CCI clears Adani in solar tender case, no proof of anti-competitive conduct

Competition Commission of India has dismissed a complaint accusing Adani Group and others of rigging a major solar tender, saying there was no evidence to support the claims.

The case was linked to a 2019 tender issued by Solar Energy Corporation of India for setting up 7 GW of solar capacity along with 2 GW of manufacturing. The idea was to push domestic production by tying project awards to factory commitments.

Adani Green Energy and Azure Power ended up as the main winners. Adani secured capacity linked to 2 GW of manufacturing and 8 GW of solar projects, while Azure got 1 GW manufacturing and 4 GW solar.

The complaint argued the rules favoured large companies and made it harder for smaller players to compete. It also flagged the greenshoe option, saying it allowed extra capacity to be given to the same bidders. There were also claims that Azure later gave up part of its capacity, which then moved to Adani entities, suggesting some kind of prior understanding.

For the global aluminium value-chain 2026 outlook, book our exclusive report “Global ALuminium Industry Outlook 2026"

Another point raised was that Adani’s scale and access to funding gave it an unfair edge, along with references to allegations in a US case.

SECI pushed back on all of this, saying the process followed government guidelines and was based on a tariff discovery system through e-reverse auctions. It said everything, from bidding to agreements, was done under regulatory oversight.

Looking at the case, the CCI said there wasn’t enough to show any collusion or manipulation. It also made it clear that just designing tender conditions in a certain way does not automatically mean they are anti-competitive.

On the dominance argument, the regulator pointed out that the power sector in India is too broad and crowded to single out one company. Firms like NTPC, Tata Power and JSW Energy are all part of the mix, across thermal, renewable and other segments.

Don't miss out- Buyers are looking for your products on our B2B platform

The Commission also said advantages like size, capital or integration don’t automatically mean unfair conduct. Claims around market blocking or entry barriers were not backed by evidence, according to the order.

On the foreign allegations, the CCI noted that even if such issues exist elsewhere, they don’t directly establish a competition law violation here.

It also addressed the tender structure itself. Linking manufacturing with project awards was in line with policy goals, and the greenshoe provision had backing from the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy and had already been upheld by the regulator.

Finally, the Commission said any tariff cuts offered after bidding were voluntary and, if anything, beneficial for consumers.

Must read: Key industry individuals share their thoughts on the trending topics