- 1 hour ago
In this special report, a panel of aviation experts discusses the Indian government's decision to cut 10% of Indigo's flight operations following a week of severe disruptions and cancellations in December 2025. Captain Amit Singh argues that the move is an 'eyewash' because airlines typically operate at 90-95% capacity anyway, meaning the cut won't significantly hurt Indigo. Former Joint Secretary Sanath Kaul highlights the lack of independence within the DGCA, calling it a 'subordinate office of the ministry.' Aviation expert Jitendra Bhargava questions the timing of the action, suggesting it is 'too little, too late' and noting that immediate sacking of CEO Pieter Elbers could throw the airline into further turmoil. The discussion also touches on the role of the 'Accountable Manager' versus the CEO and the need for an independent probe into the collusion between regulators and the airline.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Action against Indigo. Is it too little, too late?
00:03Captain, do you want to take this first, Captain Amit Singh?
00:08Do you believe that the government now has stepped in,
00:10said 10% of their flight operations have been suspended
00:14and will be given to other airlines?
00:16Presumably that the CEO is being called again and again every day
00:21as if the DGCA now is finally... Do you believe it's enough?
00:24The head of the organization is the Accountable Manager
00:30and Accountable Manager is basically accountable to the regulator.
00:35If the minister says or believes that he can fire the CEO,
00:41basically he can fire the CEO because he's the Accountable Manager.
00:45The Accountable Manager is interviewed and appointed by DGCA.
00:50So that is... A lot of people have been discussing that
00:53in a private organization, you cannot fire the CEO.
00:56But Accountable Manager can be fired on account of being appointed by DGCA
01:00for discharging certain duties.
01:04But is the 10% cut in flight operations really a solution?
01:12No, 10% is an eyewash because no airline operates up to 100% of their schedule.
01:19There are always cancellations. Indigo has been operating about 90% to 95%.
01:24So, anyways, if you cut 5%, they would be operating like normal.
01:30And another 5% would be a slight dip in their operations.
01:36So that won't hurt them too much.
01:38So the idea is there has to be penal action.
01:41What hurts them?
01:42Firstly, why is the Accountable Manager still there
01:44while all this is happening?
01:48No, so what are you saying?
01:49No, no, one minute.
01:49No, no, one minute.
01:50When you say, sir, one minute.
01:51When you say Accountable Manager, you're saying the CEO should be sacked?
01:55That the government is going to decide about sacking the CEO?
01:57That's Indigo's responsibility.
01:59How can the government of India decide to sack a CEO
02:01of a private airline?
02:04No, like I said, he's the Accountable Manager.
02:07DGCA gives the go-ahead for the Accountable Manager.
02:10DGCA can refuse the appointment of the Accountable Manager
02:13because he has to undergo an interview with DGCA
02:17before being appointed.
02:19So they can take away that privilege from the CEO
02:21that you're not the Accountable Manager,
02:23we'll appoint somebody else as Accountable Manager.
02:25So that can happen anytime.
02:27Sanat Kaur, you worked with the government
02:30as a former Joint Secretary.
02:31Do you believe the government,
02:32the minister already said, even in my interview yesterday,
02:35that if the need comes,
02:36if I find it was willful negligence on the part of Indigo,
02:39we can sack the CEO?
02:41Do you believe that's the government's job?
02:44That's a technicality,
02:46but he's already pointed out
02:47that there is a concept of Accountable Manager.
02:50So that Accountable Manager,
02:52that Accountable Manager is the issue
02:55and that can be sacked.
02:57Now, Accountable Manager is a very important thing
02:59for an airline.
03:00It can't run without an Accountable Manager.
03:02So they will have to appoint somebody
03:04who is acceptable to DGCA.
03:05Now, while I'm talking,
03:08I'd like to raise a couple of other points.
03:10One is the DGCA's office itself.
03:12You know, around earlier,
03:14they had thought of having a CAA,
03:18a Civil Aviation Authority,
03:22which is there in UK and other places,
03:24which will be independent,
03:25it'll have much bigger staff,
03:26it can recruit its own people,
03:28it can appoint.
