Why in the News
- Recently, India’s aviation authorities faced severe criticism for actions favouring a private airline following extensive flight cancellations, resulting in chaos and stranded passengers.
- The Minister of Civil Aviation posted on X that the Flight Duty Time Limitations (FDTL) orders issued by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) had been placed under abeyance with immediate effect.
- These actions, alongside a subtle direction from the DGCA to dilute the Civil Aviation Requirement (CAR) on FDTL, were argued to make a mockery of flight safety.
Background and Context
Crisis and Regulatory Response
The crisis began in India’s aviation sector after private airline Indigo cancelled flights, leading to chaos and thousands of passengers being stranded.
- Minister’s Order: The Minister of Civil Aviation ordered that the FDTL CAR be placed under abeyance to stabilize operations and prioritize relief for affected passengers.
- DGCA’s Action: Prior to the Minister’s order, the DGCA issued an appeal to pilots’ associations and pilots to cooperate and ensure flights were back without delays, with an apparent direction to dilute the FDTL norms.
These actions were stated to have prioritized the commercial interests of the airline over crew fatigue and the safety of passengers, suggesting that CARs had been modified to suit commercial aviation’s requirements.
History of FDTL Dilution
The dilution of FDTL norms reflects a consistent pattern of prioritizing commercial interests over safety standards.
- 2007 CAR: The DGCA issued a very good CAR addressing crew fatigue and the rest period of operating crew.
- 2008 Abeyance: Following complaints from airline owners to the Minister, the Minister ordered the DGCA to keep the CAR in abeyance. An order dated May 29, 2008, confirmed the abeyance of CAR Section 7, Flight Crew Standards, Series J, Part III dated 27th July, 2007.
- Mindset Continuation: The mindset, persisting for 18 years, continues to favour commercial interests of airlines, ignoring the dangers of fatigue and inadequate rest periods.
Judicial Intervention and Reversal
The historical dilution of safety standards led to judicial intervention:
- Bombay High Court Writ: The pilots association filed a writ (Writ petition 1687 of 2008) against the 2008 abeyance order.
- Interim Relief and Court Observations: The High Court granted interim relief and slammed the aviation authority for putting lives of pilots and passengers at risk. The Court pulled up the Aviation Ministry and the DGCA for arbitrarily playing with duty hours, observing that authorities should decrease the number of flights instead of increasing pilot duty hours to overcome the acute shortage of pilots. The Court stated that safety of flights had been overlooked for protecting financial interests of a few airline operators.
- Subsequent Reversal: Strangely, the same High Court reversed the order and upheld the action of the Civil Aviation Ministry.
Systemic Lapses and Lack of Accountability
The chaos and the subsequent abeyance order were attributed to a systemic failure involving both the private airline and the regulatory body.
Deadline Disregard
- The owner of Indigo and the DGCA both knew for more than a year that the new regulations (mandated by the High Court) would take effect from November 1, 2025.
- Failure to prepare resulted in chaos and thousands of passengers stranded, who may get refunds but not compensation for incurred expenses such as hotels and transportation.
Underemployment of Crew
The malaise is directly linked to the DGCA’s CAR Series ‘C’ Part II Section 3 Air Transport dated April 19, 2022, which states:
- Applicant shall have on his regular employment sufficient number of flight crew and cabin crew.
- Requirement is not less than three sets of crew per aircraft.
- Misuse of Norms: Even with existing (and considered unsafe) FDTL and rest period rules, a minimum of six sets of pilots an aircraft for domestic operation and not less than 12 sets of pilots an aircraft for widebody, long haul operations are needed.
- Airline Arrogance: Airlines appear to have deliberately underemployed qualified sets of crew, taking advantage of the CAR, with Indigo being identified as a major player in this misuse.
Regulatory and Judicial Deficiencies
- DGCA’s Lack of Oversight: The current situation proved the complete lack of safety oversight by the DGCA over the past few years, with airline owners confident that the government and the DGCA would ignore safety norms.
- Judiciary’s Role: The judiciary has been accused of showing a total disregard for aviation safety and playing second fiddle to the government for over 20 years.
International and National Safety Parallel
ICAO Audit Observation
- In 2006, the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) identified in its audit report the need for India to have an independent civil aviation authority and not a puppet regime under government control.
- The recent actions were seen as graphic proof of this observation, with the DGCA first appealing for pilot cooperation and the Aviation Ministry then ordering the abeyance of the Court-mandated CAR.
Compromise on Safety
- Dilution of safety norms to this extent was stated to be an action not expected even from third world countries.
- The order setting February 10, 2026 as the outer limit for the abeyance was dismissed, as the airline has not complied with the earlier CAR for more than a year, suggesting further extensions and compromise on safety can be expected.
Lessons Not Learnt
Despite the rhetoric that safety is paramount, actions prove otherwise.
- Major Accidents: Three major aircraft accidents have occurred in India since 2010 (Mangaluru, Kozhikode, and Ahmedabad).
- Delayed Findings: Findings of the Air India AI 171 crash in Ahmedabad are being delayed by the Ministry.
- Plummeting Safety: While the CEO of Indigo expects operations to normalize in 10 to 15 days, safety is perceived as plummeting to its nadir, suggesting future flights will rely on the saying “on a wing and prayer”.
Way Forward
- Reinforce Flight Safety as Priority
- Regulatory bodies must ensure crew duty hours, rest periods, and operational safety are strictly enforced, without dilution for commercial convenience.
- Strengthen DGCA Oversight
- DGCA must be empowered and independent, with transparent accountability mechanisms.
- Audit and monitor compliance with CARs, FDTL rules, and licensing standards consistently.
- Enforce Minimum Crew Requirements
- Airlines must maintain minimum six sets of pilots per domestic aircraft and twelve sets per widebody long-haul aircraft, with no exceptions.
- Judicial and Governmental Accountability
- Government and judiciary should prioritize aviation safety over commercial interests, ensuring High Court directives are fully implemented.
- Passenger Rights and Compensation Mechanism
- Develop standardized compensation framework for passengers affected by flight cancellations and delays, including incidental expenses.
- Independent Civil Aviation Authority
- ICAO recommendations should be implemented, creating autonomous regulatory body free from airline and political influence.
- Safety Culture in Airlines
- Encourage corporate adherence to safety norms, with penalties for violations.
- Focus on crew fatigue management, operational readiness, and continuous training.
Conclusion
- Recent events in India’s aviation sector demonstrate that commercial interests continue to override flight safety, with DGCA and Ministry actions undermining established safety norms.
- The crisis underscores the urgent need for independent regulatory oversight, strict enforcement of CARs and FDTL rules, accountability of airlines, and robust passenger protection mechanisms.
- Without these measures, the safety of passengers and crew will remain compromised, and India’s aviation sector will continue to face systemic vulnerabilities and international scrutiny.
UPSC MAINS PYQs
- International civil aviation laws provide all countries complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above the territory. What do you understand by airspace? What are the implications of these laws on the space above this airspace? Discuss the challenges which this poses and suggests ways to contain the threat. (2014)
