Shankar Shyamnaval Mishra v. Air India

$~38 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 13809/2023, CM APPL. 54602/2023, CM APPL. 55961/2023 and CM APPL. 27210/2024 SHANKAR SHYAMNAVAL MISHRA .....Petitioner Through:

Mr Abhay Kumar, Mr Shagun Ruhil, Mr Karan Chopra, Mt Khalif Akhtar, Mr Shreenivash Advocates.

Versus

AIR INDIA .....Respondent Through:

Mr. Rajiv Nayar, Sr. Advocate with Mr.

Amit Mishra, Mr.

Azeem Samuel, Ms. Mitakshara Goyal, Mr.

Vaibhav Kharbanda, Mr. Shivam Goel, Ms. Shrijeta Pratik, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

O R D E R

% 21.01.2026 1.

The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the order dated 15.09.2023 passed by the Appellate Authority declining the request of the petitioner to supply certain documents.

2.

The petitioner submits that the documents were necessary to enable him to effectively defend himself in the inquiry initiated against him. 3.

The documents sought by the petitioner have been succinctly captured The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

by this Court in its order dated 31.10.2023, in which notice was directed to be issued.

4.

The facts of the case would indicate that the petitioner was accused of urinating on a female passenger in seat 9A on the flight AI-102 of Air India, flying from New York to New Delhi on 26.11.2022. In the Internal Inquiry Committee („ICC‟), set up against the petitioner, he was found guilty of being an "Unruly Passenger". The petitioner alleges that Air India is in possession of internal correspondence and emails from pilots and crew members dating back to November 2022, which suggest his innocence, but were denied during the inquiry.

5.

The order of the Appellate Authority would indicate that certain documents have been directed to be supplied but most of the documents sought by the petitioner have been refused.

6.

Learned counsel for the petitioner points out the relevance of the documents refused, and their relevance to the outcome of the appeal. 7.

The Court is of the opinion that if the petitioner is prejudiced by non supply of the documents by the ICC, the Appellate Authority is fully competent to examine the said position. The interim order, whereby, the supply of documents has been refused, should not come under way, or otherwise act as an impediment, for the appellant to re-agitate the issue when the final hearing in the said appeal will take place. 8.

The Appellate Authority will have to comprehensively consider the rational of the documents and the reasons for the non-supply thereof, at the time of the adjudication of the appeal. If the petitioner, thereafter, has any grievance, he shall be at liberty to take appropriate recourse in accordance with law.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

9.

With the aforesaid observations, the instant petition stands disposed of.

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J JANUARY 21, 2026 Nc/ ksr The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.