Latest news with #PublicInterestLitigations
The Hindu
2 days ago
- The Hindu
Reform cannot wait, aviation safety is at stake
The Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau's preliminary report on the Air India Boeing 787 air crash in Ahmedabad, on June 12, 2025, was released last week, on July 12. The report remains inconclusive, with critical uncertainties on whether pilot action was inadvertent or deliberate. I would argue that the lack of faith among pilots and those who track aviation like myself about the robustness of the investigation and its findings — whether correct or not — emanate from a deep lack of trust in the entire aviation system in India that often penalises its personnel, excessively, rather than holding airlines and regulators to equal scrutiny. I would like to use this opportunity to, once again, call for a complete reform in the aviation sector. A genuine 'culture of safety' must permeate every layer of the aviation system. This includes fair employment terms and, crucially, access to mental health care without punitive consequences resulting in the automatic grounding of and loss of income for air crew at a time when the current system, ironically, jeopardises their psychological well-being. Also read | The preliminary report on the AI 171 crash is notably brief and lacking in technical transparency, says aviation expert The complex web of aviation safety is highly technical, but years of study with aviation professionals have helped me understand its intricate technicalities. The aviation system broadly involves multiple elements: the aircraft itself (design, airworthiness, and maintenance) and the people who operate it (maintenance engineers, technicians, pilots and cabin crew). These are, broadly, the responsibility of the airline operator, while airport infrastructure, air traffic control systems and its personnel are the responsibility of the Airports Authority of India (AAI) and/or the aerodrome operator. The Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) has regulatory control over airlines, the AAI and the airport operators. The Ministry of Civil Aviation (MoCA) has supervisory control over the DGCA and the AAI. Aviation accidents never result from a single failure but stem from multiple failures that align together, as in the Swiss cheese model. Each safety layer has flaws (holes); when these holes align across layers, an accident occurs. The fight for safety through courts I have filed over 15 Public Interest Litigations (PIL) in the various High Courts and the Supreme Court of India after studying the links between aviation technicalities, regulations and data. I approached the judiciary because aviation authorities in charge of safety, became the violators. No one is held accountable for air crashes or the lives lost, in turn emboldening violations despite knowing that existing/known safety breaches can cause deaths. Court interventions have saved lives, as seen in the case of the crash in 2018 at Ghatkopar, Mumbai, when a small plane fell into a building site. In 2016, the Bombay High Court had issued a stay that halted construction near Mumbai airport. Had it not been issued, a 13-storey building would have stood in its place at the site.. Mumbai's airspace is among the most hazardous globally — there are over 5,000 vertical obstructions within a four-kilometre radius and in violation of the Inner Horizontal Surface (IHS) criteria. Despite a pending PIL, obstacles in the no-obstacle approach and take-off funnel rose from 125 in 2010 to over 1,000 in 2025, highlighting regulatory opacity and potential misrepresentation by the DGCA, the AAI, airport operators, and the MoCA before the Bombay High Court. Had the High Court been informed about this accurately, the spread of these obstacles could have been stopped. Regulatory loopholes that pose a threat Until 2008, airspace around airports was strictly regulated. The Aircraft Act and Statutory Order 988 of 1988 enabled the strict control of construction of buildings around airports. In 2008, a non-statutory committee was formed, effectively bypassing the legal safeguards that once ensured obstacle-free zones. It approved 25 buildings in prime locations in Mumbai using an aeronautical study conducted by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), which ought not to have been a part of a move to recommend construction which was illegal and of extra height. By the time ICAO distanced itself from the misuse of aeronautical studies, the AAI had begun conducting its own assessments which were less stringent. The appellate committee granted permission for extra height recklessly. Around the year 2015, these obstacles, in addition to being physical barriers to safe flight movements, began interfering with radar and communication signals. The appellate committee also came out with guidelines and capped the maximum height at 90 metres in the Inner Horizontal Surface (IHS) and recorded that 'any further deterioration in obstacle profile in and around airport is likely to aggravate the situation'. Despite this, the appellate