Regulator orders probe into IndiGo’s ‘unfair business practices’

NEW DELHI: Two months after IndiGo’s mass flight cancellation in the wake of non-compliance with flying time norms, Competition Commission of India (CCI) on Wednesday ordered a detailed probe into its alleged unfair business practices.

It said the carrier enjoyed “a position of dominance” in the airline business, noting that it operated exclusively on 330 routes, had consistently had 60%-61% market share and a much larger fleet than its rival Air India.

Bengaluru-based Kartikeya Rawal had moved CCI after his flight on Dec 5 last year was cancelled and alternative ones were available only at higher prices. He alleged the overcharging by IndiGo was “abuse of dominance”. The airline contested the claim, while arguing that CCI did not have jurisdiction in the case.


“…IndiGo is a significant market player… (has) effective control over market capacity and supply-side conditions. The domestic passenger aviation market exhibits very high and increasing concentration, exhibiting leading firms possess the ability to operate independently of competitive forces, as the presence of effective rivals is materially constrained,” the regulator said in a 16-page order uploaded on its website.

In 2025, IndiGo had 64% domestic market share, followed by Air India group with 27%, Akasa with 5.1%, and other smaller airlines the remaining 3.9%, according to DGCA data.

“..IndiGo operates the largest fleet with over 400 aircraft, which is significantly higher than that of its nearest competitor, Air India, which operates a fleet of (about) 191 aircraft. Therefore, on the basis of substantial and sustained market share, wide network reach with exclusive operations on a significant number of city-pair routes, comparatively larger fleet and strong financial performance, the commission is of prima facie view that (IndiGo) enjoys a position of dominance in the relevant market,” CCI said.

The order said “by cancelling thousands of flights constituting a significant portion of the scheduled capacity, IndiGo effectively withheld its service from the market, creating an artificial scarcity, limiting consumer access to air travel during peak demand. Such conduct by a dominant enterprise may be viewed as restricting the provision of services.”

The order added passengers who had booked tickets were left with “no real choice but to accept last-minute cancellations. Further, passengers were left to seek alternatives, on their own, at significantly higher prices. Given IndiGo’s dominant position, consumers were effectively locked in and lacked viable alternatives which appears to be in violation of (rules).”

Cancellation of flights and lack of alternatives for passengers seemed to be “prima facie causing an appreciable adverse effect on competition in India. Thus, the Commission is of the opinion that a prima facie case of contravention of provisions is made out in the present matter.”
Select The Times of India as your preferred source on Google Search