Bombay HC Dismisses Air India Employees' Petitions, Rules They Are Not Maintainable Post-Privatisation

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has ruled that petitions filed by Air India employees against the are not maintainable since the airline’s privatization. The court said Air India Limited (AIL) is no longer discharging any public duty and now functions as a private company with a purely commercial objective of making profits.

Bench Hears Three Linked Cases

A bench of Justices Shree Chandrashekhar and Manjusha Deshpande was hearing three petitions filed by employees of Air India, through Advocate Ashok D. Shetty in 2001. Though the facts and reliefs sought in each petition were different, the employer in all cases was Air India, so the court heard them together.

Privatisation Changed Legal Standing

Initially, when the petitions were filed, they were considered maintainable. However, during the pendency of the proceedings, Air India was privatized. The court observed that this change in status meant the company was no longer amenable to writ jurisdiction.

Court’s Ruling on Maintainability

The bench noted, “We hold that all the three writ petitions, although maintainable on the dates on which they were instituted, have ceased to be maintainable, due to privatization of AIL, which is not discharging any public duty.”

It further clarified that petitioners are free to seek remedies available in law, and any time spent pursuing the writ petitions will be excluded while calculating limitation periods.

Judicial Discipline and Precedent

The court emphasised the importance of judicial discipline and consistency in following earlier rulings on similar issues. Referring to previous decisions, it said that when a co-ordinate bench has already settled a legal issue, other benches of the same strength must follow that precedent.

Also Watch:

Bombay HC Upholds Eviction Of Former Air India Employees From Kalina Housing Colony Under AAI Act

Writ Jurisdiction Not Applicable

The court concluded that Air India, being a private entity post-privatization, is outside the scope of writ jurisdiction. Consequently, all three writ petitions and pending applications were dismissed, though the employees were allowed to pursue alternate remedies in accordance with law.