Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
7 judgments · newest first · showing 1–7
The State of Jharkhand filed an FIR alleging that Dr. Nishkant Dubey and others forcibly entered the Air Traffic Control (ATC) room at Deoghar Airport, exerted pressure on officials, and caused an unsafe take‑off, invoking Sections 336, 447 and 448 of the IPC and Sections 10 and 11A of the Aircraft …
The Supreme Court heard a batch of public interest writ petitions filed by passenger groups, travel agents and others seeking full refunds of air‑fares for tickets cancelled due to the COVID‑19 lockdown and the ban on domestic and international flights. The Ministry of Civil Aviation had issued an …
The appellant insurer denied a claim for the death of a passenger who was on a motorised glider sightseeing flight, arguing that the glider was not a standard aircraft and the passenger was not a fare‑paying traveller in a regular airline or charter. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal …
A news report of a security breach at Sanganer Airport led the Rajasthan High Court to take suo moto cognizance and register a public interest writ under Art. 226. While the case was pending, the Bureau of Civil Aviation Security (BCAS) issued a circular exempting certain VVIPs from pre‑embarkation …
The appellant, a ground handling service provider, had been granted a five‑year security clearance in 2007 but it was withdrawn in 2008 on grounds of national security. The appellant challenged the withdrawal, seeking a post‑decisional hearing and disclosure of the material relied upon, but the High …
The Joint Action Committees of the Airlines Pilots Association of India challenged a circular issued by the Director General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) that kept the Civil Aviation Requirements (CAR) 2007 in abeyance and revived Aeronautical Information Circular (AIC) 28/92. The appellants argued that …
The Airports Authority of India appealed a Gauhati High Court order that awarded compensation for cutting trees on its land using a multiplier of 18 years' yield. The appellant argued that the multiplier violated the Supreme Court’s decision in State of Haryana v. Gurcharan Singh, which limits the …
