In a landmark Judgment dated 18 October 2024 in Civil Appeal Nos. 3098-3099 of 2023: Airports Economic Regulatory Authority of India vs. Delhi International Airport Ltd. & Ors., the Supreme Court of India (Supreme Court) has addressed the pivotal issue of whether the statutory sectoral regulators, which are quasi-judicial bodies, have the locus/standing to appeal against the orders of the Appellate Tribunals before the Supreme Court.
This case centred on the maintainability of appeals by the Airports Economic Regulatory Authority (AERA) against judgments passed by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT)[1] under the AERA Act, 2008 (AERA Act). The issue focused on whether regulatory bodies can act as aggrieved parties in appellate proceedings. This ruling has significant implications for the functioning and authority of regulators to seek judicial review and uphold their mandates.
Key takeaways from the judgement are as follows:
AERA’s role as a tariff regulator: The factors to be considered by AERA while determining tariff under Section 13(1)(a) of the AERA Act includes cost of efficiency, economic and viable operation of major airports. Even when not directly setting tariffs, AERA is seen as regulating them due to its focus on airport viability.
Interpretation of Section 18(5): The usage of the expression “as the case may be” in Section 18(5) of the AERA Act does not exclude AERA as a respondent in appeals against its own orders before the TDSAT. It ensures that AERA is notified of TDSAT orders even if not directly involved in the appeal.
AERA’s right to appeal: While Section 31 of the AERA Act does not explicitly allow appeals to the Supreme Court, AERA’s role as a necessary party in TDSAT proceedings enables it to appeal such orders before the Supreme Court.
To conclude, the Supreme Court's affirmation on AERA’s standing to appeal decisions made by the TDSAT underscores the critical role that regulatory bodies play in protecting public and economic interests. This landmark decision not only delineates the boundaries between adjudicatory and regulatory functions but also empowers authorities to carry out their mandates more effectively and without obstruction.
