Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Friday, November 1, 2024

Delhi HC Takes Suo Moto Cognizance Of Stubborn Reluctance To Wear Masks Properly: On Flight And Issues Guidelines

Posted in: Civil Laws
Wed, Mar 17, 21, 10:27, 4 Years ago
star star star star star
5 out of 5 with 1 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 3759
Its Own Motion vs Directorate General of Civil Aviation has taken suo-motu cognizance of what it described as an alarming situation on an Air India flight bound towards Delhi from Kolkata on March 5.

It is quite refreshing, rejuvenating and remarkable to learn that the Delhi High Court has just recently on March 8, 2021 in a latest, landmark, laudable and learned judgment titled Court On Its Own Motion vs Directorate General of Civil Aviation & Ors. in WP(C) No. 3184/2021 has taken suo-motu cognizance of what it described as an alarming situation on an Air India flight bound towards Delhi from Kolkata on March 5. It has issued a slew of directions to the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) and commercial airlines in the country with respect to in-flight Covid-19 protocol. In the order passed by Delhi High Court Justice C Hari Shankar, he notes that though all the passengers had worn masks, many passengers had worn the masks below their chin and were exhibiting a stubborn reluctance to wear their masks properly.

To start with, the ball is set rolling by first and foremost pointing out in para 1 by a single Judge Bench of Justice C Hari Shankar of Delhi High Court that:
The Court is constrained to pass the present order because of an alarming situation which was witnessed, by the Court, during the Air India flight from Kolkata to New Delhi on 5th March, 2021.

On a serious note, the Bench then discloses in para 2 that:
It was noticed that, though all the passengers had worn masks, many passengers had worn the masks below their chin and were exhibiting a stubborn reluctance to wear their masks properly. This behaviour was seen not only in the bus transporting the passengers from the airport to the flight but also within the flight itself. It was only on repeated entreaties made (by me) to the offending passengers that they condescended to wear their masks properly. On the cabin crew being questioned in this regard, they stated that they had directed all the passengers to wear masks, but were helpless in case they did not comply.

On a more serious note, the Bench then goes on to put forth in para 3 that:
To the perception of the Court, such a situation, in the present scenario, when the country is seeing a resurgence of COVID-2019 cases, after they had shown signs of ebbing, is completely unconscionable. Passengers in a flight are in a closed air-conditioned environment, and, even if one of the passengers suffers from COVID, the effect on other passengers could be cataclysmic. It is a matter of common knowledge that being within arm's length distance of a COVID carrier, even if he is asymptomatic and is merely speaking, is more than sufficient to transmit the virus.

On a most serious note, the Bench then puts forth in para 4 that:
Attempts were made, by the Court, to trace, from the internet, the latest guidelines of the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), regarding the protocols to be followed by passengers undertaking domestic air travel. Unfortunately, the website of the Directorate General of Civil Aviation does not contain the latest guidelines, issued with regard to in-flight protocol to be maintained by the passengers and the crew. The guidelines available on the website of the DGCA – which, too can be accessed, only after an intrusive navigation through the site, are of 21st May, 2020. The Court has come across two news items, in different editions of the Times of India in August, 2020, specifically stating that the instructions of May, 2020, were subsequently altered, by relaxing them in some respects and making them more stringent in others. Relaxation was permitted by allowing, inter alia, meals to be served in flight, middle seats to be occupied, etc. At the same time, a news item in the e-edition of the Times of India, dated 29th August, 2020, titled India's new flying rules: No mask and SOP violation can land you in 'no-fly' list, contains the following recital:

As per the latest development, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) has now asked airlines to put those passengers on the 'no-fly list' who violate the standard operating procedures (SOPs) or do not wear masks during a flight. This means, you will no longer be allowed to fly if you don't wear masks or comply with the COVID related protocols.

Meanwhile, the government has also allowed airlines to resume in-flight meal services on domestic flights, and serve alcohol and hot meals on international flights, however, those being subject to certain guidelines. Therefore, from now on, passengers who intentionally don't use a face mask, and poses a risk to other passengers, they will be put on 'no-fly list' by flight commander or the cabin crew after assessment. However, passengers will be allowed to remove facemasks if absolutely necessary and that too for legitimate reasons.

For the sake of clarity, the Bench then makes it a point to mention in para 5 that:
This Court does not intend to criticise, in any manner, the efforts made by the Governmental authorities, including the DGCA, in trying to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic situation, which has left everyone befuddled regarding the best possible manner to deal with the crisis. Sensitization of the citizenry has, however, to precede, not succeed, galvanization of the governmental machinery. Having put in place protocols to be followed by the public, in various exigencies, to mitigate the possibility of a COVID resurgence, if such a resurgence - which looms large as an ominous possibility as on date - is to be avoided, these measures would have to be strengthened.

