Moneycontrol Presented by Motilal Oswal
Days hours minutes
Nerolac
Presented by :

Co-Presenting Sponsor :

Capital Trade

Powered by :

Godrej Properties

Associate Sponsors :

Aegon Life
LIC Housing Finance
Indiabulls
DHFL

Co-Presenting Sponsor

Capital Trade

Associate Sponsors

  • Indiabulls
  • Aegon Life
  • LIC Housing Finance
  • DHFL
you are here: HomeNewsBusiness
Jan 10, 2018 08:36 PM IST | Source: PTI

IndiGo against HC order upholding DIAL decision to shift to T2

Interglobe Aviation Limited, which operates the airline, mentioned the appeal before a bench of Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice C Hari Shankar which listed it for hearing on January 15.

 
 
live
  • bselive
  • nselive
Volume
Todays L/H
More

No-frills airline IndiGo today moved the Delhi High Court against its single judge's order upholding the decision of IGI airport operator DIAL to partially shift its operations from Terminal 1 to Terminal 2.

Interglobe Aviation Limited, which operates the airline, mentioned the appeal before a bench of Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice C Hari Shankar which listed it for hearing on January 15.

The airline has challenged the single judge's December 20, 2017 ruling that there was no illegality in the decision of the Delhi International Airport Limited (DIAL) to partially shift operations of IndiGo, along with that of SpiceJet and GoAir, from Terminal-1 (T-1) to Terminal-2 (T-2) of the Indira Gandhi International (IGI) Airport here.

DIAL on October 21 last year had asked the three airlines to shift their flights to and from Delhi to Mumbai, Kolkata and Bengaluru, to T-2 from January 4, 2018.

All other flights of the airlines shall continue to operate from T-1, the airport operator had said.

While upholding DIAL's decision, the single judge had given the airlines time till February 15 to partially shift their operations.

In its appeal, Indigo has claimed that DIAL had not appropriately considered the inconvenience which would be caused to passengers while arriving at its decision.

The airline has also contended that DIAL had not taken into account its proposal to shift the other two airlines to T-2 and to let it remain in T-1.

In the proceedings before the single judge, the airline had challenged DIAL's decision on the ground that partial shifting of its operations would inconvenience passengers, especially those on hopping flights emanating or ending at those sectors, as T-1 and T-2 are not connected.

Defending its decision, DIAL had said that T-1 had already exceeded its capacity and if airline operations were not shifted partially, it would lead to overcrowding.
Sections
Follow us on
Available On