DGCA Assures Court: No Compromise on Pilots' Mandatory Weekly Rest

During the hearing of the public interest litigation (PIL), the DGCA categorically informed the Court that mandatory weekly rest for pilots has not been relaxed for any airline. Appearing for the regulator, advocate Anjana Gosain submitted that the requirement of weekly rest remains fully operational and has not been withdrawn or diluted.

"Weekly rest is non-negotiable. It cannot be tampered with. No relaxation has been given to any airline in this regard," Gosain told the Court, adding that the position may be formally recorded.

She clarified that the only relaxation granted by the DGCA pertains to night operations and that, too, is strictly limited until February 10, 2026, to enable operational adjustments during the transition phase.

The PIL alleges that the DGCA has effectively kept the revised FDTL regulations in abeyance till February 10, 2026, and contends that the regulator lacks statutory authority to suspend notified safety norms governing pilot fatigue and passenger safety, particularly in the backdrop of widespread flight cancellations and delays witnessed in December 2025.

However, the DGCA and IndiGo dispute this claim, maintaining that the FDTL regulations have not been kept in abeyance and that only specific, time-bound relaxations have been granted, without diluting core safety requirements, such as weekly rest.

The petition has been filed by Sabari Roy Lenka, a former aircraft engineer, along with Aman Monga, a Crew Resource Management (CRM) trainer, and Kiran Singh, a social worker. The petitioners assert that even temporary relaxations under the FDTL regime undermine passenger safety and that the DGCA lacks statutory authority to defer or dilute the notified safety regulations.

They have also challenged the practice of airlines branding themselves as "low-cost carriers," arguing that there is no statutory definition or legal recognition of such a classification under existing aviation laws or Civil Aviation Requirements.

During the proceedings, the respondents raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the petition, pointing out that a similar challenge to the FDTL norms filed by pilots' associations is pending before a Single Judge of the High Court.

Declining to reject the petition at the threshold, the Division Bench noted that Lenka's professional background as an aircraft engineer has a direct bearing on aviation safety.

"She has worked as an aircraft engineer. Her functions are directly connected with passenger safety. Her locus cannot be ruled out outrightly," the Court observed, adding that the pendency of a similar matter would not preclude other citizens from raising public interest concerns relating to safety.

The Court has sought detailed responses from the Centre, the DGCA, and IndiGo, and directed that the matter be listed again after four weeks, with the aviation regulator required to place its detailed stand on record.

At an earlier hearing, the Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia had observed that safety regulations, once framed, are ordinarily required to be implemented unless they suffer from legal infirmities or are successfully challenged before a competent forum.

"Unless the regulations are challenged or have inherent flaws, they are required to be enforced. These regulations have a direct nexus with safety measures.

The concerns raised cannot be brushed aside," the Bench had orally remarked.

The revised FDTL norms, notified by the DGCA in 2025, were introduced to strengthen aviation safety by limiting pilot duty hours, enhancing mandatory rest periods, and curbing excessive night landings, thereby aligning Indian aviation standards with global fatigue-risk management principles.

- ANI