Furthermore, the Bench then also states in para 6 that:
This order merely seeks to achieve this objective, by lending some teeth to the instructions already in place, in the larger public interest.

Most significantly and also most remarkably, what forms the bottom-line of this notable judgment is as stated most elegantly, eloquently and effectively in para 7 that:
The following guidelines are, therefore, issued, for immediate compliance by all airlines as well as by the DGCA:

(i) The DGCA is directed to reflect, forthwith, on its website, prominently, the instructions containing the guidelines and protocols to be followed by passengers and in-flight crew in domestic flights. This shall be reflected on the main website of the DGCA, without requiring the person accessing the site to navigate through various links to reach the instructions. The DGCA will ensure that prominence, to the instructions, or to the weblink through which they can, by a single click, be accessed, is accorded, by displaying them in a distinct and different font, blinking or otherwise, or by any other suitable means.

(ii) All airlines are directed to ensure that, along with the boarding pass, written instructions regarding the protocol to be followed by passengers in flight, including the measures that could be taken against them on failure to follow the protocols, are provided to the passengers. The passengers should also be duly sensitised regarding their responsibilities, to abide by said protocol, both before as well as after boarding the flight. The inflight announcements which, presently, merely require the passengers to wear masks at all times, should be modified to include a cautionary word regarding the penal action that could be taken against them in the event of default.

(iii) In-flight crew shall carry out periodical checks of the aircraft, in order to ensure that all passengers are complying with the protocol to be followed by them in flight, especially regarding wearing of masks. It is made clear that masks should be worn as directed by governmental instructions, covering the nose and mouth, and not worn merely covering the mouth or below the chin.

(iv) In the event of any passenger being unwilling to follow this protocol prior to the flight taking off, the passenger should be offloaded without delay. If a passenger, despite being reminded more than once in flight, refuses to follow this protocol, action should be taken against the passenger in accordance with the guidelines issued by the DGCA or Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, including placing the passenger on a no-fly regimen, either permanently or for a stipulated, sufficiently long, period.

(v) It shall be the responsibility of the in-flight crew to ensure strict compliance, by the passengers, with the aforesaid protocol. In order to ensure compliance, the DGCA may consider sending random observers on flights, without prior information, who would check to ensure that the COVID protocols are followed in flight.

(vi) Strict enforcement of all penal provisions, which could visit delinquent passengers who refuse to abide by the COVID protocols to be maintained in flight, should be ensured. There should be no relaxation whatsoever in that regard.

(vii) It is noticed that the guidelines of the DGCA do permit relaxation from the requirement of wearing masks in exceptional cases. Such relaxation, if necessary, should be allowed only in cases which are truly exceptional, such as for medical reasons, after a conscious assessment and evaluation of (a) the necessity of the passenger to fly and (b) the justifiability of the passenger's refusal to wear the mask, weighed against the risk to public interest involved if the passenger is allowed to travel without a mask. In deserving cases - which should be the exception, not the rule - the airline should take steps to isolate the passenger so that he is kept at a safe distance from other passengers in the flight.

To put things in perspective, the Bench then directs in para 8 holding that:
All concerned authorities are directed to accord adequate publicity to these guidelines, so that there is strict compliance therewith. The DGCA, the Ministry of Civil Aviation and Ministry of Home Affairs, as well as all airlines operating in the domestic sector, should take all steps in order to ensure that these guidelines are complied with. They should also ensure that, in the case of airlines which repeatedly fail to ensure compliance with the said guidelines, penal action is initiated, in accordance with law.

Going ahead, the Bench then also directs in para 9 that:
Let this order be also displayed on the official website of the DGCA, the Ministry of Civil Aviation and the Ministry of Home Affairs, and a copy provided to learned counsel for the Union of India and Air India, who have been gracious enough to appear at the request of the Court.

Strictly speaking, the Bench then hastens to add in para 10 that:
The DGCA would also ensure circulations of these guidelines to all airlines, for strict compliance therewith. Periodical review of the situation should be undertaken, to ensure that no laxity creeps into the system.

Frankly speaking, the Bench then also urges in para 11 that:
It is the duty of each of us to contribute towards this end. Pointing fingers at the Central and State Governments, who have formidable tasks to deal with, and are doing all they can, is of no use whatsoever. Each of us, as members of a conscious and conscientious citizenry, is required to be sensitive and sensitized in equal measure, and to strain every sinew to keep the pandemic at bay. If the citizenry becomes complacent, no Government, howsoever activated and alive to the situation, can help.

