Must be implemented: Delhi High Court seeks DGCA response on plea to unpause pilot fatigue regulations

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday sought the stand of the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) on a plea challenging its decision to keep the new Flight Duty Time Limitation (FDTL) rules in abeyance following massive disruptions to airline services. .A Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia directed the counsel appearing for DGCA, Anajan Gosain, to obtain instructions in the matter by tomorrow (January 29). “We will have it tomorrow. Please get your instructions,” the Bench said. During the hearing, the Court also observed that the rules must be implemented as they have a direct nexus with the safety of the passengers. “It has a direct link with the safety of the passengers… The regulator has provided some regulations. Unless it is challenged or there is some flaw, they need to enforce it. They have not been practically followed... They must be implemented,” the Court remarked. .The Bench made the observations while dealing with a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by one Sabari Roy Lenka and other litigants challenging the DGCA decision to keep the rules in abeyance. It is the petitioner’s case that the DGCA does not have the authority to keep the rules in abeyance and, therefore, the rules must come into force. The DGCA introduced the revised norms in 2025 to improve safety by limiting pilot duty hours, increasing rest periods, and reducing night landings, aligning with global fatigue-risk standards.However, when these stricter rules took effect, IndiGo, the country’s largest airline, struggled to comply, triggering widespread flight cancellations and delays in December 2025. To reduce passenger disruption, the DGCA placed the new FDTL rules in abeyance temporarily and granted exemptions until early February 2026 while airlines adjust. .In their plea, the petitioners have also sought directions to restrain airlines from calling themselves low-cost as there is no statutory definition, classification or legal recognition of a “Low-Cost Airline” under the Aircraft Act, 1934, the Aircraft Rules, 1937 or any Civil Aviation Requirement (CAR). Further, the plea also seeks action against Indigo for failing to provide facilities like free meals, refreshment and hotel accommodations for flight cancellations. .Advocates Shiv Prakash Pandey and Sharmistha Choudhary appeared for the petitioners. .Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.