03:29Today, DGCA is probably 50% staffed.
03:34It is totally a subordinate office of the ministry.
03:37And therefore,
03:37to call it independent under the Act
03:39is being rather foolish.
03:41So the DGCA itself is,
03:44you know,
03:45it's a very difficult job for DGCA.
03:47Plus, they keep appointing people
03:50who have no experience as the Director,
03:52as the Director General.
03:53So these are issues,
03:54which I think need to be now probed into,
03:56that why,
03:57that I said 5 or 10% is the blame of DGCA,
04:00why were they not looking into this aspect
04:02when they were approving the winter schedule,
04:06that do they have enough pilots or not?
04:07Although,
04:08although,
04:09I would say,
04:09yes,
04:10it is 100% responsibility of the Indigo,
04:12of the airline concerned,
04:13and the Board of Directors and others.
04:15But can I,
04:16to make sure.
04:16Yeah.
04:17But can I come,
04:18Dr. Susi Lund,
04:19you had a private airline,
04:21you all worked with charters.
04:23Can you believe the Government of India
04:24can put pressure on Indigo to decide
04:27who should be the CEO?
04:30Rajiv,
04:30I've been running a commercial airline in India
04:32by the name of Air Udisa,
04:34the first Udan group which we started.
04:36So I know,
04:37we had a CEO,
04:38and DGCA never took their interview.
04:40They just give a NOC.
04:42Even you might have heard
04:43that there was a Turkish guy
04:44who was about to join Air India,
04:46but he had not got the NOC.
04:48That's why then later on,
04:49Campbell came in
04:49to lead Air India.
04:51So definitely there's no interference
04:53of DGCA
04:54on the appointment of a CEO.
04:56Only the NOC required from the DCA.
04:58So sacking a official,
05:00a CEO
05:00from the airline
05:02definitely is a call
05:03of the Board of Directors
05:04because it's a private company.
05:05It's not anymore
05:06a government company
05:07like Air India earlier.
05:08So definitely
05:09the call has to be taken
05:10by the Board Directors
05:11of Indigo itself.
05:13And now when you come
05:14to the monopoly,
05:15when you said the monopoly of Indigo,
05:16I tell you,
05:17like,
05:17there are so many airlines
05:19got collapsed
05:20due to this airlines
05:21because they eat up the market.
05:22They don't let other
05:24small players
05:25to operate in particular routes.
05:26If I give you an example,
05:28in the Raipur flight,
05:29where the Flybeek airlines
05:30were operating
05:30in a cost of 2,500 rupees,
05:33whereas Indigo came in
05:34and started operating
05:35A320 aircraft.
05:36And within three months,
05:37Flybeek had moved out
05:38of the same sector.
05:39And after six months
05:40of the same,
05:41the Indigo stopped
05:42operating in that route
05:43because they don't want
05:44anyone to operate
05:45in particular routes.
05:46So you're saying Indigo
05:47misused its monopolistic position.
05:49They managed to get schedules
05:50that suited them.
05:52They therefore were able
05:53to enhance profits
05:54and according to
05:55at least Sherbeel,
05:56often at the cost of safety.
05:58Unfortunately,
05:59of course,
05:59we don't have someone
06:00from Indigo.
06:01I wish we had.
06:01They've not yet come
06:02on camera
06:03to explain their side
06:04of the story.
06:05I hope they do
06:05in the days ahead.
06:06But Sanjay Lazar,
06:07this whole question of
06:08is the action
06:09of the ministry
06:11and DGCA
06:12simply an eyewash?
06:13You call the CEO
06:14every day
06:15to your office
06:16as if you're fully in charge.
06:17All of this should have happened.
06:18Many believe in November
06:19or even before that.
06:21Do you believe
06:21that sacking a CEO,
06:24you know,
06:24sacking Peter Elber
06:25will actually solve anything?
06:28Rajdeep,
06:28I'd just like to weigh in
06:29on that part
06:30because Amit has said something
06:31and Dr. Sushilan
06:32has said something.
06:33Two things.