committee allowed obstacles to come up with impunity jeopardising safe flight operations. Ironically, the appellate committee that had permitted the safety violations was given statutory recognition through the 2015 Rules — despite these rules not allowing height relaxation. The panel comprised officials entrusted with aviation safety and included a Joint Secretary in the Ministry of Civil Aviation, a Joint Director General in the DGCA, and a Member (Air Navigation Services) in the AAI. Thus, any complaint about obstacles is essentially judged by the very entities that sanctioned them. Under pressure after a PIL on obstacles, the MoCA amended the 2015 Rules to limit the no objection certificate (NOC) validity to 12 years — an admission of the issue but an evasion of responsibility. How does the MoCA justify approving 100-floor buildings when it knows that 45 floors would become illegal in 12 years? This raises critical questions. What are the mechanisms that exist to demolish floors that become illegal after the expiry of the NOC? What began in Mumbai has now spread across India. Even greenfield airport projects such as Navi Mumbai (Maharashtra) and Noida (Uttar Pradesh) have obstacles sprouting around them. Navi Mumbai Airport will start operations with a 'displaced threshold' — which means aircraft will be unable to use the full runway because of the obstacles and increasing risks to air safety, thereby turning the airport into a monument of corruption and indifference by aviation authorities. There is widespread systemic breakdown. First, aircraft design and airworthiness. The DGCA's limited internal technical capability forces it to be over reliant on foreign regulators such as the Federal Aviation Administration (U.S.) and the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), as seen during the engine failure issue (Pratt & Whitney) that IndiGo experienced in 2017-18. Second, aircraft maintenance standards. Aircraft Maintenance Engineers (AMEs) work under severe stress without duty time limits. The DGCA has allowed airlines to delegate AME tasks to less-qualified, lower-paid 'technicians' — a cost-cutting move that undermines safety. Duty-time limitations recommended for AMEs by the court of inquiry following the crash in Mangaluru (May 2010) remain unimplemented. Third, the flight crew. Airlines violate Flight Time Duty Limitations for pilots, and the DGCA grants exemptions which allow pilots who are fatigued to operate. The DGCA's unique NOC requirement restricts pilot mobility across airlines, increasing stress and enabling airlines to coerce pilots into breaching regulations. Cabin crew, whose primary role is passenger safety, are often dismissed as mere hospitality workers, which is a dangerously reductive view. Fourth, airline operations. Airlines prioritise the goal of profit, adopting policies that consistently undermine safety. Despite the DGCA suspending personnel for safety violations, airline officials often retain high positions, controlling operations. DGCA-appointed officers in airlines, who are expected to enforce compliance, often have no real authority, making accountability toothless. Fifth, air traffic management. The AAI faces a severe shortage of Air Traffic Controller Officers (ATCO) — an issue that has been flagged even by parliamentary committees. The provision to give licences to ATCO has not yet been implemented. Duty-time limitations for ATCOs — recommended by the Mangalore Court of Inquiry — remain unimplemented. Sixth, silencing whistle-blowers. Whistle-blowers are often demoted, transferred, or terminated — a trend that has discouraged the reporting of critical safety issues in the AAI and airlines. When aerodromes operate in violation of safety standards, any other shortcomings in any of the other components become potentially fatal – as seen in Ghatkopar (2018), Kozhikode (2020), and now Ahmedabad (2025). Non-compliance in aviation stems from a lack of safety culture, not ignorance. Crashes are not mere 'accidents' — they are the inevitable result of years of systemic neglect and policy violations. Without immediate systemic improvements, the next disaster will not wait for five years, but is just around the corner. The role of the judiciary is important The judiciary, which has always been the silver lining in India's constitutional set-up, has been inactive on aviation issues, relying on the state's technical expertise on the subject. It must address the deterioration in the aviation sector and hold authorities accountable. Additionally, the judiciary's conservative approach to valuing human life needs to change. In India, human life is undervalued, for example, as seen in railway accidents and motor vehicle deaths — a few lakhs of rupees. When this is the worth of a human life, safety upgrades that cost crores of rupees become easier for stakeholders to ignore. Immediate and comprehensive reform is needed. The aviation system requires accountability, oversight and a safety-over-profit commitment. Reform cannot wait. Lives are at stake. Yeshwanth Shenoy is the President, Kerala High Court Advocates Association, and has been fighting for aviation safety for over a decade
