The Supreme Court stated that fluctuations in airfare and extra charges by private airlines during festive seasons are a matter of serious concern. Additional Solicitor General Anil Kaushik said the government is examining the issue and will respond within four weeks.
The Supreme Court stated that fluctuations in airfare and additional charges imposed by private airlines during festive seasons and holidays are of serious concern.
A bench consisting of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta made this observation while reviewing a petition that aims to establish regulatory guidelines to manage these unpredictable airfare changes.
The Court remarked,
“This is a very serious concern. Otherwise, we don’t entertain 32 petition,”
Additional Solicitor General Anil Kaushik, representing the Central government, informed the Court that the issue is being examined at the highest levels, and a response will be submitted within four weeks.
He stated,
“Solicitor General has also called a meeting. We have taken the matter to the highest level. We are in discussion with the highest authority. 4 weeks time may be given we will come up with a counter,”
The Court acknowledged this and postponed the matter for further review on March 23.
When the Federation of India Airlines (FIA) sought to be included in the proceedings, the Bench declined for the time being, indicating that this could be considered later.
The Court remarked,
“The union will deal with you. They will call you before taking a decision. They will constitute a committee and take a decision. It is for the ministry to decide. If they don’t, we will consider that later on,”
The petition highlights that air travel is now a necessity for millions, particularly during emergencies, festivals, or when other modes of transport, like trains or roads, are unavailable.
It was argued that airlines currently utilize opaque, algorithm-driven dynamic pricing systems, which can alter fares multiple times within a single day.
According to the petitioner, this has a disproportionate impact on the poor and middle class, who frequently book tickets last minute due to emergencies such as illness, familial deaths, exams, or sudden work requirements.
The petition also points out that air travel is categorized as an essential service under the Essential Services Maintenance Act, 1981, placing air transport on par with railways and postal services. Unlike railways, electricity, and healthcare, however, airline pricing remains largely without regulatory oversight.
The petition further noted that airlines have reduced free baggage allowances from 25 kg to 15 kg and now impose hefty fees for excess baggage, turning basic services into profit-generating tools. It was argued that there is currently no regulatory body with the authority to cap fares or supervise additional charges.
The petitioner is seeking directives for the Union government and Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) to formulate binding rules on airfare pricing, limit surge pricing, regulate baggage and additional charges, establish cancellation and refund policies, and create an independent aviation regulator with the authority to safeguard consumer interests.
ALSO READ: Weekly Rest Is Non-Negotiable, No Airline Gets Exemption: DGCA Tells Delhi High Court
During a prior hearing on January 21, the Supreme Court had raised concerns over what it referred to as exploitative pricing practices by airlines, particularly during festivals and significant events like the Kumbh Mela.
Justice Mehta remarked during the session,
“Look at the exploitation you did during Kumbh,”
Justice Nath added,
“Not only Kumbh, but every festival,”
Justice Mehta pointed out,
“Take the statistics for these two towns, Prayagraj and Jodhpur; the flight fares are three times the fares prior to the festivals,”
The Court had previously directed the respondents to file counter affidavits in answer to the petition.
ALSO READ: Pilot Fatigue Rules| Must Be Implemented: Delhi High Court Seeks DGCA Response
In today’s hearing, the government reiterated its commitment to examine the situation and promised to deliver a response within four weeks.
The matter was then adjourned for further discussion on March 23.
The petitioner was represented by Senior Advocate Ravindra Srivastava, along with advocates Charu Mathur, Jay Cheema, and Abhinav Verma.
The FIA was represented by Advocate Saurav Agarwal.
Case Title: S Laxminarayanan Versus Union Of India And Ors.