The Delhi High Court has directed the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) and the Ministry of Civil Aviation to promptly decide a complaint against Air India over inadequate meals on a 16-hour flight [Nivedita Sharma Vs Ministry of Civil Aviation].
The complaint was filed by two passengers. They said Air India served only one hot meal and limited snacks on its Delhi–San Francisco flight despite knowing that they had diabetes and hypertension.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia has directed the DGCA to examine the complaint in a timely manner.
"We direct that the grievance redressal exercise, if not already concluded, shall be completed expeditiously after taking into consideration the written replies submitted by the Appellants as well as Respondent No. 3/Air India, and a reasoned order shall be passed within a period of six weeks," the May 23 order said.
The case concerned Air India flight AI-173 from New Delhi to San Francisco on November 11, 2020.
Two passengers alleged that the quality and quantity of food served on the flight were grossly inadequate. They also claimed that one of them suffered food poisoning, dehydration and weakness after consuming the meal served by Air India.
It was further alleged that one of the passengers suffered repeated hypoglycaemic episodes during the flight. She was forced to consume sugar and sweetened beverages, the Court was told.
The passengers also alleged that the cabin crew failed to recognise or manage the medical situation properly. According to them, this showed lack of adequate training.
The passengers had moved the High Court in 2021. They sought directions to constitute an independent committee to review the quality and quantity of food served to passengers on the flight.
A single-judge had earlier noted that the passengers appeared to have suffered serious inconvenience. In an order passed on April 8, 2025, it directed the Ministry of Civil Aviation to treat the petition as a complaint or grievance. The Ministry was asked to consider it in accordance with law. The passengers' petition was closed on these terms.
The passengers later filed applications to recall the April 2025 order on concerns that the directions issued in it were not complied with.
They eventually filed an appeal before a Division Bench of the Court, arguing that the single judge ought to have decided the matter instead of relegating the decision to the MCA/ DGCA.
They also said DGCA could not fairly decide the complaint since allegations had also been made against it.
The Court, however, rejected these arguments.
It held that a writ petition need not be decided on merits merely because notice had earlier been issued. The Court said parties can still be asked to use an equally effective alternative remedy.
The Bench also noted that the case involved disputed questions of fact. Such issues could not be effectively decided in writ proceedings.
It said the Aviation Ministry and DGCA, being regulators, were better placed to decide the grievance first.
However, the Court noted that the grievance had still not been effectively redressed.
It directed the Ministry and DGCA to complete the grievance redressal exercise, if not already concluded. The authorities must consider the replies filed by the passengers and Air India, it said.
The Court ordered that a reasoned order be passed within six weeks. It also said the passengers could take legal remedies if they remained aggrieved by the decision.
Advocate Parth Kaushik appeared for the appellants along with Nivedita Sharma (one of the passengers), who appeared in person.
Advocates Anjana Gosain and Adhiraj Singh appeared for the Ministry of Civil Aviation and DGCA.
[Read Judgment]