The Delhi High Court recently addressed the issue of false positives in breath analyzer (BA) tests for crew members and emphasized that there are sufficient precautionary measures in place under the Civil Aviation Requirements (CAR) to safeguard against such occurrences.
Justice Gaurang Kanth stated that the CAR only requires airlines to conduct pre-flight BA tests and does not impose an obligation to perform blood and urine tests in case of positive results.
The court acknowledged that conducting blood and urine tests at airports before every flight would not be practical or feasible for airlines. It emphasized that creating infrastructure at every airport for such tests would incur additional costs and burden the airlines unnecessarily. Justice Kanth stated that the CAR does not impose an obligation on operators to conduct blood and urine tests, as it focuses solely on BA tests. The responsibility for conducting blood and urine tests lies with the Officer-in-Charge of the Airport, even in the incidents of accidents. The CAR already includes procedures to eliminate the possibility of false positives.
These observations were made in response to a writ petition filed by a pilot from Vistara airlines who challenged the suspension of his license for three months by the Director General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) due to a positive result in a pre-flight BA test. The pilot argued that the positive result was a false positive caused by an error in the equipment and that the blood and urine tests conducted in accredited laboratories were more reliable.
However, the court dismissed the pilot's plea, noting that he violated the provisions of the CAR and Aircraft Rules, 1937 by reporting for duty after consuming alcohol. The court emphasized that the job of a pilot carries immense responsibility, as they are entrusted with the lives of passengers and crew members. The CAR stipulates a permissible blood alcohol content of zero to ensure safety. The court also pointed out that the CAR's procedures effectively rule out false positives through second tests and control tests. Additionally, the court highlighted that no incident of false positives had occurred with the petitioner during the pendency of the case, further diminishing the likelihood of future false positives.
This ruling clarifies the obligations and safeguards for airlines and crew members in relation to BA tests, taking into account the practicality and feasibility of additional tests while prioritizing safety measures.
Picture Source :
