In Brief
The Supreme Court held that the Airports Economic Regulatory Authority (AERA) can file appeals against TDSAT orders under Section 31 of the AERA Act 2008. The respondents argued that AERA, being a quasi-judicial authority fixing tariffs, cannot defend its own orders. The Court rejected this, distinguishing between adjudicatory and regulatory functions. While authorities exercising purely adjudicatory powers (deciding disputes between parties) cannot defend their orders in appeal, those performing regulatory functions—protecting public interest through policy discretion—can be necessary parties to appeals and defend their orders. The Court found AERA's tariff determination is regulatory, not adjudicatory, because it exercises broad policy discretion considering multiple factors, not individual rights. AERA is therefore a necessary respondent in tariff appeals before TDSAT and has standing to appeal TDSAT orders to the Supreme Court. The Court also clarified that the outdated distinction between quasi-judicial and administrative functions must be replaced with the adjudicatory/regulatory distinction.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.