06:34One is
06:35the accountable manager
06:36officer
06:37under the car
06:38is answerable
06:40to the DGCA.
06:41It may not be
06:42Peter Elber.
06:43In this case,
06:43I think it could be
06:44the COO.
06:46Okay,
06:46I could be wrong.
06:47I will be stand corrected.
06:49The second thing
06:50is the CEO
06:50and like Dr. Sushilan said
06:52is gets
06:54home ministry approval.
06:55Remember this.
06:57Forget about DGCA.
06:58He gets home ministry approval
07:00because aviation
07:01is a
07:02important sector.
07:04So therefore...
07:05But it's a private company,
07:06Sanjay.
07:06How can the government decide?
07:08It doesn't matter, sir.
07:08It is aviation.
07:10Aviation
07:10is a sensitive sector.
07:12Because every CEO
07:13of all the private airlines
07:15are bound to get
07:17home ministry clearance.
07:18You can check...
07:19No, it's one thing
07:21to get home ministry clearance.
07:22It's another thing
07:23to decide on the sacking.
07:25No, no.
07:25All I want to know...
07:25It can be withdrawn
07:26by the government.
07:26What is...
07:27Home ministry approval
07:28is for security.
07:29What, according to you,
07:29Mr. Lazar,
07:30is the right action to take?
07:32Give me the action
07:33that you believe
07:33will act as a deterrent.
07:35Please, Rajdeep.
07:36I was pointing out
07:37the technicality
07:38of removal
07:38or non-removal.
07:40Okay.
07:40Let's come to
07:41what is the correct
07:42punishment for the airline.
07:44They've been docked 10%.
07:45I do believe
07:46they'll get a large
07:47monetary fine,
07:48probably a record
07:49monetary fine
07:50by the DGCA
07:51and the government
07:51of India,
07:52whatever permits
07:53within the act
07:54and the law.
07:55I also believe
07:55there's going to be
07:56huge scrutiny
07:57and they will be
07:58brought to question
07:59on the induction
08:00of aircrafts
08:01subject to
08:03their having pilots.
08:04I can see this
08:05coming in the future.
08:07Sanat Kaur,
08:07you wanted to respond.
08:08Please go ahead, sir.
08:10No, I mean,
08:11basically what I was
08:13saying was that
08:14DGCA has a responsibility
08:17which is definitely there
08:18and they must look
08:20into all this
08:21but they are crippled.
08:23They are crippled
08:24and the concept
08:25of civil evasion
08:26authority
08:26which was
08:27passed by the cabinet
08:29which was put
08:29as an act
08:30in the parliament
08:31was then not
08:32not taken up
08:35by the new government.
08:36Sir, you made
08:37that point.
08:38You believe
08:38that the DGCA
08:39has been crippled
08:40but Jitendra Bhargava
08:41is this action
08:42too little
08:43too late?
08:43Is this optics
08:44when you have
08:45the DGCA
08:47for example
08:48the CEO of Indigo
08:49doing folded hands
08:50before the minister
08:51is that all optics
08:52according to you
08:53or has the government
08:54sent out a tough message?
08:55No, the action
09:00has been too little
09:01too late
09:02on multiple fronts.
09:04Third, fourth, fifth
09:05when did the government
09:06react and when did
09:07the government
09:07give 10%
09:08curtail the 10%
09:09flights of Indigo
09:10and give it
09:11to other airlines?
09:12Could have been
09:12done earlier.
09:13Displeasure was known
09:14to the Indigo
09:15that look
09:16we are not happy
09:17with the way
09:17Indigo has behaved
09:18or Indigo
09:19disrupted the flight schedule
09:20brought Indian aviation
09:21a bad name.
09:22Now to me
09:23the board
09:24has got the message
09:25the board
09:26should take a call
09:27sooner than later
09:28but immediate
09:29sacking of the CEO
09:31would only throw
09:32the airline
09:33greater turmoil.
09:34At this moment
09:35the priority is
09:37to put the operation
09:37back on track
09:38ensure the minimum
09:40inconvenience
09:41is caused to passengers.
