The Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) informed the Delhi High Court that all relaxations and variations granted to airlines from the new pilot fatigue management rules will end within six months. The regulator said it is working towards full implementation of the 2024 Civil Aviation Requirement on Flight Duty Time Limitation to ensure pilot safety and compliance across the industry.
Appearing before Justice Amit Sharma on a contempt plea filed by pilot unions, the DGCA clarified that exemptions given to airlines were temporary, regularly reviewed and granted without any commercial considerations. The regulator stressed that these relaxations were never meant to dilute safety norms but to allow airlines time to adjust to the revised framework.
The DGCA told the court that all major airlines, including IndiGo and Air India, have been instructed to prepare for full compliance with the revised fatigue rules. Counsel for the DGCA stated that six months is the outer limit and airlines have been asked to expedite implementation of the Flight Duty Time Limitation norms.
The petitions before the court were filed by the Federation of Indian Pilots and the Indian Pilots Guild, who alleged that the DGCA violated earlier undertakings by allowing airlines to dilute rest and duty standards. The unions argued that such relaxations undermine the very objective of reducing pilot fatigue and ensuring flight safety.
The hearing comes in the backdrop of IndiGo’s recent operational crisis, which led to widespread cancellations and delays across major airports. The airline attributed the disruption to a mix of pilot shortages, enforcement of new fatigue rules, technical advisories and an aggressive winter schedule, which together exposed the absence of adequate staffing buffers.
Earlier this year, the DGCA had told the High Court that the new fatigue norms would be implemented in two phases. While most provisions, including increased weekly rest for pilots, were scheduled to take effect from July, the remaining clauses were deferred, prompting the court to closely monitor the regulator’s commitment to enforcing the full framework within a defined timeline.
