The Supreme Court on Monday declined an urgent hearing of a plea alleging that domestic airfares had surged by nearly 700 per cent, responding to the petitioner's concerns with the remark, “Don't travel by air.”
The matter was mentioned before a three-judge bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta and Aparesh Kumar Singh. An advocate sought an early hearing, arguing that airline ticket prices had increased by as much as 700 per cent and that such steep increases violated Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law.
The bench declined the request for urgent listing and moved on to the next matter.
The plea comes amid growing concerns over sharp increases in domestic airfares during festive seasons and periods of high demand. Passengers have faced substantial price variations, particularly when booking tickets at short notice, raising questions about the transparency of airline pricing practices and the effectiveness of existing regulatory safeguards.
The application was filed in connection with a pending public interest litigation by social activist S L Laxminarayanan, who has sought greater regulatory oversight of the civil aviation sector. The broader petition calls for an independent regulatory mechanism to ensure transparency in airfare determination, control unpredictable price fluctuations and protect passengers from excessive additional charges.
The petitioner has argued that demand-driven pricing allows airlines to increase fares disproportionately during periods when passengers have limited alternatives. The plea also questions the reduction in complimentary checked baggage allowance in economy class from 25 kg to 15 kg and seeks its restoration during festive periods.
The application cited examples of substantial differences in ticket prices on the same routes and travel dates. It argued that such variations cannot be adequately explained by changes in aviation turbine fuel costs alone, particularly when flights operating on the same route consume comparable quantities of fuel.
The Supreme Court has previously expressed concern over steep airfare increases. During earlier hearings, it described excessive pricing during festivals as exploitation and called for greater rationalisation of ticket prices. The court had also sought responses from the Centre and the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) on the broader issue of airfare regulation.
Meanwhile, the Centre has moved towards establishing a revised regulatory framework under the Bharatiya Vayuyan Adhiniyam, 2024. The Bharatiya Vayuyan Niyam, 2026, was notified on November 1 and is scheduled to come into effect on January 1, 2027. The framework provides for government intervention in airfare-related matters in extraordinary circumstances and requires airlines to submit tariff information to the DGCA.
The broader public interest litigation remains pending, with the next hearing scheduled for November 16. The court is expected to examine the regulatory framework and the government's response to concerns over unpredictable airfare fluctuations.
The refusal to grant an urgent hearing does not dispose of the wider petition seeking stronger passenger protection and greater transparency in airline pricing. However, the episode has once again brought the issue of affordability in India's aviation sector into focus, particularly for passengers who depend on air travel during festivals, emergencies and other periods when alternative transport options are limited.
