Institute of Legal and Management Studies

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (Aug. 12) recommended the formation of an expert committee to hear appeals against orders of the Tariff Authority for Major Ports (TAMP), constituted under the Major Ports Trusts Act, 1961 for tariff determination, in place of the current practice of filing appeals directly before the Supreme Court.

“we recommend to make the remedy of appeal more effective and meaningful without disrespect to any authority. It would be appropriate if an expert appellate body is constituted to hear appeals against the orders passed by the adjudicatory board/TAMP.”, the court said.

In this regard, the Court reiterated the direction made in the case of Rojer Mathew vs. South Indian Bank Limited (2020), which denounced the provisions allowing the filing of the direct appeal to the Supreme Court from the orders passed by the tribunals.

The bench comprising Justices MM Sundresh and Rajesh Bindal heard the case concerning the fixation of tariffs by the Appellant-Paradip Port Authority (formerly Paradip Port Trust) for the use of port facilities by the Respondent-M/s. Paradeep Phosphates Ltd. The Appellant had unilaterally determined the tariff despite the role of tariff determination vested with the TAMP.

The case stemmed from a 1985 agreement granting Paradeep Phosphates exclusive use of a fertilizer berth at Paradip Port. Tariff revisions under the agreement were to be made “mutually” between the parties. In 1993, the Port Trust unilaterally increased tariffs under the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963, which the company contested.

A civil suit filed in 2000 was later referred to arbitration. The arbitrator held that the unilateral revision was invalid, ordered a refund for the period up to 31 March 1999, and referred post-1999 disputes to TAMP. The Orissa High Court upheld the award, prompting the present appeals.

Setting aside the High Court's ruling, the judgment authored by Justice Bindal held that the power to revise tariffs rests exclusively with TAMP, making it inappropriate for the High Court to uphold the Arbitrator's decision on tariff fixation. The Court further clarified that, irrespective of any agreement providing for joint tariff determination, the authority to fix or revise tariffs lies solely with TAMP.

“It cannot be denied that fixation of tariff would involve consideration of various factual aspects, especially figures involved. This Court may not have the expertise to examine the accounts in detail for the purpose of fixation of tariff.”, the court said.

Accordingly, the orders of the Arbitrator, the Appellate Authority, and the High Court were set aside, and the matter was remitted back to the TAMP for adjudication of the dispute regarding revision of tariff applicable to the respondent.

Cause Title: PARADIP PORT AUTHORITY VERSUS PARADEEP PHOSPHATES LTD.

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 802

Click here to read/download the judgment

Appearance:

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dipak Kumar Jena, AOR Mr. Pramod Kumar, Adv. Ms. Smita Kumari, Adv. Mr. Pradeep Kumar Verma, Adv. Mr. Sandip Munian, Adv. Ms. Ayushi Goyal, Adv. Mr. Ashutosh Singhdeo, Adv. Mr. Raj Shekhar Jena, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mrs. Anushka Sharda, Adv. Mrs. Raveena Rai, Adv. For M/s Khaitan & Co., AOR