The PMI Electro Playbook Behind CESL’s 10,900 E-Bus Tender

How legacy bus-building, partnered EV platforms, and scale-capital are shaping India’s e-bus supply chain

This piece builds on a detailed LinkedIn post by Shilanjan M. (LinkedIn: jshilanjanm), who pulled together a clear “why PMI wins” narrative and flagged the China-tech + localisation tension worth watching.

Why this story matters

India’s electric bus transition is entering its “industrial phase”. In this phase, the winners are not decided by who has the flashiest tech deck. They’re decided by who can deliver thousands of buses, keep them running under Gross Cost Contract (GCC) terms, and build a service system that survives Indian duty cycles.

That’s why CESL’s mega tender matters. Under the PM E-DRIVE framework, CESL concluded a large tender for 10,900 electric buses across multiple cities. In the published tender outcome coverage, PMI Electro emerged as the biggest winner with 5,210 buses, followed by EKA Mobility (3,485) and Olectra (1,785), with the balance going to another consortium. The tender process also saw legal friction around bid submission, and CESL noted that the financial bids of 14 technically qualified bidders were opened.

If you’re building anything in the EV ecosystem, the structural question is:
How did PMI become credible enough to take the largest allocation in the country’s biggest e-bus tender?

The “new startup” illusion: PMI Electro is built on an old capability

The simplest reframing is this: PMI Electro is not an “early-stage” company in bus-building terms.
PMI Electro was incorporated in 2017, but it sits on the industrial foundation of PMI Coaches, a long-running bus body fabrication business. PMI’s own company pages describe PMI Coaches as the established base that has supplied bus bodies to major OEMs like Tata and Ashok Leyland.

Independent credit rating notes reinforce the same idea from an execution lens: promoters and the parent fabrication business have a track record of over four decades in bus body fabrication, with compliance to safety and regulatory norms.

More EV News

E-Waste Start-ups Capitalizing On EV Battery Recycling

The Billion-Dollar Potential of India’s EV Leasing Market

Uno Minda Board Approves New Electric Vehicle Powertrain Component Project: A Step Forward for India’s EV Sector

Greenie Energy Powers Up India’s EV Future with $600K Seed Funding

ABB Launches ‘Battery Energy Storage Systems-as-a-Service’ to Accelerate Clean Energy Transition

So PMI came into the EV era with a major advantage:

• They already knew the shell: structure, fabrication, bus build process discipline, quality repeatability, vendor ecosystem, plant operations.
  
• The missing piece was the soul: validated electric platform maturity and EV subsystem integration.
  

Most “pure EV startups” have the opposite problem: they may have a tech story, but they don’t have a bus-manufacturing muscle memory. In public transport, muscle memory matters.

The platform shortcut: why the JV with Foton is not a side detail

Shilanjan’s post highlights a “Chinese tech angle”. That angle is real, but here’s the operator-grade interpretation:

PMI’s approach looks like time compression. Instead of spending years building a platform from scratch, PMI partnered into a mature base via a 70:30 joint venture structure that has been reported in multiple credible sources (including mainstream business coverage). That partnership has been framed as PMI holding 70% with a Foton-linked partner holding 30%.

What does this do in practice?

It lets you skip the worst phase of e-bus scaling: the phase where your bus “works”, but it doesn’t survive high utilisation. In public transport, the KPI is not “spec sheet performance”. The KPI is:

• uptime,
  
• thermal stability,
  
• parts availability,
  
• service tooling,
  
• and how quickly you diagnose field failures.
  

A partnered platform can move you from the “learning curve” to the “delivery curve” faster, but it creates a new dependency risk that the market will price in (we’ll come to that).

The tender reality: e-bus wins are factory math + service math

A 5,000+ allocation is not a press release. It is a production plan.

From credible public credit notes and reporting, PMI’s manufacturing footprint includes:

• a Haryana unit (Dharuhera) with stated capacity around 3,500 buses per year (credit note), and
  
• reported plans and investments toward expansion at Chakan, Pune for electric commercial vehicles and e-bus manufacturing (mainstream coverage references investment and ramp timelines).
  

CESL’s tender structure also matters. Under the GCC model described in coverage, private operators are responsible for ownership, operations, maintenance, and typically the charging infrastructure and energy management systems at depots provided by city authorities, while the CTU pays a per-km fee.

That is why OEM selection is not just “who can build a bus”. It’s “who can support a bus”.

And that is where PMI’s “legacy + platform” stack becomes powerful: body fabrication maturity plus an EV platform shortcut can create a deliverable product quickly, and scale becomes a game of industrial operations.

Capital: why ₹250 crore matters more than people admit

In October 2023, PMI Electro Mobility Solutions announced a ₹250 crore strategic investment from Piramal Alternatives, through convertible instruments, to support expansion.

