Pilots of a private airline sought writ directions against the airline's indemnity bond undertakings and for enforcement of aviation guidelines. The court held such contractual employment disputes are not amenable to Article 226 against a non-State employer and disposed of the petition, leaving alternative remedies open.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~20
Through: Mr. M.S. Yadav, Mr. Ashok Tobria, Mr. S.Y. Usmani, Mr. Sachin Sharma, Mr. Sahil Kaushik, Mr. Mayank Yadav & Mr. Sachin Soni, Advocates.
versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Dr. B. Ramaswamy, CGSC for UOI. [M:-9999605344]
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN O R D E R
% 02.07.2025
CM APPL. 37867/2025 ( for exemption ) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
The application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 8866/2025
(ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus and/or any other appropriate Writ directing and prevent the respondents No. 4 to bind the petitioners and other employees in unfair agreement indemnity bond cum service undertaking;
(iii) Direct the Respondent No. 4 to strictly follow the rules of law· (iv) Direct the Respondent no. 4 to strictly follow the objectives for which the respondent no. 5 was formed.
(v) Pass an order to clubbed the entire pending litigations in a specific designated Courts.
W.P.(C) 8866/2025
Page 1 of 3
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/07/2025 at 12:15:41
(vi) Direct the Respondent no. I, 2 and 3 to form a committee to resolve the problems of the employees.
(vii) Direct the Respondent no. 1, 2 and 3 to establish a Grievance Redressal System for the employees. (viii) Issue directions and restraint the Respondent no. 4 from making such bias agreements which violates the basic rights of the employees. ”
W.P.(C) 8866/2025
Page 2 of 3
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/07/2025 at 12:15:41
Constitution. Respondent No. 4 is admittedly is not a public sector enterprise or otherwise “ State ” under Article 12 of the Constitution. Consequently, contractual disputes with regard to employment of the petitioners with respondent No. 4, would have to be agitated in appropriately constituted civil proceedings, and not by way of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.
PRATEEK JALAN, J
JULY 2, 2025 ‘pv/AD’/
W.P.(C) 8866/2025
Page 3 of 3
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/07/2025 at 12:15:41
2 issues framed by the court
Can contractual disputes over pilot indemnity bonds with a private airline be pursued under Article 226?
Should statutory authorities be directed to enforce guidelines on pilots' service terms absent any prior representation?
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Lomash Sharma & Anr.
Union of India & Ors.
Prateek Jalan
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
