The Supreme Court on Monday declined an urgent listing of an application seeking judicial intervention against the sharp escalation in domestic airfares ahead of the Diwali festive season, with the petitioner alleging that ticket prices on certain routes had surged by as much as 700 per cent.
The application was mentioned before a three-judge Bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh. Appearing for the applicant, advocate Abhinav submitted that airfares had witnessed an unprecedented increase and argued that air travel constitutes an essential service. He contended that such steep escalation violated Article 14 of the Constitution.
Responding to the submission, Justice Vikram Nath remarked, “Don’t travel by air. Next case,” before declining to entertain the request for urgent listing.
The application has been moved by S. Laxminarayanan in his pending public interest litigation challenging algorithm-driven dynamic pricing by airlines, unpredictable fare fluctuations and additional charges imposed on passengers.
Filed on October 30, the interlocutory application seeks interim directions requiring the Centre and aviation regulators to introduce temporary limits on domestic economy-class fares during the ongoing festive season and the forthcoming year-end travel period. It also seeks restoration of the free checked-in baggage allowance from 15 kg to 25 kg.
The petitioner has contended that airfares on several prominent domestic routes have climbed between two and seven times their usual levels during the festive rush.
Citing media reports, the application pointed out that a Delhi-Kolkata ticket, ordinarily priced between ₹10,000 and ₹11,000, had reportedly touched ₹78,694 for travel on November 6.
It also highlighted substantial differences in fares for flights operating on identical routes on the same day. According to the application, a Bengaluru-Delhi flight scheduled for 5 am on November 6 was priced at approximately ₹15,901, while a flight departing at 3:45 pm on the same route was available for ₹40,506.
Similarly, the plea cited an increase in Mumbai-Delhi fares from ₹11,531 to ₹60,577 and Delhi-Mumbai fares from ₹5,223 to ₹26,793.
The applicant has disputed the justification offered by airlines that rising aviation turbine fuel (ATF) prices account for the steep increase in ticket costs.
It argued that flights operating on the same route and on the same day consume broadly comparable quantities of fuel, making it difficult to attribute substantial differences in ticket prices solely to fuel costs.
According to the plea, while an increase in operational expenses may warrant a reasonable revision in fares, it cannot justify prices reaching several times their ordinary levels.
The petitioner has further argued that a pricing mechanism driven predominantly by passenger demand enables airlines to take advantage of travellers during festivals and other periods of heightened demand.
The development comes a day after the Centre notified the Bharatiya Vayuyan Niyam, 2026, following proceedings in the pending PIL before the Supreme Court. The new rules are scheduled to come into force on January 1, 2027.
The Rules empower the Central Government to issue directions concerning airfares where intervention is considered necessary in extraordinary circumstances and in the public interest.
Rule 192 requires scheduled airlines to determine their tariffs by taking into account factors including operational costs and to furnish relevant tariff information to the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA).
The Supreme Court had earlier expressed concern over unpredictable increases in airfares during periods of high demand. In January 2026, the Court had indicated its willingness to intervene, describing the steep fare escalation witnessed during major festivals as exploitation of passengers.
During subsequent proceedings, the Bench had also emphasised the need for rationalisation of airline pricing and urged the Centre to consider measures that could provide relief to passengers.
Apart from seeking a mechanism to regulate festive-season airfares, the application has questioned the reduction in the free checked-in baggage allowance for domestic economy-class passengers from 25 kg to 15 kg.
It contends that passengers travelling during festivals are often required to carry gifts and household belongings and are consequently burdened with additional baggage charges over and above already inflated ticket prices.
The petitioner has argued that confirmed railway reservations for festive dates are frequently exhausted well in advance, leaving passengers with limited alternatives, particularly when travel becomes necessary due to medical emergencies, bereavement or employment-related exigencies.
Drawing comparisons with other essential services, the application referred to the cap on railway flexi fares, price controls on essential medicines and regulated electricity tariffs to argue that airline pricing should not remain beyond meaningful regulatory oversight.
It has also invoked Rule 135 of the Aircraft Rules, 1937, which continues to operate under the savings provision of the Bharatiya Vayuyan Adhiniyam, 2024, arguing that the aviation regulator possesses powers to address excessive or predatory pricing.
The petitioner has alleged that the failure of the Centre and the DGCA to exercise their regulatory powers despite recurring festive-season fare surges raises concerns under Articles 14, 19(1)(d) and 21 of the Constitution.
The pending PIL, titled S. Laxminarayanan v. Union of India, is scheduled to be taken up by the Supreme Court on November 16, 2026.
The post Don’t travel by air: Supreme Court declines urgent hearing on plea seeking cap on diwali airfares appeared first on India Legal.