The Delhi High Court has sought the Directorate General of Civil Aviation's (DGCA) position on its decision to keep in abeyance the revised Flight Duty Time Limitation (FDTL) norms. The court's concern stems from the potential impact on public safety due to the non-implementation of these regulations, which are designed to prevent pilot fatigue.

The FDTL regulations prescribe minimum rest periods for pilots and flight crew members, aiming to strengthen fatigue management and ensure passenger safety. The revised norms, introduced in 2025, seek to enhance safety by limiting pilot duty hours, extending rest periods, and minimizing night landings, aligning with global fatigue-risk standards.

The DGCA's decision to pause the implementation of the revised FDTL norms until February 10, 2026, followed significant disruptions in airline operations, particularly those of IndiGo, in December 2025. IndiGo experienced widespread flight cancellations and delays as the airline was not adequately prepared to implement the new flight-duty norms for pilots. In response, the DGCA eased the regulations on December 5, allowing the substitution of leave with a weekly rest period to enable IndiGo to have more pilots on duty and normalize operations.

The court was hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) against the DGCA's move to suspend the revised FDTL norms. The PIL argues that the DGCA lacks the authority to suspend the rules, insisting that they should be enforced. The petitioners, including a former aircraft engineer, argue that the DGCA's decision compromises passenger safety and undermines the objective for which the regulations were framed. They also highlight that the revised FDTL regulations align with global safety standards prescribed by the International Civil Aviation Organization.

During the hearing, a bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia remarked that the concerns about public safety could not be "brushed aside". The court noted the direct link between the regulations and passenger safety, stating that the regulations should be implemented unless challenged or found to have flaws. The bench has asked the DGCA's counsel to seek instructions and listed the matter for further hearing.

The court also addressed the argument that the relaxation provided by the DGCA was exclusively for IndiGo, clarifying that the relaxation applied to all airlines. Furthermore, the court dismissed concerns about the locus standi of one of the petitioners, citing her background as a former aircraft engineer and the issue's bearing on public safety.