‘Are you helpless?’: Delhi HC raps Centre over IndiGo crisis, tells airline to compensate passengers

Addressing IndiGo, CJ Upadhyaya orally remarked, “So far as compensation is concerned, you’ve to immediately start it as per the 2010 circular… What about the agony? Because they faced hostile staff… think of those who got stranded for a week… in these times, what is the impact on the economy which is unassessed?… [there has to be] compensation not only for cancellations but also other damages [for the passengers’] sufferings and agony.”

Clauses under the DGCA circular of August 6, 2010, includes stipulations and conditions under which airline service providers have to pay compensation to travellers.

The division bench also noted that DGCA and the Ministry of Civil Aviation shall ensure that stipulations under the circular are strictly adhered to by IndiGo to recompense those affected in the recent spate of cancellations last week.

Justice Gedela also flagged orally, “If there is some crisis, how can the other airlines take advantage of it? How can it go to Rs 30,000-40,000… it’s like a pound of flesh, how can it happen?”

The bench also pulled up the government during the hearing.

While the union government and DGCA listed a slew of measures that have been taken since the cancellations disrupted flight operations, CJ Upadhyaya, addressing Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Chetan Sharma, representing the ministry and the DGCA, inquired orally, “Why did such a situation precipitate?… it is not a question of individual passengers being stranded… The question is, loss to the economy… All these steps have been taken once the crisis erupted… question is, why, at all, this crisis arose, and what have you been doing?”

Pointing out to the court that repeated extensions had been given to airlines to implement Flight Duty Time Limitations rules, including extension by a court until November 1, ASG Sharma said, “… When November 1 came, other airlines fell in line, this one (IndiGo) did not.”

While the court pressed on action taken by the regulatory body and government, ASG Sharma added, “It was going smoothly until this turbulence hit, they hit an air pocket because of their ineptitude.”

CJ Upadhyaya, however, remarked orally, “It [flight duty time limitations] was to be implemented by November 1… in case of failure [to implement] by these airlines, are you helpless? If they failed to come true to their assurance, what did you do?… What action could you take against them for those not adhering?… They ought to have recruited an adequate number of pilots… You (DGCA) say you’ve been monitoring it [implementation of FDTL by all airlines], are in constant touch [with airline providers over implementation of FDTL]… if they did not recruit enough pilots, what action can be taken in such a case, if they are not giving correct figures of pilots?” 

The Centre also submitted before the court that to check unreasonable surge in fares charged by other airlines, the Ministry of Civil Aviation issued a letter on December 6 mandatorily providing fare caps.

It also said in a first, it has invoked Section 8 of the Bharatiya Vayuyan Adhiniyam (earlier known as the Aircraft Act). Section 8 vests superintendence of DGCA, Bureau of Civil Aviation Security and the Aircraft Accidents Investigation Bureau with the central government, giving it powers to issue directions to each of these bodies — including on safety oversight and regulatory functions.

IndiGo, represented by senior advocate Sandeep Sethi, submitted orally before the court that while it did implement the new FDTL rules on November 1, “it was a multitude of factors, including a technical glitch, adverse weather conditions in North India… for reasons beyond our control” that pushed the airlines to cancel flights.

Meanwhile, with a high-level committee expected to conclude its inquiry into the disruption in flight operations over the past week on December 20, the Delhi HC directed that if by next date of hearing, scheduled for January 22, 2026, the inquiry is complete, “reports of same shall also be produced before court in sealed cover”.

Background

IndiGo is India’s largest airline with a domestic market share of nearly 65 per cent, and its schedule has over 2,300 daily flights, around 2,150 of which are domestic flights. The airline’s weekly domestic flights had increased to 15,014 in the winter schedule, which took effect from October 26, from 14,158 weekly flights in this year’s summer schedule.

IndiGo, however, faced crew shortages, primarily due to its inadequate preparation for the second phase of the new crew rest and duty norms that took effect on November 1. This led to widespread network-wide disruption in the airline’s operations, leading to scores of flight cancellations on a daily basis since the middle of last week. In view of the disruption, which brought India’s aviation ecosystem to its knees, pilot associations and aviation experts strongly criticised and questioned the DGCA’s earlier decision to allow an increase in flights in the airline’s winter schedule.

The massive disruption at IndiGo threw commercial flight operations out of gear all over the country. Given the scale of the disruption, the DGCA on Friday granted IndiGo a temporary one-time exemption from some night operations-related changes in the new FDTL norms for its Airbus A320 pilots. The temporary rollback, which will be in place till February 10, is likely to help IndiGo to get its act together and stabilise operations from heron. The DGCA has also granted a few other temporary relaxations to IndiGo.