Sandeep Sethi argues for IndiGo against shifting operations to Terminal 2

The Delhi High Court yesterday heard the arguments in IndiGo Airlines’ plea challenging DIAL’s (Delhi International Airport Limited) decision to shift part of its operations from Terminal 1D to Terminal 2 of the Delhi airport..The petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges the decision by DIAL whereby one airline (Go Air) was allegedly permitted to shift its entire operations to Terminal 2, while the other two airlines (IndiGo and SpiceJet) were directed to relocate their operations in ‘part’..Appearing for IndiGo, Senior Counsel Sandeep Sethi stated that the decision take by DIAL was irrational and wholly arbitrary. He submitted that,.“The flights landing at terminal 1 cannot take off from terminal 2 because there is a runway in between which cannot be crossed. This will affect operations and will also cause inconvenience to the passengers. The solution is that one terminal be given exclusively to IndiGo and the other one to Go and Spicejet.”.He based the proposal on the fact that IndiGo had around 14.62 million passengers which he said, were far more than the passengers of Go and Spicejet. He argued that their proposal was rejected by DIAL without giving any cogent reasons..Senior Counsel Rajiv Nayyar, briefed by Advocate Saket Sikri, appeared for DIAL. He submitted that they have been extremely fair and reasonable while taking the decision. He said that,.“The expansion of Terminal 1 cannot be held up. To strike fairness and balance we devised certain methods. Arbitrariness would be if we were discriminating against them (IndiGo). We have been fair. Our only mistake was that we gave them (the three airlines) time to reach a consensus. Now we are repenting it.”.The Single Judge Bench of Justice AK Chawla observed that,.“You (DIAL) seem to be in too much of a rush to do things. You waited for the three airlines to reach a consensus. There must be some reason behind it. The Court believes that it must have been done with good intentions and not just for the sake of it. You have to explain reasons behind your decision.”.The Court asked DIAL to submit a copy of the report on which the decision in question was based in a sealed cover for perusal..The matter will be next heard on November 24.