Hearing a PIL seeking directions for refunds and support to passengers affected by the IndiGo crisis, the Delhi High Court Wednesday directed the airline to pay compensation to passengers for cancellations as well as their suffering and agony. It also pulled up the Centre during the hearing, posing a slew of pressing questions regarding its role in the situation.
Here are key questions that the court asked the government:
It asked the Centre and aviation regulator, DGCA, why such a situation precipitated in the first place and why it did not take action prior to the crisis unfolding. “Why did this crisis erupt? What did you do to ensure that no such situation arises?” Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya asked.
2. What action did DGCA and the Centre take against IndiGo after it failed to implement Flight Duty Time Limitations (FDTL) by November 1, 2025, despite its agreement and undertaking to do the same?
3. While the government claimed the crisis is owing to IndiGo’s “own ineptitude” and said the “Ministry has nothing to do with it”, the court asked the government, “So you’re expressing your inability [to invoke powers and take action]?”
4. It also asked the government if airlines fail to adhere to FDTL provisions, what provisions are available to take action?
“Are you [government and DGCA] helpless? What action could you take against them for those not adhering to the rest period, under the rules and policy? Section 4 of the Bharatiya Vayuyan Adhiniyam empowers DGCA to issue certain directions pertaining to operations of these airlines. Some direction is issued and then there is a violation. What happens then and which is the authority [to check and act on such violations]?”
“You say you’ve been monitoring the implementation and have been in constant communication with airlines, and they say they’ve been recruiting… In fact, they did not recruit adequate numbers, what action can you then take? What are your powers?” the court asked.
Story continues below this ad
5. The court also asked about passengers’ rights. “What action has the government taken to ensure these service providers’ employees behave properly with stranded passengers? FDTL, which regulates working hours of pilots, was with a certain objective. Why is it being withdrawn?” it asked.
6. It further asked what happens “in ground reality, if a pilot who is supposed to do two night landings, is now doing six night landings? Are you compromising on the safety of passengers?”
What the government said:
– It said it gave repeated minimal exemptions and accommodated IndiGo upon their request for giving effect to FDTL so this kind of situation does not arise.
– Despite monitoring and repeated communications, the government said this situation arose within 4-5 days because there is a shortage of pilots.
– It said the DGCA immediately stepped in when the crisis erupted, “very unhappily [as] exemptions are now being given” because FDTL had to be implemented in totality, without exemptions. Exemptions being given “reluctantly” to ensure stability, it added.
– There are provisions in the Bharatiya Vayuyan Adhiniyam for such violations which includes imprisonment and penalties. “We have the power of suspending the CEO and COO of the airlines” and “are looking into that”, it said. If the inquiry finds them completely guilty, “it could lead to this” — exercising Section 19 of the Act which deals with the Centre’s powers to restrict, suspend or cancel licence, certificate or approval of airlines.
– It further said 10% route curbing for IndiGo has been done, show cause notice issued, penalty provisions are in process, inquiry panel appointed, restorative measures are in place. “So, whatever the government could do, it has done more than that”.
– However, it said, it cannot have a “knee-jerk reaction” which may “affect public interest”. Instead, it has to be “a graded and informed step” against the airline.
Sohini Ghosh is a Senior Correspondent at The Indian Express. Previously based in Ahmedabad covering Gujarat, she recently moved to the New Delhi bureau, where she primarily covers legal developments at the Delhi High Court
Professional Profile
Background: An alumna of the Asian College of Journalism (ACJ), she previously worked with ET NOW before joining The Indian Express.
Core Beats: Her reporting is currently centered on the Delhi High Court, with a focus on high-profile constitutional disputes, disputes over intellectual property, criminal and civil cases, issues of human rights and regulatory law (especially in the areas of technology and healthcare).
Earlier Specialty: In Gujarat, she was known for her rigorous coverage in the beats of crime, law and policy, and social justice issues, including the 2002 riot cases, 2008 serial bomb blast case, 2016 flogging of Dalits in Una, among others.
She has extensively covered health in the state, including being part of the team that revealed the segregation of wards at the state’s largest government hospital on lines of faith in April 2020.
With Ahmedabad being a UNESCO heritage city, she has widely covered urban development and heritage issues, including the redevelopment of the Sabarmati Ashram
Recent Notable Articles (Late 2025)
Her recent reporting from the Delhi High Court covers major political, constitutional, corporate, and public-interest legal battles:
High-Profile Case Coverage
She has extensively covered the various legal battles - including for compensation under the aegis of North East Delhi Riots Claims Commission - pertaining to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots, as well as 1984 anti-Sikh riots.
She has also led coverage at the intersection of technology and governance, and its impact on the citizenry, from, and beyond courtrooms — such as the government’s stakeholder consultations for framing AI-Deepfake policy.
Signature Style
Sohini is recognized for her sustained reporting from courtrooms and beyond. She specialises in breaking down dense legal arguments to make legalese accessible for readers. Her transition from Gujarat to Delhi has seen her expand her coverage on regulatory, corporate and intellectual property law, while maintaining a strong commitment to human rights and lacuna in the criminal justice system.
X (Twitter): @thanda_ghosh ... Read More
