Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal

Supreme Court Directs Re-evaluation of Airport Tariff Calculation Method, Emphasizes Need for ‘Single Till’ Mechanism

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India has directed a fresh examination of the method used to calculate the Hypothetical Regulatory Asset Base (HRAB) for airport charges. This direction comes in the wake of applications by Delhi International Airport Limited (DIAL) and Mumbai International Airport Limited (MIAL), citing a newly discovered piece of evidence – a letter dated 24.05.2011.

In their judgment, Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M. M. Sundresh emphasized the complexities involved in the calculation of HRAB. “The nature of jurisdiction exercised by this Court is predicated on two specialist authorities/tribunals having applied their mind to it,” Justice Kaul observed, highlighting the nuanced nature of the issue.

The central contention of the applicants was the adoption of a ‘single till’ mechanism, where both aeronautical and non-aeronautical revenues are considered as composite revenue for tariff fixation. The Court recognized the significance of this approach in the context of airport operations and revenue calculations. “It would be difficult to have a re-appreciation of evidence and facts, especially when the admitted position is that the TDSAT has not opined on it,” Justice Kaul remarked, acknowledging the need for expert opinion from the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT).

The Supreme Court’s decision to remit the matter to TDSAT for a fresh look at the HRAB computation using the ‘single till’ mechanism marks a crucial step in addressing the ongoing dispute over airport charges. The TDSAT is now expected to independently review the impact of the 2011 letter from the Ministry of Civil Aviation to the Airport Economic Regulatory Authority and determine the appropriate method for HRAB calculation.

Date of Decision: 04 December  2023  

DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD. VS AIRPORTS ECONOMIC REGULATORY AUTHORITY & ORS.  

Latest Legal News