SC urges Centre to “rationalise” airfares

THe sublime margaret court on fri urged the Centre to use up steps to “rationalise” airfares, pointing to the glaring disparity in fine prices charged by different airlines for the same route on the same day, with economy class fares ranging from ₹8,000 to ₹18,000.A bench of justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking regulatory guidelines to control unpredictable airfare fluctuations and additional charges imposed by private airlines during festive seasons, holidays and emergencies.During the hearing, solicitor general Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Directorate General of Civil Aviation and the Union government, informed the court that the Bharatiya Vayuyan Adhiniyam (BVA), 2024, has already come into force and that rules under the new legislation are presently under consultation.“There’s a new Act that has come into force. The 2024 Act has come into force. The rules are in the process of consultation. We will consider all the aspects,” Mehta submitted.The bench, however, stressed the need for immediate relief to passengers struggling with volatile and widely divergent airfare pricing.“Try to give some relief to people because of the discrepancy. On the same day, for flights on the same sector, one airline charges ₹8,000, while another charges ₹18,000 in economy class,” observed the court.Mehta acknowledged the existence of the problem but maintained that any durable solution would have to emerge through statutory rules framed under the new aviation law. “I am not disputing the problem, but the solution has to be by statutory rules,” he said.The petitioner, social activist S Laxminarayan, through advocate Charu Mathur, urged the court to issue effective interim directions, contending that adequate regulatory powers already exist under the current legal framework but are not being exercised.“Rules are there, powers are there, they are not being exercised,” the petitioner’s counsel argued during Friday’s hearing, pointing out that even under the previous Aircraft Act regime, authorities possessed powers to intervene where airlines indulged in predatory or excessive pricing. The petitioner further submitted that until fresh rules are framed under the 2024 law, the existing regulatory framework would continue to operate.“Under the new rules, it says that if the DGCA is satisfied that, in a particular situation, the airlines are indulging in charging predatory or excessive fares, it will issue directions,” the counsel submitted.Mehta responded by stating that the DGCA was indeed issuing directions wherever required.The bench nevertheless underlined that some degree of “rationalisation” in airfare pricing was necessary.“There has to be some rationalisation,” remarked the court, while asking the Centre how much time it would require to finalise the new rules under the BVA.In its order, the court recorded the Centre’s submission that the rule-making exercise under the 2024 enactment was ongoing and may take some time. “SG submits that after the enactment of the 2024 Bhartiya Vayuyaan Adhiniyam, the rules of the said enactment are being framed and the process is ongoing and may take some time,” the bench noted in its order.The court also took note of the petitioner’s stand that rules framed under the previous legal regime continue to remain operational and should be invoked even under the new law.Posting the matter for further hearing in July, the bench granted time to the petitioner to file a reply to the Centre’s affidavit.The issue of volatile airfares has repeatedly engaged the attention of the Supreme Court over the past several months, particularly in the context of alleged surge pricing during festivals, emergencies and major events such as the Kumbh Mela.In an affidavit filed earlier before the court, the Centre had urged the bench to dispose of the PIL by treating it as a set of suggestions or representations for the new aviation rules presently under formulation.The government stated that the ministry of civil aviation and the DGCA were in advanced stages of finalising draft rules under the BVA, which would replace the regulatory framework under the Aircraft Rules, 1937.The Centre also defended the deregulated pricing regime, arguing that liberalisation had improved connectivity and affordability while allowing the government to intervene in exceptional situations affecting public interest. At the same time, it assured the court that passenger welfare remained a priority and that the government was attempting to fast-track the rule-making exercise “in the wake of emerging scenario”.The PIL challenges what it describes as “unregulated, opaque and exploitative” airfare practices adopted by airlines, especially during peak travel seasons and emergencies. It also raises concerns over reductions in baggage allowances and increasing ancillary charges imposed on passengers. The petition seeks binding norms on airfare pricing, regulation of surge pricing during peak demand periods, control over add-on charges, and the establishment of an independent aviation regulator to safeguard consumer interests.