The Delhi High Court on Wednesday called for responses from multiple governmental bodies concerning a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that demands the closure of abattoirs and meat shops near the Indira Gandhi International (IGI) Airport. The plea, raised by animal rights activist Gauri Maulekhi, cites increased risks of bird strikes, which pose a threat to both air traffic and local safety.
The bench, led by Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, issued notices to several respondents including the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), Airport Authority of India, Food Safety and Standards Authority of India, Delhi government, Delhi Pollution Control Committee, Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Delhi Development Authority, and Delhi Police. They are required to address the concerns brought up in the PIL and report the measures taken to mitigate these risks. Responses are expected to be detailed and submitted by May 14, with affidavits due within six weeks.
The primary concern outlined in the PIL is the danger presented by wildlife, particularly birds, which are attracted to the airport area due to the presence of slaughterhouses and other food-related businesses. This attraction increases the likelihood of bird-aircraft collisions, which have not only endangered passengers but also posed a crash risk to the surrounding residential areas.
Maulekhi’s plea points to the violation of aviation rules and the Bharatiya Vayuyan Vidheyak, 2024, which prohibits the slaughter or flaying of animals and the disposal of garbage within a 10-kilometer radius of the airport’s aerodrome reference point (ARP). According to the petition, such activities constitute a cognizable penal offense yet persist due to lack of effective enforcement by the authorities.
The petition also highlights a disturbing statistic: between 2018 and 2023, there were 705 bird strikes recorded at IGI Airport—a number that surpasses the combined incidents reported at 29 other airports across six states.
Maulekhi has made several representations to the authorities, demanding not only the shutdown of illegal establishments within the stipulated radius but also the effective implementation of a “bird avoidance model” (BAM) at IGI Airport. Despite these efforts, the petitioner claims there has been no substantial action taken, which has compelled her to seek judicial intervention.
