If there is a flight delay of, say, more than three hours on the tarmac due to lack of clearance from the Air Traffic Control, then passengers on board should be permitted to get back to the airport lounge, the Supreme Court has held.
The airline should also provide them food and water, said a Bench of Justices R.V. Raveendran and A.K. Patnaik. “Normally, if the aircraft has remained on the tarmac for more than two or three hours after boarding is closed, the passengers should be permitted to get back to the airport lounge to get the facilitation service from the airline. Whenever there is such delay beyond a reasonable period (say three hours), the passengers should be permitted to get back to the lounge.”
Writing the judgment, Justice Raveendran said: “If for any unforeseen reason, the passengers are required to be on board for a period beyond three hours or more, without the aircraft taking off, an appropriate provision for food and water should be made, apart from providing access to toilets.”
The Bench made it clear that congestion at the airport on account of delayed or cancelled flights could not be a ground for preventing the passengers from returning to the lounge when there was a delay of more than two hours after the completion of boarding.
“While the guidelines issued by the Director-General of Civil Aviation cover the responsibilities of the airlines, the DGCA and other authorities concerned should also specify the responsibilities of the airport and the ATC authorities to ensure that no aircraft remains on the tarmac for more than three hours after boarding is closed and that if it has to remain so, then permit the passengers to return to the lounge till the aircraft is ready to take off. The DGCA shall also ensure that the conditions of carriage of all airlines in India are in consonance with its Civil Aviation Directives.”
No public utility service could say it was not bound to care for the health, welfare and safety of passengers because it was a low-cost carrier and deny them food and water, the Bench pointed out.
In the instant case, N. Satchidanand was awarded Rs. 10,000 as compensation by the Permanent Lok Adalat for Public Utility Services and Rs. 2,500 as costs for his being confined aboard an IndiGo aircraft for 11 hours, after boarding was completed for the Delhi-Hyderabad flight in December 2007. The airline's writ petition against this award was dismissed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court and the present appeal is directed against that order.
Allowing the appeal, the Bench said: “If a flight had remained on the tarmac without taking off for 11 hours, after boarding was completed, and if permission was refused to send the passengers to the airport lounge, the airport and ATC authorities had to be blamed for requiring the passengers to stay on board.”
Setting aside the award for damages, the Bench said: “There can be no doubt that the respondent, like any other passenger, forced to sit in a narrow seat for 11 hours, underwent considerable physical hardship and agony on account of the delay. But it was not as a consequence of any deficiency in service, negligence or want of facilitation by the appellant. If the delay was due to reasons beyond the control of the airline and if the appellant and its crew have acted reasonably and in a bona fide manner, the appellant cannot be made liable to pay damages even if there has been some inconvenience or hardship to a passenger on account of the delay.”
No comments:
Post a Comment