Delhi HC raps Centre over IndiGo crisis

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday addressed the widespread disruption caused by IndiGo’s recent flight cancellations, calling on the Centre to explain how the situation escalated to such an extent. Over the last nine days, the airline has cancelled more than 4600 flights, leaving thousands of passengers stranded across airports and triggering significant operational and economic concerns.

During the hearing, Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya questioned the government’s role and accountability in the unfolding crisis. “Question is why did such a situation precipitate? Who is responsible? It is not question of individual passengers are stranded at airports. Question is loss to the economy. What steps were taken,” he remarked, as reported by LiveLaw.

"Question also is, if there was a crisis how can other airlines be permitted to take advantage? How can it go to 35-39k? How could other airlines start charging? How can it happen?"

Live Law quoted Justice Gedela saying.

The additional solicitor general informed the court that a show-cause notice had already been issued to the airline, which replied with a “profuse apology”. He added that the roll-out of the FDTL scheme had been postponed since 2024 because the carrier repeatedly sought extensions and continued to give assurances before the single-judge bench. The bench then asked the government to clarify what measures had been taken to assist stranded travellers and prevent harassment at airports. “If they failed, what action did you take? You allowed the situation to reach this point,” it said.

The bench further pressed the authorities to clarify whether any arrangements had been made to compensate affected travellers and whether IndiGo employees were being held to expected standards of conduct amid the ongoing disruptions.

Questions over fare surge and quality of petition

The court also noted that mass cancellations had led to a sharp rise in airfares charged by other airlines. “The situation created in the past week has raised an alarm. The disruption has caused the passengers facing continued inconvenience. Such disruption has even resulted in an unreasonable surge in the fares being charged by the other airlines,” the bench observed.

Although the judges expressed dissatisfaction with the public interest litigation placed before them—stating it lacked “adequate research and evidence and statutory provisions to support prayer”—they agreed to take cognisance of the matter owing to its public significance. The Centre has been instructed to file its response by December 20.