Rs 10 Lakh Penalty On Akasa Air For Offloading Confirmed Passengers, Giving No Compensation

On September 6, Akasa Air refused to board seven passengers on a Bengaluru-Pune flight and failed to provide compensation, for which the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) fined the airline ₹10 lakh.

The seven passengers were unable to board the replacement aircraft because nine of its seats were inoperable.

Read on to find out all the details.

Air Akasa Fined Rs 10 Lakh by DGCA For Refusing Passengers To Board Plan

In violation of Civil Aviation Requirements (CAR) Section-3, Series M, Part IV, Akasa Air provided a substitute flight for the impacted passengers but failed to provide compensation.

A representative for Akasa Air confirmed that the airline has received the DGCA order and said it is collaborating with the authority to enhance its procedures.

As per the spokesperson, “We acknowledge receipt of an order by the DGCA dated December 24, 2024. We continue to work closely with the DGCA to address this matter and enhance our protocols as required by the regulator.”

Akasa Air was previously given a notice by the DGCA for neglecting to promptly update its operations manual and for failing to maintain and certify its aircraft.

DGCA Sent Show-Cause Notice

Following a spot check that discovered incorrect reinstallation of a tire pressure sensor on an aircraft (VT-YAY), the DGCA sent a show-cause notice to Akasa Air’s Aircraft Maintenance Engineer (AME) on December 9.

As per the DGCA, “During the spot check by this office on August 30 at KIAL airport, Bangalore it was observed that the right-hand nose wheel tire pressure indicator system sensor on aircraft VT-YAY was re-installed by certifying staff… He had failed to do the positive locking of the system’s sensor…”

The DGCA noted that the AME had violated Civil Aviation Requirement 145 by failing to lock the sensor system securely. The DGCA ascribed the problem to insufficient certification procedures and maintenance standards.

For failing to obtain the required ATRP approvals for practical training, exceeding the allotted training hours, and using unqualified examiners for CAT II/III operations, Akasa Air was fined ₹30 lakh in October.

After Akasa Air’s explanations for a show-cause notice on August 29 were judged inadequate under Rule 162 of the Aircraft Rules, 1937, the penalty for training lapses was applied.