"Market-determined airfares and passenger protection need not be in conflict." Critically examine this in light of the recent rules under the Bharatiya Vayuyan Adhiniyam, 2024.

Airfares in India have been deregulated since 1994 [5]. The government holds that fares are market-driven and not set by it in normal circumstances [6]. New rules under the Bharatiya Vayuyan Adhiniyam, 2024, which replaced the Aircraft Act, 1934 [2], keep this market regime. They add a power to issue written fare directions in "extraordinary situations" [1]. This makes the two goals complementary in design, but only partly in practice.

How the rules reconcile market and protection

• Market by default: Fares stay dynamic. The Union government can intervene only "in the public interest" during extraordinary situations [1].
• Transparency: Airlines must publish tariffs online and file them with the DGCA. This narrows the information asymmetry between airlines and passengers [1].
• Formalising ad hoc action: Informal requests for fare restraint during the Kumbh, after Pahalgam and during the Kerala floods now have a statutory footing and a paper trail [1].
• Capacity first: In the 2025 festive season, DGCA got airlines to add flights instead of capping fares [4]. This fixes the market's supply problem without overriding prices.

Where tension persists

• Undefined trigger: "Extraordinary situations" is not defined [1]. This leaves wide executive discretion and raises concerns of arbitrariness in delegated legislation.
• Open-ended caps: The IndiGo-crisis caps were to run "until the situation fully stabilises" [3]. No end date was set in advance.
• Base fare vs. hidden costs: The PIL behind the rules targeted ancillary charges [1]. A cap on the base fare alone can push costs into add-on fees.
• Weak regulator: A parliamentary committee found that DGCA oversight had not stopped fare surges. It sought a SEBI-like quasi-judicial body [5]. Under the rules, DGCA only monitors, while the Ministry decides on caps [1].
• Economic risk: A cap adds no seats. Frequent caps can discourage airlines from adding capacity.

On balance, market pricing and passenger protection can coexist when intervention is rare, rule-bound and proportionate. The way forward is to:

• define the triggers and sunset clauses in law;
• extend directions to ancillary charges;
• strengthen DGCA's tariff-monitoring capacity;
• refer the rules to the Committee on Subordinate Legislation.

A capacity-first, cap-as-backstop approach would protect consumers and sustain a competitive aviation sector.