Richa Parihar v. Alliance Air Aviation Limited & ANR.
$~56 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 13215/2025 and CM APPL. 54150/2025 (for ex-parte interim stay) RICHA PARIHAR .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Yashvardhan Singh Soam and Mr. Devender Kumar, Advocate with petitioner in person.
versus ALLIANCE AIR AVIATION LIMITED & ANR. .....Respondents Through:
Ms. Neetica Sharma, Mr. Naman Saraswat and Ms.
Shivangi Chawla, Advocates for R-1.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
O R D E R
% 29.08.2025 1.
Issue notice. Ms. Neetica Sharma, learned counsel, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 1 - Alliance Air Aviation Limited ["AAAL"].
2.
The petitioner was employed as a First Officer with AAAL, under a Fixed Term Employment Agreement ["FTEA"] dated 25.07.2019. She resigned in August 2023 and served a three-month notice period, which concluded on 27.10.2023 3.
By way of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner assails a communication from AAAL dated 07.07.2025, by which AAAL demanded the sum of Rs. 10 lakhs from her under the FTEA and the related indemnity bond executed by the petitioner, predicated on the non-compliance with the requisite five-year service W.P.(C) 13215/2025 Page 1 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
period.
4.
In response, the petitioner, through a communication dated 22.07.2025, contended that no amount was payable by her under the indemnity bond. On the contrary, she asserted that she was entitled to arrears of salary, leave encashment, and Provident Fund contributions, together with interest thereon.
5.
Unfortunately, neither the agreement nor the indemnity bond has been placed on record.
6.
Be that as it may, at this stage, Mr. Yashvardhan Singh Soam, learned counsel for the petitioner, instructed by the petitioner, who is present in person, seeks consideration of the petitioner's case by way of representation to AAAL. He refers to the decision of this Court in Captain Harsha Mahendra v. Alliance Air Aviation Limited & Anr [W.P.(C) 11795/2025; decided on 07.08.2025], filed by a similarly placed employee of AAAL, which reads as follows:
"1.
Issue notice. Ms. Neetica Sharma, learned counsel, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. She is permitted to file her vakalatnama by 08.08.2025.
2.
The petitioner seeks directions for the release of his Provident Fund, Gratuity, and other terminal dues, along with issuance of a No Objection Certificate and an Experience Letter. 3.
It is the petitioner's case that he was in the services of respondent No. 1 - Alliance Air Aviation Limited, from 19.02.2016, and tendered his resignation on 05.03.2021. He claims to have served the requisite notice period of six months, but states that his statutory and contractual dues have not yet been paid.
4.
As the petitioner's representation for payment of his dues has not been responded to, I am of the view that the appropriate course, at this stage, is to direct the respondents to treat the present writ petition as a representation, and take an appropriate decision on the petitioner's claims within a period of six weeks from today. If any amounts or documents sought by the petitioner are admittedly payable or issuable to him, the respondents will take the necessary steps within a further period of four weeks thereafter.
W.P.(C) 13215/2025 Page 2 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
5.
In the event the respondents contend that any of the petitioner's claims are unjustified, either in full or part, they will communicate the reasons thereof to the petitioner within a period of six weeks. 6.
The writ petition, alongwith pending applications, is accordingly disposed of.
7.
All rights and contentions of the parties remain reserved." [Emphasis supplied.] 7.
In view of the foregoing, the present writ petition is disposed of in the light of paragraphs 4 to 7 of the aforesaid order. 8.
It is made clear that AAAL may examine the petitioner's contentions, and if it decides to enforce the indemnity bond in full or part, the amount may be adjusted against any balance amount payable to the petitioner, without prejudice to her right to challenge the same in appropriate proceedings.
9.
The pending application is accordingly disposed of. PRATEEK JALAN, J AUGUST 29, 2025 UK/sd/ W.P.(C) 13215/2025 Page 3 of 3 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.