The Bench also noted that though the FIR was lodged in 2011 and a chargesheet was also filed, no charge has been framed against Jeetendra Krishna Varma to date. File.
| Photo Credit: The Hindu
In a relief to a 61-year-old pilot, the Bombay High Court has quashed a 2011 DGCA order suspending his licence, noting the order was “illegal and unsustainable” as it violated the principles of natural justice by not granting him a hearing.
The Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), on March 12, 2011, suspended Jeetendra Krishna Varma’s Airline Transport Pilot License (ATPL), considered the highest level of pilot licence, after an FIR was lodged against him in Delhi for allegedly procuring the licence based on forged documents.
Varma, then aged 46, moved the High Court, challenging the DGCA’s order suspending his licence under provisions of the Aircraft Rules.
A Bench of Justices Manish Pitale and Shreeram Shirsat, in the judgment passed on Monday (June 8, 2026), said the DGCA’s licensing authority neither issued a show-cause notice to Varma nor granted him a hearing in person before taking the decision to suspend his licence.
“We feel that definitely prejudice has been caused to the petitioner (Varma) as he could not point out his side of the story and therefore, we deem it fit to set aside the order (suspension of licence) and remit the matter back to the respondent (DGCA) to give an opportunity to the petitioner, which will be in consonance with the principles of natural justice,” High Court said.
The Bench also noted that though the FIR was lodged in 2011 and a chargesheet was also filed, no charge has been framed against Varma to date.
“The order (suspension of licence) deserves to be quashed and set aside, as it is illegal and unsustainable. The ATPL licence which was issued to the petitioner is restored,” the Court said, adding the DGCA was at liberty to initiate an inquiry, give an opportunity to the petitioner and thereafter pass a reasoned order.
The aircraft rules clearly envisage that before a person is disqualified from holding or obtaining a licence, an opportunity of being heard has to be given. The authority has to grant a hearing to the person and then pass a reasoned order as to why it feels that the licence should be suspended or cancelled, the High Court said.
“Adopting such a procedure will be in consonance with the principles of natural justice. In the present case, there is a complete infraction of the rules,” the Court noted.
As per Varma’s plea, he was issued a Commercial Pilot License in December 1988, which was renewed periodically. He was employed with Air India, where he operated flights regularly.
In 2010, the petitioner became eligible for issuance of an Airline Transport Pilot License (ATPL), considered the highest level of pilot licence. He appeared for the requisite test and was issued the licence.
In March 2011, a complaint was filed in Delhi alleging that Varma obtained the ATPL based on forged documents. He was arrested and released on bail the same month. After registration of the FIR, the DGCA suspended his licence.
The DGCA contended that Varma had obtained the ATPL based on forged documents, and hence, in the interest of public safety, the licence was suspended.
Varma, in his plea, said he was neither issued a show-cause notice nor granted an opportunity to put forth his case before the DGCA decided to suspend his licence. This was contrary to the rules, he claimed.
After his licence was suspended, he was terminated from his job, Varma said. He had filed a petition in HC challenging the termination order. In February 2019, the high court set aside the termination.
Published – June 10, 2026 12:15 pm IST
