New Delhi [India], January 22 : The Union of India on Thursday informed the Delhi High Court that decisive action has been initiated on the basis of the inquiry commission's report into the IndiGo crisis marked by large-scale flight cancellations and passenger disruption.
The submission was made during the hearing of a plea seeking an independent judicial probe into the incident before a Division Bench headed by Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya of the Delhi High Court.
Placing the steps taken on record, the Union told the Court that a Senior Vice President of IndiGo has been directed to be dismissed from service. It further informed the Bench that a monetary penalty of ₹22 crore has been imposed on the airline and a bank guarantee of ₹50 crore has been secured to ensure compliance with the corrective measures recommended in the inquiry report.
The Court was also apprised that warnings have been issued to several senior officials of the airline, including the Chief Operating Officer, the Director, the Deputy Head of Flight Operations, and a Resource Analyst, for lapses identified during the inquiry.
Regarding passenger relief, counsel appearing for IndiGo submitted that refunds for cancelled tickets have already been processed. He added that a structured mechanism for compensating stranded passengers is currently being finalised. During the hearing, the petitioner's counsel pointed out that the airline had issued vouchers to stranded passengers with a validity period, raising concerns about restrictions placed on their use.
The Court queried counsel for the airline on the time limit prescribed for utilisation of such vouchers. In response, the counsel stated that the validity period was 12 months. The Bench observed that a 12-month period appeared reasonable but sought clarity on the airline's position in the event a passenger is unable to utilise the voucher within that timeframe. Counsel for IndiGo submitted that instructions would be sought on this aspect.
Taking note of the submissions, the Court directed IndiGo to place on record, within two weeks, complete details of refunds, compensation, and passenger assistance by way of an affidavit. The matter has now been listed for further hearing on February 25.
Earlier, the Delhi High Court had directed IndiGo and the Union government to ensure that compensation to stranded passengers is initiated without delay and that all norms prescribed by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation are strictly complied with. The Court had emphasised that passenger welfare remains its primary concern and that measures must be taken to prevent a recurrence of such large-scale disruptions.
The Bench had also expressed concern over the sudden surge in airfares during the crisis and sought clarity on the regulatory oversight exercised at the time. The Additional Solicitor General informed the Court that fare caps were introduced as a regulatory measure and that the Ministry of Civil Aviation had intervened once the situation escalated.
Flagging safety-related issues, the Court had raised concerns about pilots exceeding night-landing limits and questioned what steps regulators could take when airlines face staffing shortages. It also noted that the DGCA had issued a show-cause notice to IndiGo, reiterating that compensation obligations under the relevant clauses of the DGCA circular must be strictly adhered to.
The Court directed the Ministry and the DGCA to ensure the effective enforcement of all statutory obligations, including provisions relating to compensation and damages, and clarified that the Centre has the power to review DGCA decisions and take corrective action where necessary.
Senior Advocate Sandeep Sethi, appearing for IndiGo, submitted that such a situation had arisen for the first time in the airline's 19-year history and urged the Court not to record any adverse findings at this stage. The Bench noted the submission but reiterated that the immediate priority was the timely redressal of the inconvenience suffered by passengers.
IndiGo has maintained that multiple unforeseen factors contributed to the crisis, and the Court observed that these factors would be examined in the ongoing inquiry.