Several petitions had been filed before the High Court challenging Air India's decision to terminate contracts of commanders and co-pilots following Covid-19 pandemic. The Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed a batch of petitions by former commanders and co-pilots of Air India challenging their termination from services due to the stress in the civil aviation sector on account of Covid-19 pandemic [Naresh Kumar Beri & Ors v Union of India & Ors]. Single-Judge Justice Yashwant Varma dismissed the pleas noting that since Air India Limited (AIL) has ceased to be a government company on its disinvestment, writ petitions against the carrier would no longer be maintainable. While holding thus, the court agreed with the view recently taken by the Bombay High Court and Karnataka High Court. “The Court also finds merit in the objection which was addressed on behalf of the respondents who had contended that since AIL had ceased to be a government company by virtue of the exercise of privatization noted above, the writ petition itself would cease to be maintainable,” Justice Varma said. Several commanders and co-pilots who were hired by the Air India on contractual terms after their superannuation had moved the court challenging two orders of the airlines dated April 2, 2020 and August 7, 2020.
While the first order stated that considering the outbreak of the pandemic, their engagement is being put under temporary suspension, the August order said that in view of the prevailing scenario in the aviation sector, the petitioner’s contractual agreements are being discontinued.
As the pleas came up for hearing, a preliminary objection was raised to their maintainability by Air India. It was argued that due to its privatisation, writ petition against it is not maintainable.
It was also argued that since the engagement of the petitioners was governed by a mere contract of service, a writ petition either for its enforcement or alleged violation of its terms would not be maintainable. The Court agreed with the submissions and held that a non-statutory contract of service is not enforceable under Article 226 of the Constitution. “The Court reiterates the legal position by holding that merely because the contract of service has been entered into with a body which may be an instrumentality of the State or one which performs a public function would not be determinative of the question.” The judge added that ultimately the question of maintainability of a writ petition would have to be judged on the anvil of whether the contract is statutory or not. “Accordingly and for all the aforesaid reasons, the preliminary objections are upheld. The writ petitions shall consequently stand dismissed. The present order, however, shall not deprive the petitioners of the right to assail the action of AIL in accordance with law, if so chosen and advised,” the Court ordered. Advocates Lalit Bhardwaj and Jatin Anand Dwivedi appeared for the petitioners. Advocates Anajan Gosain, Shalini Nair, Ritika Khanagwal, Dipika Sharma appeared for the Union of India. Air India was represented through Senior Advocate Rajiv Nayar along with advocates Manzira, Akansha Das, Amit Mishra, Sanjeet Ranjan, Azeem Samuel and Anandita Barman.