Indian Express
5 days ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
Decode Politics: Why a court order has upset Congress govt's applecart in Himachal
In an unusual expression of helplessness Thursday, Himachal Pradesh Chief Minister Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu said the state High Court 'does not listen to my government' and said he may approach the Supreme Court. Sukhu's complaint was regarding the felling of fruit-laden trees across approximately 3,000 bighas — about 243 hectares — of 'encroached' forest land. On July 2, the High Court had directed state-wide removal of all apple trees and orchards that had come up on forest land. The Himachal government tried arguing that the court order put at risk livelihoods, especially in a state that relies heavily on fruit production. Himachal Pradesh's forest cover spans from the Shivalik foothills to the Pir Panjal ranges, totalling 37,033 sq km. As per an affidavit submitted to the National Green Tribunal (NGT) in February 2025 Himachal's Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, the IFS officer Sameer Rastogi, there were 18,374 cases of encroachment on 5,689 hectares of forest land across the state. The affidavit, which did not talk about the nature of the encroachments, said 9,903 – or nearly half – of the encroachments had been removed, reclaiming 3,097 hectares. However, action against removal of encroachments has been sporadic at best, and runs into resistance by local communities which have been profiting by using the land to cultivate fruit. The ongoing clearing of encroached land stems from two complaints, filed back in 2014 and 2015 and later converted into Public Interest Litigations (PILs). On July 2, a Division Bench of Justices Vivek Singh Thakur and Bipin C Negi ruled that 'fruit-bearing trees are not forest species' and directed the Forest Department to plant native forest species like deodar, chir, and kail after clearing the encroached areas. The Division Bench further said, 'The needful be done at a war footing. The ongoing monsoon is a conducive period to plant forest species. The cost of removal — cutting, removal of stumps and plantation of forest species — can be recovered from the encroachers.' Many of the felled trees were three to four decades old, farmers have pointed out, with the yields now destroyed just before harvesting. 'These trees were at their peak bearing stage. It takes 7 to 10 years for a new orchard to reach this maturity,' says a Chaithla-based orchardist, who saw trees over two bighas flattened. Noted horticulturist Deepak Singha, who has hailed the High Court decision to evict the encroached forest land, cautioned that small farmers could bear the brunt of the drive. 'Big farmers who have encroached hundreds of bighas of forest land have become rich, but the small apple growers live hand to mouth. The government should come up with a policy for these growers,' Singha said. Environment activist Guman Singh said he was 'not in favour of cutting down any kind of tree, be it forest species or fruit species'. Himachal's economy rests on apple farming to a large extent, with the fruit accounting for 49% of the total area under fruit crops. Apples make up 85% of the state's fruit economy, which is valued at around Rs 4,000 crore. With harvest season only weeks away, the tree-felling and the damage to their yields have left apple farmers distressed. According to state government data, available in an affidavit submitted to the High Court, '3,659 apple and other fruit-bearing trees had been felled on encroached forest land till July 15'. This included land in Chaithla (2,456 trees felled), Rohru (713) and Kotgarh (490) – the three towns which constitute the main region for apple cultivation in Himachal. As the Sukhu government tries to assess the overall impact of the drive on production this season, the CPI(M) is mobilising the smaller farmers, who own less than five bighas and whose land is among that cleared, in protest. Rakesh Singha, a senior CPI (M) leader and former MLA from Theog, has led multiple meetings under various farmer fronts. While refraining from commenting directly on the High Court order, the CPI (M) has accused the state government of not having a policy to protect the interests of small fruit growers. BJP MLA from Chopal (Shimla) and party spokesperson Balbir Singh Verma has said Sukhu's claim of going to the Supreme Court is 'merely political'. He pointed out that in January 2025, the High Court had offered the state the option to take possession of the fruit trees growing on encroached land. At the time, the government, through the Advocate General, expressed its inability to do so, claiming that its Forest and Revenue Departments were not in a position to manage or harvest fruit from such land. This, Verma argued, effectively paved the way for court-ordered felling. The BJP leader said the Congress government will have to pay a heavy price. The state is due to see panchayat elections next year.
