Back
Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, Rep. by Secretary to Government Ministry of Civil Aviation – Respondent
ORDER :
The petitioner was granted License to carry on the Ground Handling Services to interested Airlines at Airports at Chennai and Kolkata as per the International Standard on 29.11.2010. The License Agreement was entered on that date with contractual terms and conditions. As per Clause 1(a) of the License Agreement, the License commenced on 23.09.2010 for a period of ten years from 23.09.2010 to 22.09.2020 unless terminated earlier under the provisions of that Agreement.
2. The appointment of an agency for Ground Handling Services was made under Airports Authority of India (General Management, Entry for Ground Handling Services) Regulations, 2007 (in short “2007 Regulations”). These Regulations came to be amended / modified periodically and new Regulations were issued. The 2007 Regulations is superseded by Ministry of Civil Aviation (Ground Handling Services) Regulations 2017 (in short “2017 Regulations”). Thereafter, new Regulations viz., Airports Authority of India (Ground Handling Services) Regulations, 2018 (in short “2018 Regulations”) was issued in supersession of 2017 Regulations.
3. As per Regulation 3(4) of 2018 Regulations, at the Airport having annual passenger throughp
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the rights of existing GHAs to continue providing services were safeguarded by the court's various orders, but the appellants did not have an ....
The judgment established that Ground Handling Agents have no inherent right to continue providing services once a third-party agency has been duly identified in accordance with the applicable regulat....
Existing ground handling agents lack an indefeasible right to operate once new agencies are duly identified in accordance with regulations, even if formal operations have yet to begin.
The court upheld the authority of CIAL to modify tender conditions for ground handling services, emphasizing the need for a competitive environment and the absence of established conflicts of interes....
A writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is not maintainable against a private company, even if it discharges a public function, unless the contract of service is governed or regulated b....
The petitioner, as a commission vendor, has no legal right to assert that he can continue to act as a commission agent from the stall located at Platform no. 1 and to assail the decision of the respo....
The termination of a license agreement is valid if it is in accordance with the terms and conditions of the agreement, and the public interest outweighs the personal interest of the licensee.
The court held that the termination of a license by a public authority is not arbitrary or discriminatory if it is done in accordance with the terms of the license agreement and is necessary to achie....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
