Delhi HC Refuses to Entertain PIL Seeking Four-Times Compensation from IndiGo Over Flight Disruptions

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday, December 17, 2025, refused to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking “four times” compensation for passengers affected by recent flight cancellations by IndiGo Airlines and a judicial inquiry against the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) for alleged regulatory lapses.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela declined to examine the plea, observing that the issues raised were already under consideration in an earlier PIL pending before the court.

“We decline to entertain this writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to seek impleadment in the earlier PIL,” the Bench said.

During the hearing, advocate Virag Gupta, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that passengers were facing immense hardship due to mass flight cancellations and disrupted services.

“People are suffering, and the prayers in this petition are different from the earlier plea,” Gupta argued, pressing for a direction that IndiGo commit to paying at least four times the ticket value as compensation.

“Let them give a commitment that minimum four-time compensation may be given,” Gupta urged.

Responding to the submissions, Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, appearing for the Centre and the DGCA, questioned the basis of the compensation demand. “Why only four times? Why not four thousand times?” Sharma remarked.

Court, however, turned its focus to the petitioner, expressing concern over the multiplicity of proceedings.

“Why are you so charged today? Why didn’t you implead yourself in the earlier petition? Why is there a multiplicity of matters?” the Bench asked. The judges further queried whether any statutory framework existed to assess damages in such cases, remarking pointedly: “You should have sought impleadment in the ongoing matter. Are you here for brownie points?”

Following these observations, the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the petition.

In its order, the Court noted that the controversy stemmed from the cancellation of multiple flights and disrupted services by IndiGo.

“The issue in the present case concerns taking appropriate measures to salvage the situation which occurred on account of cancellation of a number of flights and disrupted services of respondent no. 3, IndiGo,” the Court recorded. It noted that the petition primarily sought directions to pay four times the ticket value as compensation and also sought action against IndiGo, along with a probe by a retired judge or the Lokpal.

However, the Bench emphasised that it had already taken cognisance of a related PIL. “This Court has already taken cognisance of the public interest litigation petition, Writ Petition No. …, and the issues raised in the present petition can very well be pleaded in the said writ petition,” the order stated.

While acknowledging the petitioner’s contention that the prayers differed, the Court found no justification for entertaining a separate PIL. “We do not see any reason as to why the concerns raised in this PIL cannot be taken cognisance of in the earlier PIL. The jurisprudence developed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and various High Courts permits the Court to expand the scope of a petition if the same appears to be in public interest,” the Bench said.

Accordingly, the petition was dismissed, with liberty to the petitioner to seek impleadment in the pending PIL.

Case Title: Centre for Accountability and Systemic Change (CASC) v. Union of India & Ors.

Bench: Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela

Hearing Date: 17 December 2025