Need more time to examine BLA of AirAsia India: DGCA to HC

Aviation regulator DGCA today moved Delhi High Court seeking two more weeks to examine AirAsia India's brand licensing agreement (BLA) with Malaysia's AirAsia Berhad to determine who controls the low- cost carrier.
The application was moved before a bench headed by Chief Justice G Rohini, which on November 11 had directed AirAsia India, a joint venture between Tata Sons and Malaysia-based AirAsia Berhad, to submit the BLA to Directorate General of Civil Aviation that was tasked to examine the agreement and take a decision in four weeks on who controls the airline.
The matter was listed for hearing today but could not be taken up as the judges were not available for hearing it. The hearing was posted for February 23 next year.

DGCA in its application said the agreement has to be examined in terms of the directions given by this court.
"The process of collecting additional information from the stakeholders and its evaluation has commenced and would entail some time," DGCA stated.
The court's direction on the issue had come on the plea by Federation of Indian Airlines (FIA) which had alleged that as per the BLA, the ownership and control of the airline was with the foreign entity.

It had noted that this agreement was never placed before the DGCA, nor before any other authority which processed the application of AirAsia India to be granted an Air Operator Permit (AOP).

"The agreement in question has not been placed before us by either party," the bench had said.
The bench had also issued notices to the Centre, DGCA and AirAsia seeking their replies on BJP leader Subramanian Swamy's plea for impleadment of R Venkataramanan, Managing Trustee of the Sir Dorabji Tata Trust and a member of the Board of AirAsia India Pvt Ltd.
Swamy has sought impleadment of Venkataramanan regarding
a letter of Cyrus Mistry, ex-Chairman of Tata Sons, that there was an alleged fraudulent transaction of Rs 22 crore in connection with the setting up of AirAsia India Pvt Ltd.

The BJP leader had also sought summoning of the report of a forensic investigation by an auditing firm into the alleged fraudulent transaction, which was reportedly revealed in Mistry's letter of October 25.
AirAsia India, represented by senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, had opposed Swamy's plea saying the allegations in his application have no connection with the main matter pertaining to grant of flying license to the airline.
Singhvi had also said the FIA's plea that BLA should be examined to determine who owns the airline was a "fishing expedition".
He had said BLA was not required to be filed as per the rules for seeking the Air Operator's Permit (AOP) from DGCA and a no-objection certificate (NOC) from Civil Aviation Ministry.

Meanwhile, the Ministry and DGCA, in their respective affidavits, have stated that BLA was not required to be filed while seeking AOP and NOC and it was not filed.
However, they have said that based on all the documents placed before them, they "found no reason to believe that substantial ownership and effective control was not vested in Indian national".
DGCA had also said there is no need to submit commercial agreements when applying for grant of AOP.
The Delhi High Court had, on September 2 this year, asked the Ministry to file its response to a plea by the FIA alleging that certain agreements were not considered by the government while granting flying licence to AirAsia.

Earlier Swamy had moved court seeking "immediate suspension" of flying licence given to AirAsia India.
Malaysia's largest budget-carrier AirAsia had set up the joint venture with the Tata Group and Telestra Tradeplace to launch the regional airline in India.
In his PIL, Swamy has challenged the clearance granted to the airline on the ground that according to the policy, foreign investment is only permitted in an existing airline but AirAsia India was not an existing carrier.