CAPT. BHARAT PRASAD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition impugns the order dated 21.9.2012 passed by the Appellate Authority whereby the termination of the petitioner as a Pilot with the respondent no.3 in terms of the letter dated 29.9.2010 was upheld. The petitioner claims that petitioner was fully and duly qualified and therefore both the termination order dated 29.9.2010 and 21.9.2012 are required to be set aside.

(2.) THE facts of the case are that the petitioner was given a fixed term employment of five years from 16.12.2009 to 15.12.2014 in terms of the Agreement dated 16.12.2009. Clause 12.2 of the Agreement provides for termination of the service of the employee/Pilot if the performance is found to be unsatisfactory.

(3.) THE aforesaid observations show that all the three examiner pilots have observed one way or the other that the petitioner is not fit to be released for flying as a co-pilot without a safety pilot. Petitioners actions were found dangerous for flight safety. Petitioners handling of aircraft was dissatisfactory and he had no idea of cockpit preparation. The knowledge of the petitioner on procedures and technical aspects as also operating procedures and overall performance was found to be below substandard and dissatisfactory. In my opinion, surely this Court is ill- equipped to substitute the opinion of the examiner pilots who checked the proficiency of the petitioner as a pilot to fly the aircraft as a co-pilot without a safety pilot. Courts are not equipped to perform and decide technical functions which are best left to the Competent Authorities. It is relevant that after all if the petitioner, who is found unfit by the team of examiners for being given independent operation of the aircraft, lives of passengers would also be at stake.