Utt HC | Prescribing frequency of flights and their economic viability, purely a matter of economic policy, not to be considered under Article 226

Uttaranchal High Court: A Division Bench of Ramesh Ranganathan, CJ and N.S. Dhanik, J. dismissed a petition being wholly misconceived, as the directions sought for were not within the realm of the Court.

In the present matter the petitioner required appropriate actions to be taken by the Court to interconnect Pantnagar Airport, Jolly Grant Airport and Indira Gandhi International Airport; and ensure proper air transport between them and the respondents to gear up the working of the proposed unserved airports in Uttarakhand, i.e. Chinyalisaur, Gaucher, Haridwar, Pithoragarh (Naini-Saini) & Uttarkashi.

The High Court opined that, “where an Airport should be established, how many flights should be run every day at these Airports, whether or not the Airport at Pantnagar should be connected with the Airports at Dehradun and Delhi and if so, in what manner; and whether or not such inter-connectivity of Airports are economically viable, are all matters of policy which lie exclusively in the executive realm”. Further, it held that “it would not undertake the exercise of monitoring establishment or operation of Airports in different parts of the State, or to prescribe the frequency of flights to and from these Airports, in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India”.[Pankaj Miglani v. Union of India, 2019 SCC OnLine Utt 242, Order dated 03-04-2019]

Join the discussion

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.