Karnataka HC Directs IndiGo To Expeditiously Conclude Inquiry Against Pilot Suspended For Allegedly Refusing To Fly Over Fuel Discrepancy
The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday directed IndiGo airlines to expeditiously conclude its enquiry against a pilot suspended last year for delaying a flight by 8 hours.The pilot claims that delay was due to a safety hazard of 1000 kilograms fuel deficit he identified in his pre-flight inspection on the Dubai-Bengaluru route. However, the airline chose to "victimise his diligent action"...
The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday directed IndiGo airlines to expeditiously conclude its enquiry against a pilot suspended last year for delaying a flight by 8 hours.
The pilot claims that delay was due to a safety hazard of 1000 kilograms fuel deficit he identified in his pre-flight inspection on the Dubai-Bengaluru route. However, the airline chose to "victimise his diligent action" by suspending him and stalling the matter since September 2025.
Meanwhile, he has been unable to complete his flying hours, which is an impediment to his license renewal.
Indigo on the other hand questioned the maintainability of the plea in Bengaluru, stating that its offices are based in Delhi.
After hearing both sides, Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum on Tuesday issued a limited direction to the airline to serve the pilot with the chargesheet and conclude the disciplinary enquiry within three months.
The single-judge bench further directed the Respondents to serve all necessary documents to the pilot, explaining the grounds of his suspension.
“The Issue is allowed in part. The second respondent (IndiGo) to serve all necessary documents to the petitioner, suggesting what made him to be placed under suspension…The petitioner is allowed to contest the enquiry…The second respondent should conclude the enquiry within 3 months," it ordered.
Significant to note that the pilot had also levelled allegations of inaction against the Director General of Civil Aviation.
However, DGCA submitted that the dispute was between an employer and its employee, and no blanket directions could be issued by it at this stage.
Sr. Advocate Jayna Kothari, along with Adv. Abhimanyu Devaiah, Adv. Pratheek Mathur and Adv. Omkar Suresh appeared for the petitioner.
Case Title: Sharan A. v. Director General of Civil Aviation & Anr.
Case No: WP No.5499 of 2026