New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday sharply questioned the central government for not acting sooner to contain the crisis triggered by widespread IndiGo flight cancellations, which left lakhs of passengers stranded across airports and sent ticket prices on other carriers surging to unprecedented levels. A bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela asked why the situation was permitted to deteriorate despite clear warnings about non-compliance with Flight Duty Time Limitation rules, including mandatory pilot rest norms, that were to take effect from November 1. “The question is why, at all, this crisis arose and what have you been doing?” The bench remarked, directing both the government and IndiGo to ensure adequate compensation is paid to affected passengers. The court also asked whether authorities were “helpless” or unwilling to act against IndiGo after the airline failed to comply with the FDTL requirements by the stipulated deadline.
The judges noted that the issue extended beyond the hardship faced by travellers stranded for hours or days. The disruption, they said, had caused losses to the wider economy, which relies heavily on timely and efficient air travel. They further voiced concern over “harassment” reported by passengers and pointed out that the mobility of people is central to economic functioning.
The bench also scrutinised the steep surge in ticket prices charged by other airlines during the crisis, questioning how airfares could jump from about Rs 5,000 to Rs 30,000 to Rs 35,000 and even touch Rs 39,000. “If there was a crisis, how could other airlines be permitted to take advantage? It is like a pound of flesh. How could this happen?” the court asked during a hearing that continued for more than ninety minutes.
The judges instructed that the report of the committee probing the disruption in flight operations, if completed, should be submitted in a sealed cover by January 22, the next date of hearing. While acknowledging that the Ministry of Civil Aviation and the Directorate General of Civil Aviation had taken steps once the crisis unfolded, the bench said it remained troubled by the failure to prevent such an escalation.
Appearing for the Centre and the DGCA, Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma told the court that a statutory framework was already in place and a show-cause notice had been issued to IndiGo, which had “apologised profusely”. Sharma said the crisis emerged due to several instances of non-compliance with guidelines issued over time, including limits on crew duty hours. According to him, authorities had repeatedly urged IndiGo to implement Civil Aviation Requirements, and while other airlines complied with the November 1 deadline for FDTL norms, IndiGo did not.
Sharma added that the sudden fare spike had now been controlled and capped, a step he noted had not been taken before. This prompted the bench to ask what action the government could have taken earlier if an airline did not adhere to the rules. “Are you expressing your inability? What action could you have taken against them for failure to adhere?” the court asked.
Senior advocate Sandeep Sethi, representing IndiGo, said the airline’s operational breakdown resulted from several factors, including unexpected technical problems and adverse weather conditions in North India. The court responded by directing IndiGo to arrange immediate compensation not only for cancellations but also for the additional hardships passengers endured. “What about the agony? Because they faced hostile staff. Think of those who got stranded for a week,” the bench told Sethi.
The court said it would refrain from making observations on the causes of the disruptions since a committee has already been constituted, and IndiGo will get an opportunity to present its case. It clarified that its interventions seek to ensure that public interest is protected by both the government and the airline.