregularity before any authority or the Court.
Describing the allegations as "vague" and lacking supporting material, the Court observed that the challenge appeared to be based on private interest rather than genuine public interest. It also agreed with the State that the decisions relating to the project were matters of government policy, which courts ordinarily do not interfere with unless supported by specific evidence of illegality.
Holding that the petition failed to satisfy the requirements of a public interest litigation, the Patna High Court declined to entertain it and dismissed the writ petition.
Case Details:
Case Title: Anmol Kumar v. State of Bihar & Others
Case Number: Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 5531 of 2026
Judge: Hon'ble Chief Justice Meenakshi Madan Rai and Hon'ble Justice Soni Shrivastava
Decision Date: 29 June 2026
-300x169.webp)