Not stopping here, the Bench then also further directs in para 12 that:
Let the matter be now registered as a Suo Motu Public Interest Litigation and listed before the appropriate Bench dealing with Public Interest Litigations as per roster, subject to orders of Hon'ble the Chief Justice, on 17th March, 2021.

Finally, it is then held in the last para 13 that:
The DGCA as well as Air India, who are represented today, would file reports before the Bench, regarding compliance with the above guidelines, before the next date of hearing.

In essence, it is a brief, bold, blunt, brilliant and balanced judgment must be implemented most strictly in totality. Citizens also must themselves rise to the occasion and implement in letter and spirits what the Delhi High Court has directed in this recent, righteous and remarkable judgment. It is citizens themselves who will gain the most if they follow the directions given by the Delhi High Court in totality. The DGCA as well as Air India also must comply with accordingly as directed by the Delhi High Court which we have already discussed hereinabove. There can be certainly just no denying or disputing it!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
Present space law framework in the country. Space has heightened the curiosity of mankind for centuries. Due to the advancement in technology, there is fierce competition amongst nations for the next space war.
The scope of Section 151 CPC has been explained by the Supreme Court in the case K.K. Velusamy v. N. Palanisamy
Co-operative Societies are governed by the Central Co-operative Societies Act 1912, where there is no State Act. In West Bengal they were governed by the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act
Registration enables an NGO to be a transparent in its operations to the Government, Donors, to its members and to its urgent community.
The ingredients of Section 18 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 are
Drafting of legal Agreements and Deeds in India
ST Land rules in India,West Bengal
The paper will discuss about the provisions related to liquidated damages. How the law has evolved. Difference between the provisions of England and India.
A privilege may not be a right, but, under the constitution of the country, I do not gather that any broad distinction is drawn between the rights and the privileges that were enjoyed and that were taken away.
It is most hurting to see that in India, the soldiers who hail from Jammu and Kashmir and who join forces either in Army or in CRPF or in BSF or in police or in any other forces against the will of majority
Pukhraj v/s State of Uttarakhand warned high caste priests very strongly against refusing to perform religious ceremonies on behalf of lower caste pilgrims. It took a very stern view of the still existing practice of exclusion of the SC/ST community in Haridwar.
This article aims to define delay in civil suits. It finds the general as well as specific causes leading to pendency of civil suits and over-burdening of courts. This articles suggests some solutions which are pragmatic as well as effective to reduce the burden of the courts and speed up the civil judicial process.
This article deals with importance, needs, highlights and provisions of the Surrogacy Bill 2016, which is passed by the lok sabha on 19th December 2018 .
Cross Examination In Case of Injunction Suits, Injunctions are governed by Sections 37, 38, 39 to Section 42 of Specific Relief Act.
Satishchandra Ratanlal Shah v Gujarat inability of a person to return the loan amount cannot give rise to a criminal prosecution for cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is shown right at the beginning of the transaction..
Dr.Ashok Khemka V/s Haryana upheld the integrity of eminent IAS officer because of his upright and impeccable credentials has emerged as an eyesore for politicians of all hues but also very rightly expunged Haryana Chief Minister ML Khattar adverse remarks in his Personal Appraisal Report
State of Rajasthan and others v. Mukesh Sharma has upheld the constitutional validity of Rule 8(2)(i) of the Rajasthan Prisons (Shortening of Sentences) Rules, 2006.
Gurmit Singh Bhatia Vs Kiran Kant Robinson the Supreme Court reiterated that, in a suit, the plaintiff is the dominus litis and cannot be forced to add parties against whom he does not want to fight unless there is a compulsion of the rule of law.
explicitly in a latest landmark ruling prohibited the use of loudspeakers in the territory without prior permission from the authorities.
The Commissioner of Police v/s Devender Anand held that filing of criminal complaint for settling a dispute of civil nature is abuse of process of law.
Rajasthan Vs Shiv Dayal High Court cannot dismiss a second appeal merely on the ground that there is a concurrent finding of two Courts (whether of dismissal or decreeing of the suit), and thus such finding becomes unassailable.
Complete Guide to Pleadings in India, get your Written statement and Plaint Drafted by highly qualified lawyers at reasonable rate.
Sushil Chandra Srivastava vs UP imposed absolute prohibition on use of DJs in the state and asked the state government to issue a toll-free number, dedicated to registering complaints against illegal use of loudspeakers. It will help control noise pollution to a very large extent if implemented in totality.
Rajasthan v/s Shri Ramesh Chandra Mundra that institutional independence, financial autonomy is integral to independence of judiciary. directing the Rajasthan Government to reconsider the two decade old proposal of the then Chief Justice of Rajasthan High Court to upgrade 16 posts of its Private Secretaries as Senior Private Secretaries
