1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. Writ Petition No. 406/2007 Shriniwas s/o Vasant Deshpande, Aged about 46 years, Occu- Practising Lawyer, R/o: 9-A, Hill Road, Gandhi Nagar, Nagpur. ... Petitioner. VERSUS 1. The Union of India, through its Secretary, Ministry of Civil Aviation, New Delhi -110 001. 2. Director General of Civil Aviation, Technical Centre, Opp. Safdarjang Airport, New Delhi- 110 003. 3. Maharashtra Airport Development Company, Through its General Manager, through its Project Officer, 41/2 Ramgiri Road,Civil Lines, Nagpur. 4. The Commissioner of Police, Nagpur City & Rural, Nagpur. 5. The Airport Director, Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar, International Airport, Wardha Road, Nagpur. 2 6. The Beauro of Civil Aviation Activity Security (BCAS) Through its Commissioner, (C.A.) Janpath Bhavan, New Delhi. ... Respondents .... Mr. M.K. Kulkarni, Advocate for the petitioner. Mrs. Anjali Joshi, Advocate for the respondents 1,2 and 6. Mr. Agrawal, Advocate for respondent no..3. Mrs. Dangre, Addl. G.P. for respondent no.4. Ms Nandita Parate, Advocate for respondent no.5. --- CORAM : A.P. LAVANDE & P.D.KODE, JJ . DATE OF RESERVING : 02/09/2009 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 09/09//2009 JUDGMENT : (PER A.P.LAVANDE,J) This petition styled as public interest litigation has been filed by the petitioner Shriniwas Vasant Deshpande a practicing advocate seeking following relief. “direct the Respondents to allow the students visit under Rule 90 to Airport at least till Movement Area (as defined under Rule 35-A of the Rules) free of cost and all the activities connected with the pursuit of an Aircraft and aviation are explained to them to their satisfaction like at any other International Airport.” 2. It is the case of the petitioner that it would in the 3 interest of all the students should witness activity of an aircraft which is bound to create a permanent dent in the mind of students which will promote the desire amongst them to take up a career in aviation. By amendment the petitioner has stated that the visitors gallery has been opened in the old terminal building of the airport and the entry fees is fixed at Rs. 30/- and contract to collect entry fees is awarded to private contractor. The petitioner also seeks free entry to the students in the visitors gallery. 3. On behalf of the respondents 1,2 and 6 affidavit of Mr. Suresh Nathuramji Borkar, Airport Director, Nagpur has been filed in which it has been stated that there are no rules, guidelines or policy to provide free entry to the students in any Airport in India and the entry of visitors into terminal building towards city side is permitted by single entry ticket and all entries to airport areas and buildings are regulated by orders of respondent no. 6 and of the respondent no.2 for passengers and aircraft safety and for security reasons the same are strictly followed at all airports in India. It has been also stated that the staff and personnel working in the airport are also not allowed to visit specific operational area used for maneuvering of parking of aircrafts without proper permission. These areas are defined as high risk zones and visitors entry is restricted and regulated as per the laid down procedures at all airports in India. It has been further stated that India is a member of 4 State of International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) a UN Body which requires India to follow various Security Standards and Recommended Practices laid down by ICAO, Commissioner of Security (CA), BCAS (respondent no.6). BCAS - respondent no.6 is appropriate authority for implementation of the standards. In the affidavit reliance has been placed on Rule 90 of the Aircraft Rules. It has been further stated that persons holding visitors single entry ticket are allowed up to visitors gallery and not beyond it i.e. area categorized as movements area. Only permission holders are allowed with photo identity to visit this area after scrutiny and frisking of individuals. It has been further stated that the concerned Ministry of Government of India has duly considered the prayers of the petitioner for making a specific provision for entry of students till visitors gallery totally free of cost but after considering the facts and circumstances it has been found that allowing the students to visit a sensitive airport like Nagpur will not only increase workload of over burdened security staff at airport but may also amount to compromising with the security at the airport and, therefore, it has been decided by the respondent no. 1 that the prayer of the petitioner in this regard cannot be accepted. 4. Since the reliance is placed upon Rule 90 by the respondents 1,2 and 6, it would appropriate to quote Rule 90. Rule 90 reads thus; 5 “90. Entry into public aerodromes-- (1) No person shall enter or be in the terminal building of any Government aerodrome or public aerodrome or part of such building or any other area in such – aerodrome notified in this behalf by the Central Government unless he holds an admission ticket issued by the aerodrome operator or an entry pass issued by the Commissioner of Security (Civil Aviation) or any other officer authorized by him in this behalf. (2)No person, without permission in writing, by general or special order, of the Central Government or any officer authorized by that Government in this behalf, shall-- (a) enter or remain or cause any other person to enter or remain in the Movement area; (b) leave or throw or cause to be thrown any animal, bird or property or object of any nature whatsoever in the Movement area; (c) permit any animal under his possession or control or otherwise to stray in the Movement area; and (d) operate any vehicle in the Movement area. (3)Sub- rules (1) and (2) shall not apply to-- (a) any passenger embarking, disembarking or in transit who holds an air ticket; or (b) any person who is engaged on regular duty at an aerodrome and holds a Photo Identity Card issued by the Commissioner of Security (Civil Aviation) or any other officer authorized 6 by the Central Government in this behalf. (4)Notwithstanding anything contained in this rule, the officer in-charge of an aerodrome or any other officer authorized by the Central Government in this behalf, as the case may be, may if he is satisfied that it is necessary or expedient so to do for the maintenance of proper order or decorum-- (i) refuse admission to any person into the terminal building or the Movement area; or (ii) require any person in such building or such area to leave the same”. 5. Bare perusal of the above Rule discloses that no person without permission in writing from the Central Government or any officer authorized by that Government can enter or remain in the Movement area nor he can enter or be in terminal building of any aerodrome or part of such building or any other area in such aerodrome notified in this behalf by the Central Government unless he holds an admission ticket issued by the aerodrome authority or an entry pass issued by the Commissioner of Security (Civil Aviation) or any other officer authorized in his behalf. Sub rule 3 of Rule 90 states that sub rules 1 and 2 shall not apply to any passenger embarking, disembarking or in transit who holds an air ticket or any person who is engaged on regular duty at an aerodrome and holds a photo identity card issued by the Commissioner of Security (Civil Aviation) or any other officer authorized by the 7 Central Government in this behalf. Sub rule 4 provides that notwithstanding anything contained in this rule, the officer in- charge of an aerodrome or any other officer authorized by the Central Government in this behalf may if he is satisfied that it is necessary or expedient so to do for the maintenance of proper order or decorum refuse admission to any person into the terminal building or the Movement area or require any person in such building or such area to leave the same. Thus, the stand taken by the respondents 1,2 and 6 can not be faulted. Moreover the reasons given by the Airport Director, Nagpur Airport, Nagpur cannot be said to be unreasonable. 6. Insofar as the statement made in the petition that students must be given free entry to the visitors gallery is concerned, in the affidavit filed by the Airport Director, Nagpur it has been stated that same has been duly considered by the Government of India and it is found that same would not only increase the workload of overburdened security staff but may also amount to compromising with the security at the airport. Moreover, charging of fees for entry into visitors gallery is a matter of policy and the same cannot be interfered with and that too in a public interest litigation. Hence, we find it difficult to accept the contention of the petitioner that the students are entitled for free entry to the visitors gallery. 7. For the reasons aforesaid, we find no merit in the 8 petition. Consequently, the petition is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE patle