SC allows Air India to fly for 10 days with middle seats occupied in non-scheduled flights

‘Is the virus supposed to know that it is in the aircraft and not supposed to infect?’ SC asks as it tells Air India to start keeping middle seats vacant after 10 days.

Representational image | Commons

New Delhi: The Supreme Court Monday questioned the central government and the Air India for not keeping the middle-row seats vacant on its non-scheduled international flights or rescue flights, as a measure to enforce social-distancing norms in aircraft to curb the spread of the novel coronavirus.

Both the Centre and the national carrier argued that keeping the middle-row seats empty will not serve the purpose to arrest the transmission of virus.

“How can you say it will not have any effect? Is the virus supposed to know that it is in the aircraft and not supposed to infect? The transmission will be there, if you are sitting next to each other,” said a bench led by Chief Justice of India S.A. Bobde. The court allowed Air India to operate for the next 10 days with full bookings.

Thereafter, it said, the national carrier will have to follow the Bombay High Court’s order directing it to follow the Directorate General of Civil Aviation’s 23 March circular that said the middle-row seats will have to be kept vacant. The top court’s direction came on the Centre and Air India’s appeal against the 22 May order of the Bombay High Court.

On behalf of the Centre and the Air India, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said testing and quarantine are the best ways, and not keeping a middle-row seat empty, to mitigate the effects of the virus. He told the court a decision to book the seats was taken after health and aviation experts gave an opinion on it. Mehta also said the airline did not have enough aircraft for rescue flights.

“We are not inclined to interfere with the interim order passed by High Court. However, the solicitor general has pointed out that immense difficulty has arisen for passengers stranded on foreign soil at airports as they have been issued valid travel tickets. According to him this has resulted in a lot of anxiety and difficulties arising from want of proper health care. Moreover, travel plans of families have got disrupted because many have booked centre-row seats. The Air India should be allowed to operate non-scheduled flights with the centre seat bookings for 10 days. However, after that it will start operations in accordance with the Bombay High Court order,” the bench said in its order.

The court said the HC shall pass an effective interim order after hearing all parties concerned, and arrive at a prima facie finding about the safety of passengers — whether travelling on non-scheduled or scheduled flights.

“It is necessary to consider the danger of transmission of COVID virus,” the CJI said. The DGCA, it added, is free to alter any norms it may consider fit, even as the matter is pending before the court.

It did not go down well with the bench when Mehta objected to the court order. “You should be worried about the health of the citizens, not about the health of commercial airlines,” it said.

Rescue flights follow SOP issued by MHA: Centre

On Friday, the Bombay High Court had asked Air India to respond to a pilot’s plea claiming the airline violated DGCA guidelines that made it compulsory to keep a seat vacant between two passengers.

The petitioner had said Air India “grossly violated” the circular.

In its counter, Air India, through advocate Abhinav Chandrachud, denied the charge. It claimed that the 23 March circular was not applicable to non-scheduled, commercial, international flights but only scheduled and domestic ones.

The court was also informed that a fresh DGCA order of 22 May had superseded the 23 March circular, and the former had not expressed provision for middle seats of flights to be kept vacant. But the High Court took the view that Air India was bound by the 23 March circular as the latest one is to be followed for domestic flights.

Mehta told the top court the 23 March order was not applicable to non-scheduled international flights as it was issued before the lockdown period and much prior to the beginning of rescue flights. He said it was the standard operating procedures issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) that were valid for flights operating internationally to bring back stranded Indians, adding the SOP did not prevent the airline from booking centre-row seats.

Mehta read out the minutes of a 4 May meeting between medical and aviation experts to cite the reason why bookings were done. “Not booking middle seats serves no purpose. Best practice is testing and quarantine,” he submitted, offering to place the minutes on record.

Also, he said the government had made it mandatory for passengers returning on rescue flights to stay in quarantine for 14 days – seven days in an institution and the rest at home. The 22 May order, Mehta reiterated, was for a domestic flight scheduled to start on Monday.

The CJI then asked Mehta if rules were different for domestic and international flights. On being told they were the same, the CJI remarked: “There should be a difference. It’s common sense that maintaining social distancing is important to eliminate.”

Mehta then said the airline did not have enough aircraft to bring back people. The CJI, however, responded: “No one has stopped you from bringing them back. Fact of the matter is that the high court has asked you to keep the centre seat vacant.”

The court went on to dictate its order after Mehta said Air India had booked all seats till 16 June. It noted the HC is due to hear the matter again on 2 June.