'Vague Allegations': Patna High Court Dismisses PIL Challenging Award Of ₹28,000-Crore Pirpainti Thermal Power Project To Adani Group

The Patna High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation challenging the award of the Pirpainti Thermal Power Project to the Adani Group, holding that the allegations raised in the petition were “vague” and “nebulous” and did not warrant interference in a policy decision of the State. The Court further observed that the petition did not qualify as a genuine public interest litigation and appeared to be based on private interest.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Meenakshi Madan Rai and Justice Soni Shrivastava was hearing a PIL challenging the approval, establishment and operation of the 2400 MW (3x800 MW) ultra-supercritical coal-based Pirpainti Thermal Power Project in Bhagalpur district.

The petitioner, a practising advocate, submitted that the Bihar State Cabinet had approved the project in March 2025 and that the procurement process was conducted through tariff-based competitive bidding, in which Respondent No. 6 emerged as the lowest bidder. It was contended that the successful bidder was to invest over ₹28,000 crore in the project, with the first unit scheduled to be commissioned within 48 months and the entire project within 60 months.

The petitioner alleged that, when compared with similar projects in Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, the tariff accepted for the project was significantly higher and was therefore arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of statutory provisions.

Opposing the petition, the Advocate General submitted that the challenge was premature as it proceeded on the assumption that tariffs likely to be paid in 2030 would be excessive. It was further argued that any grievance regarding the bidding process lay before the Bihar Electricity Regulatory Commission and that the project was based on a policy decision taken in public interest, which ought not to be interfered with in judicial review.

Examining the maintainability of the PIL, the High Court noted that although the petitioner claimed to have no personal interest in the matter, there was no averment demonstrating that he was a public-spirited person or had previously taken up any cause in public interest. The Bench observed that before entertaining a public interest litigation, the Court must be satisfied about the character and standing of the informant, the nature of the information placed before it, whether the allegations are specific, and the seriousness of the complaint.

Applying these principles, the Court found that the petition failed to satisfy the threshold required for entertaining a PIL. The Bench observed:

“The allegations made are vague, nebulous and appears to be based on private interest as none of the other parties, who have lost out in the bid to the Respondent No. 6, have approached any authority much less this Court, complaining of any irregularities in the bidding process or the award of the bid.”

The Court also accepted the State's submission that the decisions relating to the project were matters of policy and did not warrant judicial interference.

Holding that the petition did not qualify as a public interest litigation, the High Court dismissed the PIL.

Case Title: Anmol Kumar v. State of Bihar

Case Number: Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 5531 of 2026

Appearance: Mr. Sumit Kumar Singh and Ms. Deepali Singh for the Petitioner. Advocate General Mr. S.D. Sanjay, Mr. Rahul Kumar and Mr. Mohit Agarwal for the Respondents.

Click Here To Read/Download Order