You are here: Home » PTI Stories » National » News
Business Standard

T-1 can't be exclusively given to Indigo: HC

Press Trust of India  |  New Delhi 

The today held that Terminal-1 (T-1) of the IGI here cannot be given exclusively to Airlines simply because it suits a "corporate goliath" and the cannot claim monopoly over this hub. The court observed that the decision of Delhi International Ltd's (DIAL) to partially shift operations from to cannot be said to be unreasonable only because it may operate harshly against that "If we may twist the American idiom, 'my way or the highway' to fit the present context, then cannot be heard to say that it is either their way, or the run way. are tending to forget that this part relocation from to proposed by DIAL, is only a temporary measure and once is renovated and commences its operations after capacity building, all the airlines can operate from there full throttle and take wings," a bench of Justices and said while upholding the order of a accepting DIAL's decision. The bench turned down the suggestion of that be dedicated exclusively to its use and low-cost carrier be asked to move its entire operations to T-2, and said this sprang from IndiGo's own commercial considerations and not made in the larger public good. It said was as much a business rival of as was a competitor of these two private carriers. may be on top of the heap if the volume of passenger traffic is seen, but this would not entitle to claim monopoly over to the exclusion of the rest, it added. "Such a suggestion of 'only us and none else' at T-1, if implemented, would have reduced it into a one horse race, giving a clear edge to IndiGo, over its competitors and DIAL would have been accused of adopting a partisan approach of promoting IndiGo's dominant position instead of offering a level playing field to all the low cost carriers. "DIAL has not shown bias but has tried to balance the interests all the parties as best as is possible, given the severe constraints of available space," the bench said. It said that simply because it suits a "corporate goliath" like with its voluminous passenger traffic to remain in T-1, will not mean that should be boxed in a corner and completely nudged out from T-1, only because its volume of passenger traffic is one fourth that of The bench, which dismissed IndiGo's appeal saying it was meritless, however, held that there was merit in the submission of SpiceJet's that any attempt on IndiGo's part to claim exclusive use of was bound to hurt its (SpiceJet) business prospects and will be anti-competitive. "We are of the opinion that there is no illegality, arbitrariness or infirmity in the impugned judgement that warrants interference," the bench said. The decision came on IndiGo's plea challenging its order of December 20 last year, upholding DIAL's October 21, 2017, decision to partially shift the operations of Indigo, and from to at the here. The bench observed that the has gone to the extent of watering down the option given by DIAL to and by directing that in the event they make a request to shift one third of their operations by excluding the three identified sectors, that is Mumbai, and Bengaluru, they may do so within one week from today. It granted a last opportunity of a week to both the airlines to approach the regulator to suggest the other sectors they would be willing to shift from to T-2, as long as they collectively met the yardstick of one third passenger traffic volumes of their operations at It said if DIAL receives any such request within the stipulated timeline, it shall consider and take a decision within one week and, if no such request is made, the regulator shall fix a deadline for shifting one third of the flight operations of the concerned airlines from to T-2, under written intimation to them. While upholding DIAL's decision, the had given the airlines time till February 15 to partially shift their operations. shifted all its operations to T-2, saying partial shifting of its operations would "kill" it as it was a smaller The bench said public interest lies in expediting the redevelopment activity at T-1, which is a purely administrative decision. It said the date of shifting a part of the operations from has had to be pushed thrice over, thereby delaying the date of commencement and postponing the conclusion of the renovation work. The bench said IndiGo, and are not being banished forever from and this part relocation was only a temporary measure. "It is settled law that when public interest competes with private interest, then the latter has to give way to public interest," it said.

(This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

First Published: Tue, February 13 2018. 20:15 IST
RECOMMENDED FOR YOU