The Delhi High Court on Friday questioned the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) over the “indefinite” relaxation granted to airlines on implementing new norms governing pilots’ weekly rest and leave.

Issuing notice on a public interest litigation (PIL), a bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia sought an explanation from the aviation regulator on the “rationale” behind its decision to immediately withdraw the new flight-duty norm stating that “no leave shall be substituted by weekly rest”.

The bench directed the DGCA and IndiGo to file their responses to the PIL within two weeks.

On December 5, 2025, the DGCA rolled out an exemption to the Flight Duty Time Limitations (FDTL) to allow IndiGo to deploy more pilots on duty in order to reduce disruptions and normalise operations. IndiGo had cancelled hundreds of flights nationwide in the first week of December last year after failing to adequately prepare for the implementation of the new flight-duty norms for pilots.

Appearing for the DGCA, counsel submitted that the regulator had been monitoring the situation after the FDTL came into effect on November 1, 2025, and that the withdrawal decision was taken following an audit and representations from airlines regarding pilots clubbing the two types of offs. She clarified that even after the December 5 decision, weekly rest for pilots continued to be mandatory and governed by the Civil Aviation Requirements (CAR), while leaves remained a contractual matter between pilots and airlines.

DGCA counsel further told the court that a separate relaxation from night-duty norms, granted through another letter issued on December 5, had been extended to IndiGo only until February 10.

The court, however, questioned why the relaxation on non-substitution of weekly rest and leave was withdrawn without a deadline, while the night-duty exemption was time-bound. “The grievance seems to be that leave and weekly off can't be mixed up, which you have withdrawn because of disruption in one particular airline. If you are issuing two letters on the same day - one is till February 10 but first one is indefinite. This letter is forever. So if your response on the first letter was with regard to disruption and the second letter also was (due to) disruption but you have limited the time up to February 10 (for night duty). Why not for the other one?,” the court said.

“What is the rationale for withdrawal of this? And this applies to all airlines,” the bench asked the DGCA counsel.

At the previous hearing, the court had observed that concerns relating to public safety arising from non-implementation of DGCA regulations aimed at preventing pilot fatigue could not be “brushed aside”.

The petitioners — Sabari Roy Lenka, Aman Monga and Kiran Singh — have alleged that the relaxation from fatigue regulations was illegally granted by the DGCA only to IndiGo and was prima facie malafide.

The plea further alleged that the DGCA, which is required under the International Civil Aviation Organisation to uniformly enforce fatigue regulations, prevent unsafe rostering, ensure staffing adequacy, assess airline preparedness and suspend non-compliant schedules, has consistently failed to do so.

The matter is scheduled to be heard next in April.