Supreme Court Advises Against Air Travel Amid Soaring Fares
Supreme Court's Warning on Air Travel
A file image of Indian airline aircraft parked at an airport. (Representational picture)
New Delhi, Nov 2: The Supreme Court advised a petitioner against air travel on Monday, declining to prioritize a plea that claims airfares have surged by nearly 700%.
An attorney brought the issue before a bench consisting of Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and Aparesh Kumar Singh, highlighting the dramatic fare increase.
"The cost of aviation has skyrocketed by 700%," the lawyer stated. In response, the bench remarked, "Avoid air travel."
The attorney argued that air travel is a vital service, asserting that such fare hikes violate Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law.
Currently, the Supreme Court is also reviewing a separate petition from social activist S. Laxminarayanan, who is advocating for an independent regulatory body to ensure transparency and safeguard air passengers' rights.
Laxminarayanan's petition calls for guidelines to manage the unpredictable fluctuations in airfares and additional fees charged by private airlines.
During a hearing on October 16, the government informed the court that it had received administrative approval for new regulations under a 2024 law intended to oversee India's aviation industry, with publication expected within two weeks.
The Supreme Court instructed Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to present the finalized rules under the Bharatiya Vayuyan Adhiniyam, 2024, at the next hearing scheduled for November 16.
On August 17, the government had indicated that it was expediting the development of rules under the Bharatiya Vayuyan Adhiniyam to modernize the aviation sector.
Last November, the Supreme Court requested responses from the government and other parties regarding Laxminarayanan's petition.
In a January hearing, the court expressed its intent to address the "unpredictable fluctuations" in airfares, particularly noting the steep increases during festive seasons.
The court described the significant fare hikes by airlines as "exploitation" and directed the government and the Directorate General of Civil Aviation to respond to the petition.