On August 11, frequent flyer and social activist S Lakshminarayana filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court, seeking regulatory guidelines to check unpredictable fluctuations in airfares and ancillary charges levied by private airlines. Lakshminarayan argued that air travel, once a luxury, is now an essential service and has been classified as one. In the 140-page document, the petitioner sought the government’s intervention into what the writ described as “irregular, opaque and exploitative conduct of the airlines”.
As it turns out, discontent against airline pricing is not specific to India. Recently, the US Senate Subcommittee’s report titled ‘The Sky’s the Limit’ created an uproar in the country. The report – focused on the airline industry’s tendency to “unbundle” as many charges as possible, making these ancillary fees a significant revenue stream – criticizes carriers for loading passengers with new charges, which are added to the cost of the ticket.
So whether it’s assigned seats, food, water, checked in baggage – virtually anything that can be charged for can be charged. According to this report, this strategy, known as “unbundling”, has spread to almost every airline in the industry and “ancillary fees” have become an important revenue source. According to the report, unbundling has “incredibly increased” the cost of flying for consumers, who now face additional fees to fly with a carry-on or checked bag, or even to sit next to their minor children.
The Senate report argues that airlines such as United, Delta, Spirit, Frontier and American Airlines have generated billions of dollars in revenue from ancillary fees, while travelers face more complex fees and fewer options to avoid them, obscuring the total cost of travel. Citing figures, the report argued that the five airlines collectively earned $12.4 billion in revenue from seat fees between 2018 and 2023 and last year for the first time United earned $1.3 billion from seat fees, more than the $1.2 billion it earned from checked bag fees.
As the Supreme Court began hearing the petition filed by Lakshminarayana, the reality unfolded like a nightmare when a major lapse on the part of India’s largest airline led to a shameful collapse of the aviation ecosystem. Although IndiGo soon recovered from its collapse, it triggered a series of internal and external investigations which the airline is still grappling with.
According to aviation experts, the investigation and reprimand by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) brought more relief to the airline than expected. Internal board investigation is ongoing. Then, last week IndiGo shares fell after it was announced that the Competition Commission of India (CCI) has ordered a probe into the monopoly position of the airline.
Regulate, regulate, regulate: arguments in favor
Even before the December unrest, fliers had long expressed concerns over changes in tariffs and airfares imposed in India, especially after the pandemic.
The writ petition echoes many of the points already raised by the flyers. It argues that air travel is now an essential service and has been classified under the Essential Services Maintenance Act, 1981. Air travel becomes important during many situations, including medical emergencies. And, in many such situations, the writ argues, there is no alternative as rail or road travel is not possible due to unavailability or becomes uneconomic due to the time it takes.
During public emergencies, air travel is the only option and hence it is the responsibility of the State to protect passengers from arbitrary fare hikes in such situations. The document argues that allowing airlines to increase fares unchecked in such situations is not only “unconscionable” but also a violation of specific articles of the Indian Constitution.
Two recent examples have been mentioned in detail in the writ. First, airfares to Prayagraj skyrocketed during the Maha Kumbh in 2025, which the petition called “profiteering on faith”, with fares to a city like Hyderabad becoming even higher. ₹₹1 lakh for a one-way ticket. The writ pointed out that the DGCA’s “delayed intervention came only after mass outrage” and yet no penalty was imposed and “the airlines continued to set fares beyond reasonable limits, thereby proving the ineffectiveness of the fare supervision mechanism”.
Another example is the exorbitant fares charged by airlines after the Pahalgam terrorist attack in April, when airfares from Srinagar to Delhi increased. ₹Typical rates between Rs 65,000 vs ₹Rs 6,000-8,000 for a one-way ticket, with similar spikes for Mumbai, Bengaluru and other cities. The writ argues that it is possible for fares to increase “four to six times” the normal rate within a matter of hours due to the “opaque, algorithm-driven pricing mechanism adopted by the airlines”.
The same pattern was repeated with airfare hike in December 2025 when IndiGo failed to meet the court-ordered flight charge deadline guidelines, resulting in massive cancellations and delays and financial loss to those affected.
Auxiliary and other charges
Of concern to passengers are ancillary and other charges including ad-hoc charges such as baggage fees and fuel surcharges and many argue that private airlines use these to increase their revenues.
The writ argues that over the years all airlines have unilaterally reduced the free check-in baggage allowance from 25 kg to 15 kg, a 40% reduction from the earlier entitlement, thereby “converting what was earlier a part of the ticketing service into a new revenue stream”. It has also been argued that the policy of allowing only one piece of checked baggage in luggage and the absence of any exemption or relaxation to those carrying only hand luggage demonstrates the “arbitrary and discriminatory nature of the measure”.
International travelers have also faced arbitrary and excessive excess baggage fees. Bengaluru-based fashion designer Andrew Pierce, who recently flew to Phuket for a fashion shoot with 30 kg of extra luggage, paid US$500 for an extra piece, while a return ticket on IndiGo was US$210, making luggage more expensive than flying up and down the country. Pierce said, “I often have an extra piece of luggage because it’s required for trade shows and I’ve never paid more than US$250 for an extra piece except for Indigo, which to me is tantamount to robbery in broad daylight.”
When asked, an IndiGo spokesperson said the allegations were true and “as per industry standards”. He said airfare is dynamic and can be purchased during discounts or at lower prices if booked in advance, but the cost of excess baggage is fixed per unit.
The practice of airlines charging fees for seat selection has also been a subject of controversy. Earlier, only seats that had extra space – such as first row or emergency – were charged, but recently IndiGo and other companies led by it have started charging. ₹For any aisle or window seat in aircraft 450 and above, only the middle seats will be freely allocated. In many cases, families with small children traveling together are told they will have to pay extra to sit together on a flight that was previously taken for granted.
This latest tactic has not gone down well with passengers, who have alleged that it amounts to robbery. Almost equally troubling is the strategy of combining the sale of food and beverages on board, which many argue amounts to coercion.
Airlines’ worst nightmare and the way forward
Airlines are wary of any type of fare regulation because they argue that their entire business model is based on free pricing determined by demand and supply. They argue that dynamic pricing is necessary to manage the high volatility of operating costs and ensure the financial sustainability of a notoriously low-margin sector. The global airline industry remains one of the lowest margin sectors with a projected net profit margin of only 3.9% in 2026.
Airlines argue that price caps during peak periods would prevent them from recovering costs incurred during low-demand seasons or covering sudden increases in expenses such as fuel and labor. Furthermore, given the way regulators have evolved in India, industry confidence in their capabilities remains low. “There is a tendency in India to over-regulate, to intervene when not necessary or to over-extend into matters that are out of scope,” says a former head of the Competition Commission of India (CCI).
The bigger issue, he says, is the need to look at whether the airline’s actions – whenever they arise or become a point of contention – are justified. “Without monitoring, even the most disciplined student can run amok,” says a former Civil Aviation Ministry official. 2025 has revealed all the cracks, especially for users of air services. It is now up to policy makers to find solutions.
