M. Sufian Siddiqui v. Union of India and Ors.

1 Petitioner has filed thisjAlifenillfublic interest and the prayers made inthewrit petition read&asi,ui#er^, "a. Direct the respoiMrv^l0^^0^get the SecurityAudit conducted atthe Indira dai&tiflmi^ional Airport-Terminal- 3 by a specialized agency independent, National/International (ICAO) in consonance^, wjth t}w,.^jMnexure-17-Security Standards &Recomm^M^'0act^<f^RP's) stipulated by International Civil Aviation Organization' as deemedfit by this Hon 'ble Court in that regard. And b. Direct the specialised agency to file their Security Audit Report befiyre this Hon'ble Court after conducting the Security Audit at the IGIAirport. And c. Direct the respondents to take all appropriate steps to fiyrmulate and commission/deploy round-the-clock impenetrable security arrangements based on the inputs and suggestions received pursuant to the Security Audit W.P.(C) 11070/2017 1of[3] 2018:DHC:8632-DB -) V- 'V Report at the said Terminal-3 at Indira Gandhi International Airport. And d. Direct the respondent no. 1 toforthwith install PNR Scanners/Readers to verify the authenticity ofthe E-Tickets at the Entry Gate ofthe Terminal Building at IGI Airport. And e. Direct the respondent no. 1 to collaborate and ardently pursue with the "International Civil Aviation Organisation" to ensure that the "Standardization of E- Ticketing" is accomplished across theglobe. And f. Direct the respondents to inte^ate the Ticketing Software likeARING andSITA.e^c. at the ltjl,0rport. And g. Direct the respondent^-tQ^ adequate education and training to the cit the Entry GaieiofTermmdif$:^Mt^ andjol^p to all the concernedfortke§k0rity^p0hcIGIAirport. A0h. Direct the resp:b,rM'$M '^ "Airport Security Committee" co-ordination amongst the different responsibleforthe management ofth^eg^t^il^^e IGI Airport and to advise on the develo^t^^S^^^ntation ofsecurity measures at the i. Direct the resp^^0^^jg^^tly implement the "International Civil AviMSn^r^anization's" - ICAO's 'Annexure-17 Security Standards And Recommended Practices' (SARF'^^m.^m^^^^d the clock impenetrable security atihe^IGIlirport:And j. Award the cost ofthepresentpetition infavour ofthe petitioner. And k. Grant any other further relief which this Hon 'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances ofthepresent case."

2. Respondents have filed detailed counter affidavits and on going through the counter affidavits filed by respondent No.l - Bureau of Civil W.P.(C) 11070/2017 Page 2of[3] ef) n Aviation Security, respondent No.2 - Airport Authority of India and respondent No.3 — Delhi International Airports Ltd., we find that most of ' the security arrangements in the airport in question have been updated and based onvarious statutory requirements as are laid down by the DGCA and various other authorities, particularly, the standards and norms fixed by Bureau of Civil Aviation Security arrangements and requirements are in place.

3. That being so, now taking into accbunt the detailed counter affidavits filed by the respondents, we see np^reaspn to make ari;^dndulgence in the matter, particularly,;iii the mosfep|the prayers in the writ petition are within'the'i'executiyd^^ of the re^ppndents who have to take action for updatini'"and:upkeep1ngarrangements in the airports after consulting technical down by various statutory authorities and proceed in the mia^in|I^||^]^t for awrit Court to exercise jurisdictionunder Article 226 (jf^fepiiiMronto laydown any guidelines or putinto place asystem or||^^^e^rify'guidelines orprocedure for enforcing security arrangeme!i%^^^^^f These are to be decided by the statutory authorities like the DGCA, the Bureau of. Civil Aviation Security etc. and once thS|i|^^f^e|ts.^^@ought on record various security arrangements made in the airport, we see no reason to make any further indulgence into the matter in apublic interest litigation.

CHIEF JUSTICE SEPTEMBER 20,2018/ns V. KAMESWAR RAO, J