Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute Properties Acquired By Gift During Marriage Remain Separate Property Of Spouse Under French Civil Code; Husband Entitled To Half Share Only In Community Assets: Madras High Court Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Against Closure Of Human Trafficking Complaint, Flags Lack Of Bona Fides Access To Justice Cannot Be Denied When Tribunal Is Not Functioning': Calcutta High Court Holds Writ Maintainable Under Article 226 Amid Stalled Conciliation Proceedings Violation Of Natural Justice Overrides Bar On Maintainability Under Section 18 MSMED Act: Orissa High Court Panic In A Train Does Not Mean Self-Destruction: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants ₹8 Lakh Compensation For Passenger's Death In Stampede Section 101 JJ Act | Date Of Knowledge Of Order, Not Mere Knowledge Of Disposal, Commences Limitation Period: Delhi High Court Telangana High Court Quashes Order Declaring Inam Land As Govt Property Without Determining Occupancy Rights Proviso To Section 125(3) CrPC Does Not Limit Enforcement Of Monetary Relief Orders Under Section 20 DV Act: Telangana High Court Regularization Of Deviation Within Permissible Plot Envelope Governed By Uniform Fee Schedule, Arbitrary 5X Penalty Unsustainable: J&K&L High Court Man Who Blackmailed Woman With Her Own Nude Photos To Rape Her Repeatedly Can't Escape Conviction Merely Because His Voice Sample Wasn't Taken: Delhi High Court Arbitration Clause In Sale Agreement Cannot Be Invoked If Subject Matter Involves Third-Party Title Disputes: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Errs In Dismissing Amendment Plea If New Facts Emerge From Written Statement: Punjab & Haryana High Court 'No Compensation For Own Wrong': Gujarat High Court Rules Tortfeasors & Legal Heirs Cannot Claim Motor Accident Damages Under Section 166 MV Act Allahabad High Court Pulls Up Police And Magistrates Over Illegal Remand Of Juvenile Accused Section 13(1)(ia) & (ib) Hindu Marriage Act | Spouse Seeking Divorce On Grounds Of Cruelty And Desertion Must Prove Allegations With Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Cannot Let Land Become Banjar: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Appointment Of Receiver Under BNSS Amidst Pending Civil Title Disputes Section 8 Arbitration Act | Executing Court Must Refer Parties To Arbitration If Dispute Falls Within Scope Of Compromise Decree: Madhya Pradesh High Court Suit For Damages Arising Out Of Tortious Injury Barred By Limitation If Not Filed Within One Year: Punjab & Haryana High Court 72-Hour Gap Not Proximate: Calcutta High Court Quashes Murder Conviction, Holds 'Last Seen' Theory Inapplicable When Time Gap Is Wide Original Owner Cannot Create Trust Over Property Already Sold; Separate Relief For Title Declaration Not Required: Madras High Court

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