The Madras High Court has requested the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) to clarify its stance on an exemption given to InterGlobe Aviation, operator of IndiGo airlines, regarding pilot fatigue regulations under India’s aviation safety standards.
CHENNAI: Earlier, the Madras High Court asked the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) to clarify its plans regarding an exemption granted to InterGlobe Aviation Limited, the operator of IndiGo airlines, from certain pilot fatigue regulations under India’s aviation safety standards.
Justice V. Lakshminarayanan was hearing a writ petition filed by Chennai resident Y.R. Rajaveni, challenging the DGCA’s order issued on December 5, 2025.
This order provided IndiGo with an exemption from adhering to paragraphs 3.11 and 6.14 of the Civil Aviation Requirements (CAR) for a defined class of aircraft.
The exemption pertains to fatigue management norms established under CAR 2024, which impose stricter limits on night operations, landings, and mandatory weekly rest for flight crews.
The petitioner seeks to annul the exemption and obtain an interim stay, asserting that the DGCA lacks the statutory authority to weaken essential safety regulations through an executive directive.
The Court noted that the request for interim relief could be assessed only after hearing from IndiGo, which has been named as the second respondent and has yet to appear in the case.
Representing the DGCA, Additional Solicitor General A.R.L. Sundaresan explained that the exemption was granted due to the airline’s inability to immediately comply with the updated fatigue norms. He informed the Court that strict adherence to CAR provisions had led to widespread flight cancellations, prompting the need for regulatory intervention to stabilize airline operations.
The ASG clarified that the exemption was not meant to permanently dilute safety standards and that the DGCA was collaborating with IndiGo to facilitate compliance with the fatigue management framework. The Court recorded these statements.
The ASG also indicated that the DGCA would submit a counter-affidavit, directed to be filed by January 5, 2026. Additionally, the Court specifically requested the aviation regulator to clarify whether it intends to extend the exemption granted to IndiGo on December 5, 2025, beyond the specified period.
The order states,
“Mr. A.R.L. Sundaresan states that the first respondent shall go on record by way of counter affidavit on 05.01.2025. The counter shall specifically state whether the first respondent intends to extend the exemption granted on 05.12.2025 for a further period,”
The matter is scheduled for further hearing on January 6, 2026.
In December 2025, IndiGo faced significant operational challenges, canceling hundreds of flights in a brief period. Media reports cited difficulties in adhering to the revised fatigue norms, particularly restrictions on night operations and enhanced weekly rest requirements, which reportedly affected crew availability and flight scheduling during the winter season.
The DGCA’s exemption order issued on December 5, 2025, was made against this backdrop, with the regulator highlighting the necessity to stabilize airline operations.
The petitioner, represented by Senior Advocate Sanjoy Ghose, argued that under Rule 133A(1) of the Aircraft Rules, 1937, any directive or exemption issued by the DGCA under Rule 133A(4) must align with the parent legislation, namely the Aircraft Act, 1934.
The petitioner contended that the CAR provisions on pilot fatigue management are mandatory and form part of a regulatory framework designed to protect flight crews and passengers. Granting an exemption from these requirements, it was argued, effectively amounts to improperly amending binding safety regulations.
The revised aviation safety norms were introduced in 2024 after prolonged litigation initiated by pilot unions before the Delhi High Court, which sought to align India’s aviation standards with international safety norms.
Although earlier litigation regarding the CAR 2024 notification concluded after the government assured a phased implementation, the present case directly addresses the legality of a post-notification exemption granted to a specific airline and whether such relaxation falls within the DGCA’s statutory authority.
Additionally, a contempt petition challenging the DGCA’s earlier exemptions provided to various airlines is still pending before the Delhi High Court.
In the Madras High Court case, Central Government Standing Counsel K.B. Arun also represented the DGCA, while Senior Advocate Ghose appeared for the petitioner, instructed by Advocate M. Ramesh.
Case Title: Rajaveni Vs Director General of Civil Aviation
Read Attachment:
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