09:42Imagine
09:42if the succession
09:44plan within Indigo
09:45is not there
09:47what would happen
09:48if Peter Elbert
09:49is to go away
09:50at short notice
09:51and leave the airline
09:53in turmoil
09:53they wouldn't know
09:54anything about it.
09:55So in my opinion
09:56let things unfold
09:57in a systemic manner
09:58Ministry of Civil Aviation
10:01has made it
10:01this pleasure known
10:02the fact that
10:03Peter Elbert
10:04has been summoned
10:04and made to answer
10:06Indigo has given
10:07an answer
10:08that we do not
10:09really know
10:09or we can't identify
10:11the real problem
10:12we'll take 15 more days
10:13time to come back
10:14and give you
10:14reply to the show
10:15cause notice etc
10:16all can't be accepted
10:18and the LFB
10:19that they put forth
10:20on the second day
10:214th of December
10:22was simply
10:23not bought
10:23by anyone
10:24neither the
10:25travelling public
10:26nor the aviation expert
10:27nor the DGC etc
10:28so I don't know
10:30why Indigo
10:31was trying to
10:32hoodwink
10:32not be truthful
10:33to the DGCA
10:35the regulatory agency
10:36to the travelling
10:37public to him
10:38which is
10:39really an apology
10:40and they have
10:40apologised
10:41though belatedly
10:42Sherby Panag
10:44do you believe
10:45it's too little
10:45too late
10:46what would you like
10:47to see that
10:47would restore
10:48according to you
10:48confidence
10:49in such a situation
10:51since you deal
10:52with corporate
10:52governance
10:53should the corporate
10:54should the board
10:55of directors
10:55have acted earlier
10:57or leave it now
10:58to DGCA
10:58so Rathip
11:01I think
11:01each party
11:02has to do
11:02their own job
11:03in this
11:03and the board
11:04no board
11:05of directors
11:05of any company
11:06is expected
11:07to do day to day
11:07management
11:08the day to day
11:08management
11:09is with
11:09professional management
11:10so therefore
11:12it's a little unfair
11:13to put the entire
11:14element
11:15at the door
11:16of the board
11:17it's also
11:18I think
11:18what Indigo
11:19needs to do
11:20is come out
11:20clearly
11:21in terms of
11:21what did
11:22professional management
11:23tell the board
11:23and how did
11:25the board
11:25respond to that
11:26now both of them
11:27are complicit
11:27that there's nothing
11:28that can be done
11:28but that information
11:29isn't there
11:30and till then
11:30given the personalities
11:32involved
11:32I would reserve
11:34my comments
11:35I don't believe
11:36Air Chief Marshal
11:36Dhanoa
11:37and Miss Pallavi Shroff
11:38knowing them
11:40professionally
11:42and knowing
11:43their professional
11:43reputations
11:44would be
11:45sleeping on
11:46the wheel
11:47so I think
11:47I'd wait
11:48to see
11:49what professional
11:50management did
11:51but now that
11:52everything is out
11:53in the open
11:53the question
11:54that for the board
11:55is
11:55and it's not
11:56I wouldn't agree
11:57with the statement
11:58that you know
11:58if a CEO
11:59has to be replaced
11:59that's the job
12:00of a nomination
12:01and remuneration
12:01committee of the board
12:02this is ultimately
12:03a very large enterprise
12:04which is governed
12:06so there's a
12:07nomination and
12:08remuneration committee
12:09which is supposed
12:09to look into
12:10elements of
12:10succession planning
12:11and ensure
12:12that in moments
12:12such as these
12:13it's able to
12:14because you've got
12:14the managing director
12:15Rahul Bhatia
12:16who's sitting
12:16in Switzerland
12:17I just want to
12:18try and understand
12:19do you believe
12:19someone on this show
12:21has today said
12:21all of this was
12:22collusion between
12:23DGCA and Indigo
