Public Safety Paramount In Aviation Industry, DGCA Has Power To Classify Aircrafts And Determine Pilot Training: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court observed that the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), as an expert authority under the Aircraft Act, 1934 and Aircraft Rules, 1937, has the statutory mandate to classify aircrafts based on technical specifications for safety and regulatory compliance

A single bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula asserted that under Article 226 of the Constitution, the court cannot interfere with expert/technical decisions in aviation unless there is evidence of arbitrariness or abuse of power.

Background:

The Government Aviation Training Institute (GATI) (petitioner no. 4) offers professional training to aspiring student pilots. Petitioners no. 1, 2 and 3 are student pilots enrolled at GATI for pursuing commercial pilot training to obtain Commercial Pilot's License (CPL).

They are challenging the notification issued by Directorate of Flying Training (DFT) on behalf of DGCA (respondent no.1), which re-classified the 'Pipistrel VIRUS SW 121 Aircraft', which forms part of GATI's fleet of aircrafts, as a 'Light Sport Aircraft' (LSA). As a result, the Pipistrel Aircraft is now classified under the 'Restricted Airworthiness Standard'. It was previously under the 'Normal' Category and certified for CPL training by the DGCA.

The petitioners contended that the notification is without jurisdiction because the DFT lacks the statutory authority to classify aircraft types, and that the decision exceeds the DGCA's regulatory scope.

Analysis:

The High Court referred to the Aircraft Act and Rules. It noted that under Section 5A of the Aircraft Act empowers the DGCA to issue directives necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft operations. Rule 29C of the Aircraft Rules details the DGCA's responsibility to set standards and procedures in line with International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) standards, ensuring aviation safety.

Further, Rule 50 grants the DGCA authority to define conditions and standards for issuing Certificates of Airworthiness, based on technical specifications of different aircrafts and to safeguard the integrity of the aircraft and the safety of its occupants.

It remarked “The exercise of these powers by the DGCA is aimed at ensuring that the aircrafts engaged in aviation activities within India meet the highest safety and operational standards.”

DGCA, as an expert body, has the power to classify and periodically reassess aircrafts based on evolving safety standards and technological advancement, the Court said.

In the present case, it noted that the reclassification of the aircraft was a direct exercise of these statutory powers by DGCA. It stated that the reclassification decision is within DGCA's responsibility to “…continuously monitor and update aircraft classifications as per current safety evaluations and the evolving understanding of aircraft capabilities and limitations.”

The Court held that the notification was within the DGCA's jurisdiction and did not exceed its authority or violate procedural norms under the relevant regulations.

The Court observed that the DGCA's classification of aircraft is within its expertise and emphasised the need to recognize the technical nature and specialised knowledge required for such determinations.

It stated that given the Court's role under Article 226 is limited in cases involving expert bodies like the DGCA and that judicial restraint is essential in aviation, where technical standards are critical. It stated that intervention is warranted only if there is clear evidence of arbitrariness or abuse of power that contradicts aviation safety rules.

“The jurisprudence under Article 226 of the Constitution dictates that the Court's jurisdiction to intervene in matters involving expert bodies is circumspect and limited. This is particularly true in sectors like aviation, where safety and technical standards are paramount.”

Here, it noted that determining eligibility criteria for CPL issuance involves considerations of public safety. The type of aircraft and the required training hours are essential for ensuring high safety and competence standards for future pilots.

It stated that such decisions are best made by the DGCA, an expert body with the technical expertise and statutory authority to set aviation training standards and ensure public safety.

The Court thus dismissed the petition.

Case title: Himanshu and Ors vs. Directorate General of Civil Aviation & Anr (W.P.(C) 3432/2024)

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 897

Click Here To Read/Download Order