IndiGo Security VP Fired: Tarmac Meal Controversy Takes High Court Twist

Well, it seems the dust hasn't quite settled on that rather peculiar incident at Mumbai airport earlier this year, where passengers were seen casually dining on the tarmac. Indeed, a significant development has just unfolded in the Delhi High Court, shedding more light on the repercussions for those involved. The Centre, representing the government, recently informed the court that a decision has been made: IndiGo's Vice President of Security, Nishant Kumar, has been dismissed from his position.

For those who might recall, this entire saga began after a flight diversion led to a chaotic scene. Passengers, disembarked from an IndiGo flight, were filmed eating right there on the apron, a scene that understandably raised eyebrows and, more importantly, serious questions about airport security protocols. Following this viral incident, the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), the aviation watchdog, promptly issued show-cause notices not only to IndiGo but also to Mumbai Airport, demanding an explanation for the security lapse.

It's worth noting that Nishant Kumar, as the airline's security head, was reportedly a signatory to IndiGo's response to that DGCA notice. Naturally, when whispers of his potential dismissal began to circulate, Kumar wasn't one to simply stand by. He took the matter to the Delhi High Court, challenging any such move. His primary argument, as presented by his legal counsel, was rather pertinent: how could a dismissal be justified based on DGCA findings that hadn't even been shared with him?

During the recent court proceedings, the Centre's standing counsel, Anurag Ahluwalia, confirmed that, yes, the decision to dismiss Kumar had indeed been taken, and an official order to that effect had been issued. However, there was a slight pause, a moment of legal back-and-forth, as the court pressed for clarity. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela specifically inquired whether the dismissal order had actually been served upon Mr. Kumar. The Centre's counsel, needing a moment to verify this crucial detail, requested some additional time to confirm the service of the order.

Meanwhile, Kumar's legal team vehemently argued that any decision to terminate his employment, especially one supposedly based on the DGCA's findings from the tarmac incident inquiry, was inherently flawed if those findings were kept under wraps from him. It's a fundamental principle of natural justice, isn't it, to be aware of the accusations against you? The court, having heard both sides, decided to schedule the next hearing for July 24. It seems we'll have to wait a little longer to see how this high-stakes aviation drama truly concludes.