$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 23^rd March, 2023 + W.P.(C) 3200/2023 SHANKAR SHYAMNAVAL MISHRA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Akshat Bajpai, Mrs. Ishanee Sharma, Mr. Shobhit Trehan and Ms. Renuka Parmanand, Advocates (M:

7080975620).

versus UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF CIVIL AVIATION & ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Ashish Jain, CGSC with Mr.

Gaurav Kumar, Ms. Ankita Kedia, Advocates and Mr. Chetanya Puri, GP (M: 9811125100).

CORAM:

JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The Petitioner-Shankar Shyamnaval Mishra has filed the present writ petition seeking directions for Constitution of the Appellate Committee in a time bound manner, by the Respondent No. 2- Director General of Civil Aviation (“DGCA”) under Para 8.5, Section 3-Air Transport, Series M, Part VI of the Civil Aviation Requirement for Handing of Unruly Passengers (“CARHUP”) issued on 8th September 2017.

3. The brief background of this petition is that an incident took place on 26^th November 2022 in Air India flight AI-120, where a passenger seated in the next row accused the Petitioner of misconduct and inappropriate Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 3200/2023 Page 1 of 6 behaviour in an inebriated state. The complaint made by the said passenger was recorded on the Airsewa Grievance Portal on 20th December 2022, and the Internal Inquiry Committee (“Committee”) was constituted in the Petitioner’s complaint on 24^th December 2022 under Para 6 of CARHUP. The said Committee conducted enquiries on 4^th January 2023, 10^th January 2023, 12^th January 2023 and 16^th January 2023 and after issuing a show cause notice dated 23^rd December 2022 and recording the evidence/statements of the complainant and the Petitioner, came to the following conclusion on 18^th January 2023:-

“In view of the above discussion, the Committee reaches to an irresistible conclusion that the allegations made against the respondent-passenger in the "proforma for reporting of unruly/disruptive passenger" [copy Annexure Al] stand established and accordingly the Committee holds that the respondent- passenger Shri Shankar Shyamnaval Mishra is squarely covered under the definition of "unruly passenger" as defined in paragraph 3.1 of the CAR. The respondent- passenger Shri Shankar Shyamnaval Mishra is accordingly put in "NO Fly List". Keeping in view all the facts and circumstances discussed above, he is banned from flying for a period of 4 months (four months) as provided in Level 2 of paragraph 8.1 of the CAR from the date of this report We may again made it very clear that the above findings recorded by this Committee are limited to the present inquiry proceedings only and shall not be taken as expression of any opinion on the merits of the criminal case or any other independent proceedings.

Let a copy of this Report be also sent to the respondent-passenger Shri Shankar Shyamnaval Mishra and his counsel Shri Akshat Bajpai, Advocate Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 3200/2023 Page 2 of 6 through email as provided under paragraph 8.4 of the CAR.”

4. As can be seen from the above order passed by the Committee, the Petitioner has been held guilty of having been a “unruly passenger” in terms of para 3.1 of CARHUP. He has been put on the “NO fly list” for a period of four months as provided in Level 2 of para 8.1 of CARHUP.

5. The said Report/order dated 18^th January 2023, is appealable to the Appellate Committee formed under para 8.5 of the CARHUP. Para 8.1 and

8.5 of CARHUP is relevant and is set out below:-

“8.1 For any person, who is placed in the No-Fly List, other airlines shall have the option to ban him from taking flights to/from/within India for a duration as indicated below:

a) Level 1 upto three months b) Level 2 upto six months c) Level 3 for a minimum period of 2 years or more without limit d) Persons covered under Para 7 Barred till such time that the p