DGCA Civil Aviation has imposed a fine of 20, 00,000/- (Rupees twenty lakh only) on Air Asia (India) Limited for violation of rules. Also, a fine of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh Only) has been imposed on each of the 8 designated examiners of Air Asia (India) Limited for failing to perform their duties properly as per DGCA civil aviation requirements.
New Delhi: DGCA has imposed a fine of Rs 20 lakh on Air Asia as a penalty. In fact, Air Asia did not conduct some mandatory pilot drills as per the schedule during Pilot Proficiency Check/Instrument Rating Check (which is an International Civil Aviation Organization requirement). Which has been imposed by the DGCA as a violation of the rules.
DGCA Civil Aviation has imposed a fine of 20, 00,000/- (Rupees twenty lakh only) on Air Asia (India) Limited for violation of rules. Also, a fine of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh Only) has been imposed on each of the 8 designated examiners of Air Asia (India) Limited for failing to perform their duties properly as per DGCA civil aviation requirements.
Apart from this, the Head of Training has also been ordered to be removed from his post for a period of 3 months for failing to discharge his duties as per DGCA Civil Aviation.
The regulator said in a statement, “The Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) had carried out a surveillance inspection of the LCC from November 23-25, 2022. “During the inspection, DGCA team observed that a few mandatory exercises of AirAsia India pilots were not done during pilot proficiency check/instrument rating check (which is an International Civil Aviation Organization requirement) as per schedule, resulting in violation of DGCA regulations.”
In the past few days, the regulator has levied fines on several airlines including Air India, Vistara, IndiGo and GoAir for lapses .The Directorate General of Civil Aviation, or DGCA, had issued show cause notices to the concerned manager, head of training, and all designated examiners of Air Asia as to why enforcement action should not be taken against them for lack of oversight of their regulatory obligations. Their written replies were examined, and action taken on its basis.
