IndiGo flight cancellations: Delhi HC refuses PIL seeking four times ticket refund. Here's why
A bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela said the issue was already under consideration in another PIL and permitted the petitioner to intervene in the earlier case.
- Dec 17, 2025,
- Updated Dec 17, 2025 5:38 PM IST
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday refused to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking directions to the Centre and IndiGo airline to pay compensation amounting to four times the full ticket price to passengers whose flights were cancelled in November and December following the rollout of new Flight Duty Time Limitation (FDTL) rules.
A bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela said the issue was already under consideration in another PIL and permitted the petitioner to intervene in the earlier case.
“We don't see any reason as to why the concerns raised here cannot be taken up in the earlier petition. The jurisprudence developed by the Supreme Court and high courts around PILs permits the court to expand the scope of a petition in public interest.
“We decline to entertain this petition with liberty to the petitioner to seek intervention in the pending petition. The writ petition stands disposed of,” the bench said.
The PIL was filed by the Centre for Accountability and Systemic Change (CASC) through its president, Prof Vikram Singh. The petition said the large-scale cancellation of IndiGo flights had caused serious concern across the aviation sector, with thousands of flights cancelled at the last minute, leaving many passengers stranded.
Appearing for the petitioner, advocate Virag Gupta told the court that airports were crowded with misplaced baggage. He said passengers faced long delays, poor communication from airlines, and confusion over refunds and re-booking.
The petition also sought an inquiry by a retired judge or the Lokpal to examine whether the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) was negligent and failed to prevent the crisis.
Earlier, on December 10, the Delhi High Court had questioned the Centre for not acting in time to control the situation arising from IndiGo’s flight cancellations. The court had asked why the crisis was allowed to worsen, with lakhs of passengers stranded and other airlines charging very high fares.
At the time, the court was hearing another PIL seeking directions to the Centre to provide support and refunds to passengers affected by the cancellation of hundreds of IndiGo flights.
IndiGo has faced criticism from the government and passengers for cancelling hundreds of flights since December 2, citing changes in rules related to pilots’ flight duty time and rest norms.
In the latest update, after cancelling more than 50 flights on Tuesday, IndiGo cancelled a similar number of flights again on Wednesday at major airports, including Delhi, Kolkata, Bengaluru, Mumbai and Hyderabad. Earlier, the airline had cancelled as many as 172 flights on Monday.
In a travel advisory issued late Tuesday, IndiGo warned passengers to expect flight delays or schedule changes. The airline said foggy winter mornings in North and East India reduce visibility and slow down flight operations.
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday refused to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking directions to the Centre and IndiGo airline to pay compensation amounting to four times the full ticket price to passengers whose flights were cancelled in November and December following the rollout of new Flight Duty Time Limitation (FDTL) rules.
A bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela said the issue was already under consideration in another PIL and permitted the petitioner to intervene in the earlier case.
“We don't see any reason as to why the concerns raised here cannot be taken up in the earlier petition. The jurisprudence developed by the Supreme Court and high courts around PILs permits the court to expand the scope of a petition in public interest.
“We decline to entertain this petition with liberty to the petitioner to seek intervention in the pending petition. The writ petition stands disposed of,” the bench said.
The PIL was filed by the Centre for Accountability and Systemic Change (CASC) through its president, Prof Vikram Singh. The petition said the large-scale cancellation of IndiGo flights had caused serious concern across the aviation sector, with thousands of flights cancelled at the last minute, leaving many passengers stranded.
Appearing for the petitioner, advocate Virag Gupta told the court that airports were crowded with misplaced baggage. He said passengers faced long delays, poor communication from airlines, and confusion over refunds and re-booking.
The petition also sought an inquiry by a retired judge or the Lokpal to examine whether the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) was negligent and failed to prevent the crisis.
Earlier, on December 10, the Delhi High Court had questioned the Centre for not acting in time to control the situation arising from IndiGo’s flight cancellations. The court had asked why the crisis was allowed to worsen, with lakhs of passengers stranded and other airlines charging very high fares.
At the time, the court was hearing another PIL seeking directions to the Centre to provide support and refunds to passengers affected by the cancellation of hundreds of IndiGo flights.
IndiGo has faced criticism from the government and passengers for cancelling hundreds of flights since December 2, citing changes in rules related to pilots’ flight duty time and rest norms.
In the latest update, after cancelling more than 50 flights on Tuesday, IndiGo cancelled a similar number of flights again on Wednesday at major airports, including Delhi, Kolkata, Bengaluru, Mumbai and Hyderabad. Earlier, the airline had cancelled as many as 172 flights on Monday.
In a travel advisory issued late Tuesday, IndiGo warned passengers to expect flight delays or schedule changes. The airline said foggy winter mornings in North and East India reduce visibility and slow down flight operations.