HC asks DGCA, DIAL to take action against obstacles to flight path around IGI Airport

The Delhi High Court Thursday asked the aviation regulator DGCA and DIAL, which manages the IGI Airport here, to identify buildings around the aerodrome that may be obstacles to the flight path of aircraft and to take action against them.

The direction was issued by a bench of Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice C Hari Shankar while disposing of a PIL seeking directions to DGCA, DIAL, and other authorities to carry out a survey of obstacles around the Delhi airport and remove them.

"It appears that respondents (DGCA, DIAL and AAI) are working to identify the obstacles. Identification is a continuous phenomena. When an obstacle is identified, it is expected of the respondents to remove the same in accordance with the law, rules, regulations, government policy, as may be applicable in the facts of a case, and after giving adequate opportunity of hearing," the bench said.

It also said the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), Delhi International Airport Ltd (DIAL) and the Airport Authority of India (AAI) were "conscious of their duty to ensure security" at IGI here and thus, there was no need to issue directions on it.

"One or two lapses in security here or there cannot be reason enough for this court to give guidance to the respondents for more security at the Indira Gandhi International (IGI) Airport," the bench said and disposed of the plea by advocate Yeshwant Shenoy.

The court further said the petition "made general and vague allegations", was based on "assumptions and presumptions" and therefore, it saw no reason to issue any further directions in the matter.

The order by the bench came after noting the submissions of DGCA and DIAL that a survey had been carried out in 2017 and 380 buildings were identified as obstacles.

Subsequently, notices were issued to owners of the buildings and in 69 cases the height of the structure was brought within the permissible limit of 50 meters, DGCA told the court, adding that in the remaining instances people were being heard and a decision would be taken after that.