Madras High CourtWP/12823/2025disposed of

Gokul Ramanujam v. The Director General Of Civil Aviation

2025-04-09Honourable Mr Justice D.Bharatha Chakravarthy7 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated: 09.04.2025 Coram:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Gokul Ramanujam, S/o.Late.S.Ramanujam, Residing At Flat No.194, Tower F, AWHO, Apartments, Dinesh Vihar, Near DLF Garden City, Thazhambur, Chennai.

... Petitioner /versus/

1. The Director General Of Civil Aviation, Aurobindo Marg, Opposite To Safdarjung Airport, 2.The Director General, Central Industrial Security Force, No.13, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, 3.The Assistant Inspector General, North Sector Central Industrial Security Force, CISF NS Head Quarters, Saket, New Delhi-110 017.

4.The Senior Commandant, Central Industrial Security Force, Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi-110 037.

1/7

5.The Officer in-charge, Airports Authority Of India, Rajiv Gandhi Bhavan, Safdarjung Airport, 6.The Head Air India Operations, Block-4, Vatika One on One Sector -16, NH-48, Industrial Estate, Gurgram, Haryana-122 007.

... Respondents Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to furnish a copy of the CCTV footage dated 08.02.2025 consist of running by the petitioner between Terminal-3 and Terminal-2 of Indira Gandhi International Airport at New Delhi between 20.30 Hrs to 21.30 hrs and consequently, direct the respondents to provide to the petitioner the guidelines, rules and regulations by forthwith by considering the petitioners representation dated 27.02.2025 in accordance with law.

For Petitioner :Mr.MA.P.Thangavel.

For Respondents :Mr.P.Palaninathan, Special Panel Counsel, for R1 to R4 2/7

O R D E R

The writ petition is filed directing the respondents to furnish a copy of the CCTV footage dated 08.02.2025 in respect of the petitioner running pillar to post between Terminal-3 and Terminal-2 of Indira Gandhi International Airport at New Delhi between 20.30 hours to 21.30 hours.

2. Upon hearing the Learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it can be seen that the grievance of the petitioner is with reference to a private entity namely, Air India Limited. It is the case of the petitioner that they did not even properly announce the delayed arrival of the flight, on account of which, the petitioner had to miss the connecting flight to Lucknow. Therefore, the petitioner wants to pursue the complaint against the said private entity for compensation for the deficient service and wrong done to him. In that regard, he needs the CCTV footage on 08.02.2025 to be preserved and supplied to him. The Airports Authority in turn had directed for furnishing of photographs etc. In this regard, since urgent orders are necessary, the petitioner is approaching this Court.

3/7

3. When the matter came up for admission, Mr.P.Palaninathan, Learned Special Panel Counsel taking notice would submit that if the matter pertains to the cause of action that arose in Delhi Airport, the petitioner should approach only the Delhi High Court and this Court does not even have territorial jurisdiction.

4. Per contra, the Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the cause of action arose at Chennai from where the petitioner start the travel and received the SMS and therefore, part cause of action also arose at Chennai and therefore, the petitioner is approaching this Court.

5. In view of the order that is proposed to be passed, this Court does not go into in detail with reference to the territorial jurisdiction.

6. The grievance of the petitioner is that if he wants to approach the Civil Court or the Consumer fora for compensation as against the deficient service or the loss caused to him, he may be needing such evidence in the form of CCTV 4/7

footage. When the petitioner approaches the appropriate forum, the Authorities should not say that it has gone beyond the time limit and the footages got erased and therefore, he is urgently approaching this Court.

7. In this regard, it can be seen that the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot be used for the purposes for which interim orders can be prayed before the concern forum itself. If the petitioner approaches the Consumer forum, there also under Section 38 sub-clause (ix), the powers of the Civil Court to summon the evidence is granted to the said forum. The Civil Court will also have the power. Therefore, the petitioner can very well approach the concern fora and also pray for interim orders for preserving and summoning the CCTV footage. Therefore, with such liberty kept open to the petitioner, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. 09.04.2025 bsm To,

1. The Director General Of Civil Aviation, Aurobindo Marg, Opposite To Safdarjung Airport, 5/7

2.The Director General, Central Industrial Security Force, No.13, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, 3.The Assistant Inspector General, North Sector Central Industrial Security Force, CISF NS Head Quarters, Saket, New Delhi-110 017.

4.The Senior Commandant, Central Industrial Security Force, Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi-110 037.

7. The Government Pleader, High Court, Madras. 6/7

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY,J.

bsm 09.04.2025 7/7