Air India Express Held Liable for Wrongful Denial of Boarding to IAS Officer, Family: Chandigarh Consumer Commission

May 4, 2026 : The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-I, U.T. Chandigarh has held Air India Express guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice for wrongfully denying boarding to an IAS officer and his family despite their timely arrival at the boarding gate. The Commission observed that passengers who complete check-in formalities and reach the boarding gate before the stipulated closure time cannot arbitrarily be treated as “No Show” passengers.

The Bench comprising President Pawanjit Singh and Member Suresh Kumar Sardana partly allowed the consumer complaint filed by IAS officer Veerendra Kumar Meena, his wife Krishna Meena and their minor son against the airline and awarded reimbursement of additional travel expenses along with compensation and litigation costs.

According to the complaint, the family had travelled to Dubai for a vacation between June 9 and June 17, 2024. They had booked return tickets from Dubai to Amritsar on Air India Express Flight IX-192 through a travel agent by paying ₹18,420 per passenger. The scheduled departure time of the flight was 08:50 AM, while boarding was scheduled to commence at 07:50 AM.

The complainants stated that they reached Dubai International Airport nearly two-and-a-half hours before departure, completed check-in formalities, checked in their luggage and obtained boarding passes mentioning that the gate would close at 08:25 AM. After clearing security checks, they reached the boarding gate before the stipulated closure time. However, the airline’s ground staff allegedly refused to permit them to board on the ground that boarding had already been completed, even though other passengers were still being allowed to enter the aircraft.

The family further alleged that the aircraft was still stationed at the gate when boarding was denied and that no prior intimation regarding premature gate closure had been given. As a result, they were stranded at Dubai International Airport and were compelled to purchase alternative tickets to India via Jaipur on another Air India Express flight departing later that day.

The complainants incurred an additional expenditure of ₹1,26,771 for alternate travel from Dubai to Jaipur and thereafter from Jaipur to Chandigarh. They also contended that due to the delayed arrival, the first complainant could not resume official duties on time.

Before the Commission, Air India Express argued that the complainants had failed to reach the boarding gate within the prescribed timeline and were correctly treated as “No Show” passengers after the gate was closed. The airline relied on boarding records claiming that the last passenger had boarded at 10:06 AM IST and denied any deficiency in service.

After examining the documentary evidence, the Commission found that the complainants had successfully proved that they had booked valid tickets, completed check-in formalities and obtained boarding passes before proceeding to the boarding gate. The Bench also noted that invoices and tickets placed on record established that the complainants had incurred ₹1,26,771 in additional travel expenses because of the airline’s refusal to permit boarding.

The Commission further observed that the original ticket amount of ₹55,260 paid for the Dubai-Amritsar journey had not been refunded by the airline till the disposal of the complaint. Holding the airline liable, the Bench stated:

“It is safe to hold that the aforesaid act of OP amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OPs.”

Accordingly, the Commission partly allowed the complaint and directed the opposite parties jointly and severally to reimburse ₹1,26,771 towards alternate travel expenses, subject to deduction of ₹55,260 if the original ticket amount had already been refunded. The Commission also awarded ₹15,000 as compensation for mental agony and harassment and ₹10,000 towards litigation costs, along with interest at 9% per annum from the date of institution of the complaint until realization.

Case Title: Veerendra Kumar Meena & Ors. v. Air India Express Limited & Anr.
Case No.: Consumer Complaint No. CC/345/2024
Coram: Pawanjit Singh, President and Suresh Kumar Sardana, Member