Delhi High Court
Veer Vikrant Chauhan vs Union Of India And Ors on 4 June, 2020
$~4.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 4th June, 2020
+ W.P.(C) 3350/2020
VEER VIKRANT CHAUHAN ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vineet Malhotra,
Mr.Vishal Gohri & Mr.Shubhendu Kaushik,
Advs.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Jasmeet Singh, CGSC for
UOI
Ms. Shreya Sethi, Adv. for R-4
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
JUDGMENT
: D. N. PATEL, Chief Justice (Oral)
Proceedings of the matter have been conducted through video
conferencing.
CM APPLs.11811/2020 & 11812/2020 (exemptions)
Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 3350/2020 & CM APPL.11810/2020
1. This so-called public interest litigation has been preferred with the
following prayers:
"(i) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction thereby
setting-aside the Order No.02/2020, Reference No.AV-
13011/1/2020-US(SS)- MoCA dated 21st May 2020 passed by
the Government of India, wherein it fixes minimum air fare
for travel from point A to point B;
(ii) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction thereby
directing that minimum fare which can be charged should also
be applicable to Travel Ports and Travel Agents and other
Agents who are selling tickets;
(iii) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction thereby
directing the Respondents to issue clarification in respect of
contrary/vague provisions in the order and/or guidelines laid
down by the Government of India;
(iv) Pass any such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court
may deem fit and proper on the facts and in the circumstances
of the case, in favour of the Petitioner and against the
Respondent."
2. Having heard the counsel for the petitioner and looking to the facts
and circumstances of the case, it appears that this petition, styled as a public
interest litigation, has been preferred challenging the minimum fares which
are fixed by Government of India, Ministry of Civil Aviation vide their order
dated 21st May, 2020 vide order No.02/2020 (Annexure P-1 to the memo of
this writ petition). For the ready reference paras 2 and 3 of the said order
reads as under:
"2. Whereas it is necessary to ensure that the airlines do not
charge excessive fare on the one hand and also to ensure that
journey is performed only for essential purposes; It is,
therefore, necessary to fix a fare band within which the airlines
should charge fare,
3. Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-
Section (1) of Section 8B read with clause (ab) of Sub-Section
(2) of Section 5 of the Aircraft Act, 1934 (22 of 1934), the
Central Government hereby directs for the domestic civil flight
operations permitted vide Order No. 01/2020 dated 21st May,
2020 issued by Ministry of Civil Aviation, The airlines shall
charge fares as specified below:
(i) With respect to amount of fares to be charged by the
Airlines from the passenger for journey on a particular sector,
the sectors have been classified on the basis of approximate
duration of flight and for such classes, the minimum and,
maximum fares chargeable are as under:
Class of Minimum Fare Maximum Fare
Sectors (in Rs.) (in Rs.)
A 2,000 6,000
B 2,500 7,500
C 3,000 9,000
D 3,500 10,000
E 4,500 13,000
F 5,500 15,700
G 6,500 18,600
(ii) The sectors falling under various classes are enclosed as
Annexure I to VII;
(iii) The fares indicated in para (i) are exclusive of applicable
UDF, PSF and GST;
(iv) The fares indicated in para (i) are not applicable for
Business Class;
(iv) At least forty percent of the tickets of a particular flight
shall be sold for the fare less than the mid fare between
minimum and maximum fares given in para (i) above
(excluding JDF, PSF and GST);
(v) The airlines shall make the REDs so as to fit in the
specified fare range for each class;
(vi) This order shall remain in force till 2359 hrs IST on 24th
August, 2020;
(vii) Ail airlines operating schedule domestic passengers
service shall ensure strict compliance;
(viii) These regulations on fare are not applicable in RCS
Udaan flights."
(emphasis supplied)
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has highlighted class of Sector-D of
the aforesaid order dated 21st May, 2020, wherein, the minimum fare is
₹3,500/. The learned counsel has now taken this Court to page No.58 of the
paper book, which is a screen shot dated 21st May, 2020, taken by the
petitioner, highlighting the fare from Delhi to Kolkata for the flight
scheduled for 4th August, 2020, cost of which vary from ₹2,924/- to ₹3,153/-
and is cheaper than the minimum fare fixed by the aforesaid order dated 21 st
May, 2020. In this regard, it is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that
the difference in fare prices will lead to fixation of prices by the cartel of the
airlines.
4. We are not in agreement with this contention made by the learned
counsel for petitioner. It ought to be kept in mind that whenever such type
of tariff is fixed by the Government of India in exercise of the powers
conferred under the Aircraft Act, 1934 to be read with rules enacted
thereunder, the Courts would be extremely slow in interfering with the same.
The exercise of tariff fixation, and economic matters in general, are issues
on which the writ court would generally refrain from exercising jurisdiction,
unless found to be totally arbitrary or unreasonable. We are not sitting in
appeal against such fixation of minimum and maximum fare. It ought to be
kept in mind that this fixation of minimum and maximum fares is for the
journey to be performed only for essential purposes. Section 8B(1) of the
Aircraft Act, 1934 specifically clothes the Central Government with the
power to take necessary measures to minimise the possible danger to public
health in the event of outbreak of any dangerous epidemic. In the present
situation of the Covid-19 epidemic, the exercise of this power by the
respondents cannot be said to be arbitrary or unreasonable. The order dated
21st May, 2020 is expressly stated to be in operation only for a period of
three months, and subject to review/ modification even during this period.
Thus, this is a stop gap arrangement by the Government, for which the
present public interest litigation is not tenable at law. An aggrieved
individual can always come to the Court or can go to the competent
authority.
5. It ought to be kept in mind that, in the present circumstances when
various restrictions have been placed on the airline operations, and
maximum limit for air fare is given by the Government, the minimum fare is
also prescribed so as to strike a balance between the passengers as well as
the airlines agency. Paragraph 2 of the order dated 21st May, 2020 further
indicates that the reason for fixing a minimum fare is to restrict travel only
to the performance of essential journeys. This falls within the scope of the
power of the Central Government, as mentioned above. Moreover, fixing of
the fare is a complex phenomenon and a decision to be taken by the
Government. It is a policy decision and this Court is not inclined to interfere
in this policy decision and that too by the way of a public interest litigation.
6. As and when the aggrieved party will approach the competent
authority, the decision shall be taken by the competent authority in
accordance with law, rules, regulations and government policy applicable to
the facts of the case and without being influenced by the aforesaid
observations.
7. It ought to be kept in mind that the problem being faced by everyone
during this pandemic situation is such a unique phenomenon which requires
experimental solutions. There cannot be any mathematical solution for a
problem like this. Government has to be given a degree of free movement in
joints. We are, therefore, not going into the merits of this case.
8. With these observations, this writ petition is disposed of.
CHIEF JUSTICE
PRATEEK JALAN, J
JUNE 04, 2020
ns
