The Supreme Court on Thursday expressed strong displeasure with the Central Government for its failure to file a response to a petition seeking regulatory guidelines for “unpredictable fluctuations” in airfares and ancillary charges. A bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta refused to grant the three-week extension requested by the Union, instead directing that an affidavit be filed by next Friday, May 8, explaining the reasons for the delay.
The proceedings stem from a petition filed by social activist S Laxminarayanan, who has called for a robust, independent regulator to ensure transparency and passenger protection in the civil aviation sector. The petitioner argues that the current lack of oversight allows private airlines to engage in “exploitative” pricing, particularly during festivals and emergencies.
During the hearing on Thursday, the petitioner’s counsel informed the bench that the Centre had yet to file its reply, despite notice being issued in November 2023. When the Centre’s counsel cited the evolving situation in the Middle East as a factor and mentioned that the government was “contemplating framing rules,” the bench was not convinced.
“What is this? What prevents you from filing an affidavit?” the bench asked. Pointing out that time had already been granted on three previous occasions, the Court remarked, “You file an affidavit and place everything on record. Why can’t you file an affidavit? What is this stand of the Union?”
The bench ordered the Centre to file an appropriate application alongside the affidavit, explicitly stating why the document was not filed earlier and why further time was sought. The matter is now listed for further hearing on May 11.
The Supreme Court has previously taken a stern view of the issues raised in the plea. During a hearing on January 19, the top court flagged the “exorbitant rise” in airfares during festival seasons, characterizing such pricing as “exploitation.”
The petition highlights several specific grievances:
- Ancillary Charges: The plea claims private airlines reduced free check-in baggage allowance from 25 kg to 15 kg without justification, turning a previously included service into a new revenue stream.
- Single-Piece Policy: It challenges the policy of permitting only a single piece for check-in and the lack of rebates for passengers who do not use the baggage allowance.
- Algorithmic Pricing: The petitioner argues that unregulated dynamic pricing algorithms infringe upon the fundamental rights of citizens, including the right to equality and freedom of movement.
- Lack of Redressal: The plea notes the absence of effective on-ground grievance redressal mechanisms for passengers facing arbitrary fare hikes or service reductions.
The petitioner contends that the State’s inaction in regulating fare algorithms and cancellation policies constitutes a “dereliction of its constitutional duty.” The plea emphasizes that for many, air travel is a necessity rather than a luxury, especially during medical emergencies or weather disruptions.
“The right to dignity includes access to essential services such as emergency transport on fair and non-exploitative terms,” the plea states, arguing that vulnerable citizens are currently being denied this right.
Earlier, on February 23, the Centre had informed the apex court that the Ministry of Civil Aviation was “actively considering” the issues raised. However, the Court’s latest order underscores a growing impatience with the lack of formal documentation regarding the government’s progress.
