Plea received to waive airline cross-holding rules: Centre

New Delhi: The government Monday said the Airports Authority of India (AAI) has received a request for waiving the cross-holding cap provision, but the matter is yet to be examined by the civil aviation ministry.

Murlidhar Mohol, minister of state for civil aviation, also informed the Rajya Sabha that there isn't any blanket policy restriction on airport operators from holding substantial equity stakes in airlines, though there are cross-holding curbs as part of contracts for some airports run by private companies.

Mohol didn't name the company which submitted the request to the government.


ET reported last month that Adani Airport Holdings has sought a waiver of the clause that bars the operator of Mumbai airport from holding more than a 10% stake in any scheduled carrier, and the removal of such restrictions from future airport concession agreements.

However, Adani Enterprises, the group flagship, in a regulatory filing later termed such media reports "entirely baseless and factually incorrect."

Senior officials said the government is considering Adani's proposal, along with others, with the aim of attracting well-funded airline operators and injecting competition to break the duopoly of IndiGo and Air India, which together control about 90% of India's air travel market.

Any amendment will require Cabinet approval, besides facing strong opposition from incumbent airlines, as well as inviting close scrutiny from competition regulators, as it could potentially distort the level-playing field and give an unfair advantage in airport access to private operators, especially in slot allocation.

Slots are specific scheduled times allocated to an airline to take off or land at an airport, and those at peak hours are prized assets.

Rahul Bhatia, cofounder and managing director of IndiGo, the country's biggest airline, Thursday said any move allowing cross-ownership would hurt consumers. "It typically would reflect a massive conflict of interest, and over a period of time, it would actually be against the interest of consumers," he said.