12:23these are serious
12:24charges
12:25who investigates
12:26them
12:26DGCA
12:26which is the
12:27same
12:27agency
12:28which is being
12:30accused of
12:30collusion
12:31who investigates
12:32it
12:32do you have
12:32an independent
12:33inquiry
12:33how do you
12:34actually come
12:35to the bottom
12:36of it
12:36so I think
12:38we've got to
12:38look at it
12:39in multiple
12:39we've got to
12:40break this down
12:41into multiple
12:42aspects
12:42we've got to
12:43first and foremost
12:44we definitely
12:45need an inquiry
12:46by an independent
12:48probe
12:48and not some
12:49random folks
12:50from DGCA
12:51who are the
12:51sort of usual
12:52lackeys
12:52who keep doing
12:53these things
12:53but we need
12:54an independent
12:54probe
12:55into how
12:56did the flight
12:56let's go back
12:57to basics
12:58this is a flight
12:59safety issue
12:59this isn't
13:00Indigo
13:01this isn't a
13:01software glitch
13:02this isn't
13:03operationally
13:03suddenly they forgot
13:04how to put this
13:05together
13:05they were hoping
13:06this flight
13:07duty time limit
13:08norms do not
13:09come into
13:09do not come
13:10into picture
13:11and they were
13:12also hoping
13:12that the can
13:13can get kicked
13:13down as far
13:14down as possible
13:16and an independent
13:17inquiry is
13:18absolutely needed
13:19to see who
13:20from DGCA
13:21was okay
13:22with this can
13:23being kicked
13:24as far down
13:25as it was
13:25so I think
13:26for that we need
13:27one
13:27the second part
13:28Rajdeep
13:29I think there are
13:29too many sub
13:31layers of what
13:31needs investigation
13:32and who needs
13:33to do it
13:33Indigo's
13:34abuse of
13:35dominant
13:35position
13:35some very
13:36important
13:36points have
13:37been raised
13:38that needs
13:38to be
13:38investigated
13:39by the
13:39competition
13:39commission
13:40of India
13:42somebody at
13:44the DGCA
13:44took all
13:45these Indigo
13:45plans in
13:46they approved
13:47their
13:47their
13:48their
13:49their
13:49their flight
13:51schedules
13:52and their
13:52winter flying
13:52schedule
13:53that person
13:54needs to be
13:54taken to
13:55task
13:55and so do
13:55the people
13:56at Indigo
13:56who submitted
13:57those flight
13:57schedules
13:58get taken
13:59to task
13:59this whole
14:00thing about
14:01should the
14:01DGCA
14:02remove the
14:02CEO
14:03the CEO
14:03is ornamental
14:04in this
14:04there's a
14:04whole host
14:05of people
14:05in these
14:06cases
14:07world over
14:08there's always
14:08a challenge
14:09of doing
14:09one small
14:10symbolic
14:10action of
14:11letting the
14:11CEO go
14:12and I don't
14:13agree with
14:13this element
14:14of where we
14:14are saying
14:14that there's
14:15an NOC
14:15only
14:16as in what
14:17is the
14:17NOC
14:17a rubber
14:17stamp
14:18pilots can't
14:19leave this
14:19country without
14:20NOC
14:21you should
14:21talk to a
14:22couple of
14:22pilots and
14:22you'll get
14:23a fair
14:23sense of
14:24the kind
14:24of loops
14:24the DGCA
14:25makes them
14:26jump through
14:27whether it's
14:27medical tests
14:28or otherwise
14:28which is all
14:29fair and
14:29they should
14:30do that
14:30so are we
14:31saying the
14:31CEO of the
14:33country's
14:33largest airlines
14:34appointment is
14:34an NOC
14:35no it's not
14:36there's a fit
14:36and proper
14:37test and
14:37standard that
14:38is established
14:39it's established
14:40for bank
14:40MDs as well
14:42on
14:428
14:42pew
14:43S
14:4422
14:4512
14:4722
14:4823
14:4823
14:4923
14:5323
14:5324
14:5424
14:5725
14:5725
14:5726
14:5926
14:5928
15:0029
15:0129
15:0129
15:0130
15:0230
15:03o
15:0430
15:0630
15:0930
15:1030
15:1130
15:1130
15:1131
15:1131
Be the first to comment