Indian Express
5 days ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
‘Order was pan-Himachal': HC frowns upon selective clearing of illegal apple orchards
Pulling up the Himachal Pradesh government over its 'selective' clearing of apple orchards on encroached forest land, the high court has asked why drive was not being carried out across the state, as was ordered. A division bench of Justices Vivek Singh Thakur and Bipin Singh Negi directed the state government to clarify 'why the eviction operations were being carried out only in select regions such as Chaithla village, Rohru and Kotgarh, while similar action was conspicuously absent in other parts of the state'. The bench issued the directions Tuesday. A copy of the order was made available Wednesday. Hearing a set of Public Interest Litigations (PILs) filed on rampant encroachment on forest land across the state, particularly for commercial horticultural use, the bench expressed concern over the absence of a 'pan-Himachal' approach, despite earlier judicial orders and clear directions from the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (HoFF) to initiate uniform eviction of illegal orchards. Meanwhile, in compliance with previous orders, the Forest Department, through the office of Advocate General, submitted a status report stating that 'as many as 3,659 apple and other fruit-bearing trees had been felled on encroached forest land till July 15. Of these, 2,456 trees were aggregated from the encroached forest land in Chaithla village, 713 trees were removed from the Rohru Forest Division and 490 trees from Kotgarh. The bench, however, observed, 'There is no update on similar action being taken in other forest divisions, raising concerns over partial implementation of the eviction order.' The court again emphasised that 'encroachments and their removal cannot be limited to a few regions, and must be enforced uniformly' across Himachal. 'It has again been clarified, as also in earlier orders, that encroachment from government/forest land, including the removal of fruit-bearing trees, has to be undertaken pan-Himachal Pradesh and not limited only to the areas referred to in the instructions,' the bench said. 'It appears the action for removal of encroachment/orchards from the forest land is being undertaken only in the Rohru and the Kotgarh Forest Divisions, including Chaithla village, but in these instructions there is no information with respect to removal of encroachment/orchards in other areas of the State of Himachal,' it added. The bench granted the state one week to file a comprehensive status report detailing eviction and enforcement action across the state. The matter will next be heard on July 29. Meanwhile, the high court's January 8 judgment, particularly paragraph 35, also came under scrutiny. Amicus Curiae Senior Advocate Jiya Lal Bhardwaj pointed out that 'relevant compliance affidavits have not yet been filed by the authorities'. To this, the court directed that the affidavit(s) in compliance must be submitted before the next hearing, and any pending objections to filings must be resolved. Under paragraph 35 of the January 8 order, instruction was issued to forest/revenue/officials of the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) to not allow any further encroachment by the encroachers. The paragraph also asks to compile a record of fresh encroachments and the status of earlier encroachments. During the hearing, replies from several individuals named in the case — Sohan Lal, Madan Lal, Dinesh Tajta, Kamla Devi, Lila Tajta, Sheela, Daya Chauhan, Mira, Rita, Sanjay, Sandeep, Vikrant, and Raj Kumar — were recorded, while a request for ten days for Mast Ram's reply was granted due to his medical condition. Senior Advocate VS Chauhan, appearing for one of the petitioners, informed the court, 'Sohan Lal, aged 78, is suffering from multiple age-related ailments and sought exemption from personal appearance in future hearings.' The bench accepted the request, exempting him from appearing in court unless specifically directed. Meanwhile, in a separate application, the court allowed an exemption to Mast Ram, who is undergoing cancer treatment, from attending the proceedings on medical grounds. The PILs at the centre of the case have been ongoing since 2014 and 2015, reflecting the long-drawn legal battle over the politically sensitive issue of forest land encroachment, especially for apple cultivation, a key economic driver in many parts of the hill state. Despite multiple orders from the HC, enforcement has often been sporadic, delayed or met with local resistance, given the livelihoods tied to these orchards.