This is not cosmetic funding. Electric buses are working-capital hungry:

• batteries and power electronics are expensive,
  
• inventory needs are heavy,
  
• depot readiness and service spares need upfront money,
  
• and GCC cycles mean cash conversion can be slower than people expect.
  

So PMI’s ability to secure institutional capital is a crucial leg of its scale story. In e-buses, scale is not only engineering. Scale is balance sheet stamina.

The geopolitical and continuity risk: the China angle, properly defined

Shilanjan’s post calls out the risk of a Chinese connection in today’s climate. That’s directionally correct, but the “risk” should be stated precisely, because operators don’t fail due to headlines. They fail due to continuity breaks.

Here’s what can break on-ground if parts of the platform and supply chain are externally dependent:

1. Spares continuity and lead time risk
   If a critical component has long import lead times, your fleet uptime drops.
   
2. Diagnostics and software toolchain control
   If controller/BMS tooling is vendor-gated, fault resolution slows.
   
3. Change management risk
   When tender specs evolve or regulations tighten, platform updates must be fast and local.
   
4. Perception and compliance risk
   Even if the product is solid, procurement teams and financiers can become cautious if dependency optics grow politically sensitive.
   

The market’s real question is:
How quickly can PMI localise the “control points” of the platform, not just the assembly?

Localisation: the uncomfortable truth is that it’s not binary

To stay competitive in India’s incentive environment and procurement expectations, localisation is not optional. But localisation is also not a switch you flip overnight, especially in batteries.

Here’s what credible credit notes indicate today: PMI Electro procures battery cells from suppliers including a Foton-linked source and other cell makers (as reported in the credit note). That implies a practical reality: even if assembly becomes local, cell supply chains remain globally linked.

So localisation will likely move in layers, such as:

• localising pack/module assembly and integration,
  
• increasing domestic content in enclosures, harnesses, thermal systems, and structure,
  
• building local suppliers for power electronics and auxiliaries,
  
• gradually de-risking the most sensitive parts of the platform.
  

This layered path is exactly why the PMI story is a useful case study: it shows how India’s EV manufacturing often grows through integration capability first, then deeper localisation over time.

Second-order impacts: what PMI’s win changes for the ecosystem

A mega tender doesn’t just allocate buses. It shapes the next 24 months of the supply chain.

A) The market shifts from product competition to delivery competition

Winning thousands of buses forces maturity: SOPs, QA systems, spares planning, depot service teams, training, incident response. This is how an industry becomes real.

B) Supplier ecosystems cluster around winner architectures

Large allocations create gravity. Charging partners, depot EPCs, telematics vendors, HVAC suppliers, and component makers start aligning to the dominant player’s architecture, which can speed up standardisation but also increase concentration risk.

C) City allocations will drive infrastructure decisions

Reporting on the tender indicates large allocations across Bengaluru, Hyderabad, Delhi, Ahmedabad, and Surat. That means depot charging, grid upgrades, and energy management become immediate execution bottlenecks. The bottleneck will not be the bus on day one. The bottleneck will be the depot.

The AIEV 2.0 thesis: PMI is a template, not just a company

The “PMI Electro story” is bigger than PMI. It is a live example of India’s current scaling template:

1. Start with a real manufacturing base (legacy operations matter)
   
2. Compress platform maturity through partnership (don’t romanticise reinvention)
   
3. Secure scale capital (growth without cash is collapse)
   
4. Localise strategically (control points first, depth later)
   

Whether you love or dislike the “platform shortcut” approach, it is undeniably effective in one dimension: it helps India put e-buses on roads faster.

The remaining question is not whether the model scales. It already has.
The question is: can it scale while steadily reducing external dependency and strengthening domestic control of critical subsystems?

That’s where the next chapter will be won.

Sources (for reference)

1. Financial Express (Dec 24, 2025): Report on CESL 10,900 e-bus tender outcome and bidder details
   
2. PMI Electro Mobility (official website pages): Company incorporation/start year (2017) and PMI Coaches legacy references
   
3. CARE Ratings (May 3, 2024): Credit note referencing PMI Coaches’ four-decade fabrication track record and operational synergies
   
4. CARE Ratings (Apr 7, 2025): Credit note referencing PMI Electro’s incorporation (2017), manufacturing capacity, and procurement context
   
5. Piramal Enterprises (Press Release PDF, Oct 25, 2023): PMI Electro Mobility strategic investment of ₹250 crore by Piramal Alternatives
   
6. Moneycontrol (Oct 25, 2023): News report on PMI Electro Mobility raising ₹250 crore from Piramal Alternatives
   
7. Economic Times (Oct 21, 2022): Article referencing PMI’s 70:30 JV framing and Chakan expansion planning
   
8. Jayant Mundhra. (LinkedIn post, Jan 2026): Analytical post on PMI’s CESL tender win, PMI Coaches legacy, and JV/localisation framing
   

Join All India EV Community

Click here for more such EV Updates

Name *

First

Last

Email *

Submit