The Indian Contract act, 1872 necessities significant consideration in a few of its areas. One such area of the Indian Contract act of 1872 is where if any person finds a lost good belonging to others and takes them into his custody acts as the bailee to the owner of the good.
Government has notified 63 provisions of the Motor Vehicles Amendment Act 2019 including the ones dealing with enhanced penalties
Jose Paulo Coutinho vs. Maria Luiza Valentina Pereira no attempt has been made yet to frame a Uniform Civil Code applicable to all citizens of the country despite exhortations by it. Whether succession to the property of a Goan situated outside Goa in India will be governed by the Portuguese Civil Code, 1867
In a major legal setback to Pakistan, the High Court of England and Wales rejecting rightly Pakistan's frivolous claims and ruling explicitly that the VII Nizam of Hyderabad's descendants and India can collect 35 million pounds from Londons National Westminster Bank.
Power of Attorney and the Specific Relief Act, 1963
air pollution in Delhi and even adjoining regions like several districts of West UP are crossing all limits and this year even in districts adjoining Delhi like Meerut where air pollution was never felt so much as is now being felt.
Dr Syed Afzal (Dead) v/sRubina Syed Faizuddin that the Civil Courts while considering the application seeking interim mandatory injunction in long pending cases, should grant opportunity of hearing to the opposite side, interim mandatory injunctions can be granted after granting opportunity of hearing to the opposite side.
students of Banaras Hindu University's (BHU's) Sanskrit Vedvigyan Sankay (SVDVS) went on strike demanding the cancellation of the appointment of Assistant Professor Feroze Khan and transfer him to another faculty.
Odisha Development Corporation Ltd Vs. M/s Anupam Traders & Anr. the time tested maxim actus curiae neminem gravabit which in simple and straight language means that, No party should suffer due to the act of Court.
M/S Daffodills Pharmaceuticals Ltd v/s. State of U.P that no one can be inflicted with an adverse order, without being afforded a minimum opportunity of hearing. In other words, the Apex Court reiterated the supreme importance of the legal maxim and latin phrase titled Audi alteram partem
Ram Murti Yadav v/s State of Uttar Pradesh the standard or yardstick for judging the conduct of the judicial officer has necessarily to be strict, that the public has a right to demand virtually irreproachable conduct from anyone performing a judicial function.
Judicial Officers Being Made Scapegoats And Penalized By Inconvenient Transfers And Otherwise: SC
Desh Raj v/s Balkishan that the mandatory time-line for filing written statement is not applicable to non-commercial suits. In non-commercial suits, the time-line for written statement is directory and not mandatory, the courts have the discretion to condone delay in filing of written statement in non-commercial suits.
M/S Granules India Ltd. Vs UOI State, as a litigant, cannot behave as a private litigant, and it has solemn and constitutional duty to assist the court in dispensation of justice.
To exercise one's own fundamental right to protest peacefully does not give anyone the unfettered right to block road under any circumstances thereby causing maximum inconvenience to others.
Today, you have numerous traffic laws as well as cases of traffic violations. People know about safe driving yet they end up defying the safety guidelines. It could be anything like driving while talking on the phone, hit and run incidents, or driving under the influence of alcohol.
The legal processes are uncertain. Also, there are times when justice gets denied, and the legal outcomes get delayed. Hence, nobody wants to see themselves or their loved one end up in jail.
Arun Kumar Gupta v/s Jharkhand that judicial officer's integrity must be of a higher order and even a single aberration is not permitted. The law pertaining to the vital subject of compulsory retirement of judicial officers have thus been summed up in this noteworthy judgment.
Online Contracts or Digital Agreements are contracts created and signed over the internet. Also known as e-contracts or electronic contracts, these contracts are a more convenient and faster way of creating and signing contracts for individuals, institutions and corporate.
Re: Problems And Miseries Of Migrant Labourers has asked Maharashtra to be more vigilant and make concerted effort in identifying and sending stranded migrant workers to their native places.
Gerald Lynn Bostock v/s Clayton County, Georgia that employees cannot be fired from the jobs merely because of their transgender and homosexual identity.
This article compares two cases with similar facts, yet different outcomes and examines the reasons for the same. It revolves around consideration and validation of contracts.
Odisha Vikas Parishad vs Union Of India while modifying the absolute stay on conducting the Jagannath Rath Yatra at Puri has allowed it observing the strict restrictions and regulations of the Centre and the State Government.
Soni Beniwal v/s Uttarakhand even if there is a bar on certain matters to be taken as PIL, there is always discretion available with the Court to do so in exercise of its inherent powers.
Indian Contract Act was commenced in the year 1872 and since then, several deductions and additions have happened to the same. The following piece of work discusses about the concept of offer under the Indian Contract Act, 1872
Top