The Hindu
09-07-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
National Lok Adalat in Chamarajanagar courts on July 12
Principal District and Sessions Judge G. Prabhavati said the National Lok Adalat will be held in all courts across Chamarajanagar district on July 12, as per the directions of the State Legal Services Authority. Addressing a press conference in the District Court premises on Tuesday, she said Lok Adalat benches will be set up in the courts of Chamarajanagar, Gundlupet, Yelandur, and Kollegal, with conciliators appointed to settle compromise-suitable cases through mutual agreement. She said the people can make good use of the Lok Adalat at their respective courts. Cases can be resolved through Lok Adalat if parties accept the suggestions given by conciliators. This saves both time and money for litigants and fosters better relationships between parties, she said. Except for Public Interest Litigations (PILs), various types of civil cases – including restoration of conjugal rights, maintenance, child custody, motor vehicle accident claims, industrial disputes, cheque bounce cases, cases under labour laws, electricity theft, illegal stone and sand transportation cases, and other compromise-suitable matters – can be settled in Lok Adalat, she explained. She added that pre-litigation disputes can also be resolved in Lok Adalat through preliminary consultation before being filed in court. The Lok Adalat on July 12 is expected to dispose of more cases than the previous one. In this connection, pre-consultations are underway in every court and District Legal Services Authority. If parties in any pending compromise-suitable case file an application in the respective court for transfer to Lok Adalat, such cases will be referred accordingly, she said. Senior Civil Judge and District Legal Services Authority Member Secretary Eshwar, and Bar Association General Secretary Rangaswamy were present.
India Gazette
09-07-2025
- Politics
- India Gazette
Alipore court sends four accused in Kolkata Law College gangrape case to 14-day judicial custody
Kolkata (West Bengal) [India], July 9 (ANI): The Alipore Court on Tuesday sent all four accused in the South Kolkata Law College gangrape case to 14 days of judicial custody. The incident took place on June 25, when a student was allegedly gangraped inside the South Calcutta Law College in the Kasba area of Kolkata. Five days later, on June 30, Kolkata Police said that the three main accused in the case were arrested in less than 12 hours. Initially, the Alipore Court had sent the three primary accused -- Monojit, Pramit, and Zaib -- to police custody till July 8, while the fourth accused, security guard Pinaki, was remanded to custody till July 4. Earlier, the Kolkata High Court sought a response from the West Bengal Government on three Public Interest Litigations (PILs) regarding the alleged gangrape at the South Calcutta Law College in the Kasba area. The Court also questioned why the governing body of the college was not included in the case. Kolkata Police said on Wednesday that the Detective Department of the police force will take over the investigation of the Kolkata alleged gang-rape case. Speaking to ANI, West Bengal Leader of Opposition and BJP leader Suvendu Adhikari alleged that Trinamool Congress (TMC) workers employed as permanent or casual staff in colleges have 'polluted' the state's education system. 'All of these are former TMC workers and are now employed as permanent or casual staff in colleges. They have polluted the state's education system. They are involved in rape, molestation, extortion of money, controlling admission, college festivals, college infrastructure, and even managing the money sent by the centre. All recruitments are illegal. Groups C and D of the college's University are affiliated with the Governing body. The College Service Commission controls only the professors and the Principal. Taking advantage of it, the TMC workers are recruited as casuals, on paper, 280 days of continuous job is shown, after which they are regularised,' he said. Meanwhile, the BJP's fact-finding team investigating the case submitted its report to party national president JP Nadda on Tuesday. The team included former Union Ministers Satpal Singh and Meenakshi Lekhi, Rajya Sabha MP Manan Kumar Mishra, and Lok Sabha MP Biplab Kumar Deb. Reacting to the report, Nadda said that this report exposes the 'lawlessness' in West Bengal. 'This report exposes the utter state of lawlessness in West Bengal and the state government's alarming insensitivity towards women's safety. From Sandeshkhali to RG Kar Hospital and now this, the pattern remains the same with silence, inaction and protection for the accused,' Union Minister JP Nadda said on X. (ANI)
