Synopsis: Shenoy prayed for the establishment of a Court of Inquiry headed by a retired High Court/Supreme Court Judge under the Aircraft (Investigation of Accidents and Incidents) Rules, 2017, claiming that he had repeatedly warned state authorities about the safety of the Calicut airport.
In a public interest litigation (PIL) petition seeking a CBI investigation into the Air India Express flight mishap at Calicut International Airport in Kerala that killed 19 passengers in August this year the Kerala High Court sought the Central Government’s response.
The petitioner-in-person, Advocate Yeshwanth Shenoy, has also sought an inquiry into the general functioning of the Calicut airport and the closure of the airport for the time being, apart from the prayer for a CBI investigation.
Notice of the matter was issued on Monday by Chief Justice S Manikumar and Justice Shaji P Chaly to the Ministry of Civil Aviation, the Airports Authority of India (AAI) and the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA).
In his petition, Shenoy alleged that domestic air regulations, which in turn flow from international standards set by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), were flouted by the airport at Calicut.
Shenoy prayed for the establishment of a Court of Inquiry headed by a retired High Court/Supreme Court Judge under the Aircraft (Investigation of Accidents and Incidents) Rules, 2017, claiming that he had repeatedly warned state authorities about the safety of the Calicut airport.
The petitioner argued that the AAI and the DGCA were aware of the violations involved in the construction of the airport.
The petition notes that the most common form of air accident is overshooting runways, but no such accident has caused a very high number of fatalities anywhere in the world. After years of investigation in the maze of aviation regulations and operations, the petitioner found that with the full backing of Respondent No. 1 (Ministry of Civil Aviation) & 3 (DGCA), criminal negligence occurred on the part of Respondent No. 2 (Airports Authority of India).
Shenoy also recounted his previous litigation before the High Courts of Bombay and Delhi and his specific litigation in relation to air safety issues in general concerning the Calicut Airport before the Kerala High Court in 2016.
He also claims that the petitioner subsequently took up the issue of aviation protection in separate High Courts. The Respondents, however, even acknowledged the breach of the Affidavits.
The petitioner also told the Chairman of the Civil Aviation Safety Advisory Committee (CASAC) almost eleven years ago of Captain Mohan Ranganathan’s communications relating to the safety of Calicut Airport. The petitioner claims that Captain Ranganathan is a member of CASAC.
The authorities have ignored repeated warnings about Calicut Airport, especially in the wake of the Mangalore Airport tragedy. In that regard, the petitioner sought an investigation into the incident, in particular by the Court of Inquiry headed by the retired High Court and the Judge of the Supreme Court.
The petition states that the petitioner respectfully argues that Calicut was waiting to happen and that this was discovered shortly after the Mangalore Air crash. After the Mangalore Air disaster, the Table Top airports came into the limelight. The Civil Aviation Safety Advisory Council (CASAC) is formed by Respondent No.1 to advise on steps to be taken to ensure aviation safety.
Shenoy, however, requested the closure of Calicut International Airport as an immediate interim relief, in order to avoid further mishaps.