Modi fans target Ramya for criticising his indifference towards flood victims

Dubai, May 5: Tickets on repatriation flights from UAE to India, which start on May 7, could be costlier than regular airfare, and adding to the financial woes of those flying back. Nearly 200,000 Indians in the UAE have registered on the website seeking to return home.

“A one-way repatriation ticket to Delhi will cost approximately Dh1,400-Dh1,650 - this would earlier have cost between Dh600-Dh700 [during these months],” said Jamal Abdulnazar, CEO of Cozmo Travel. “A one-way repatriation flight ticket to Kerala would cost approximately Dh1,900-Dh2,300.”

This can be quite a burden, as a majority of those taking these flights have either lost their jobs or are sending back their families because of uncertainty on the work front. To now have to pay airfare that is nearly on par with those during peak summer months is quite a blow.

Sources said that officials in Indian diplomatic missions have already initiated calls to some expats, telling them about likely ticket fares and enquiring about their willingness to travel.

Although many believed repatriation would be government-sponsored, Indian authorities have clarified that customers would have to pay for the tickets themselves. Those who thought they were entitled to free repatriation might back out of travel plans for now.

Fact of life

But aviation and travel industry sources say higher rates cannot be escaped since social distancing norms have to be strictly enforced at all times. That would limit the number of passengers on each of these flights.

“One airline can carry only limited passengers - therefore, multiple airlines are likely to get the approval to operate repatriation flights,” said Abdulnazar. “Also, airports will have to maintain safe distance for passengers to queue up at immigration and security counters.

“Therefore, it is recommended that multiple carriers fly into multiple Indian airports for repatriation to be expedited.”

The Indian authorities, so far, have not taken the easy decision to get its private domestic airlines into the rescue act. Gulf News tried speaking to the leading players, but they declined to provide any official statements. So far, only Air India, the national airline, has been commissioned to operate the flights.

Air India finds itself in the driver's seat when it comes to operating India's repatriation flights. To date, there is no confirmation India's private airlines will be allowed to join in.

UAE carriers ready to help out

UAE’s Emirates airline, Etihad, flydubai and Air Arabia are likely to also operate repatriation flights to India after Air India implements the first phase of services.

“We are fully supporting governments and authorities across the flydubai network with their repatriation efforts, helping them to make arrangements for their citizens to return home,” said a flydubai spokesperson.

“We will announce repatriation flights as and when they are confirmed, recognising this is an evolving situation whilst the flight restrictions remain in place.”

An AirArabia spokesperson said the airline is ready to operate repatriation flights when the government tells them to.

Travel agencies likely to benefit

Apart from operating non-scheduled commercial flights, the Indian government is also deploying naval ships to bring expat Indians back. Sources claim the ships are to ferry passengers who cannot afford the repatriation airfares.

Even then, considering the sheer numbers who will want to get on the flights, travel agencies are likely to see a surge in bookings since airline websites alone may not cope with the demand set off in such a short span.

Learn from Gulf governments

In instances when they carried out their own repatriation flights, some GCC governments paid the ticket fares to fly in their citizens. Those citizens who did not have the ready funds could approach their diplomatic mission and aid would be given on a case-to-case basis.

Should Indians wait for normal services to resume?

Industry sources say that those Indians wanting to fly back and cannot afford the repatriation flights should wait for full services to resume once the COVID-19 pandemic settles.

But can those who lost their jobs or seen steep salary cuts stay on without adding to their costs? And is there any guarantee that when flight services resume, ticket rates would be lower than on the repatriation trips.

As such, normal travel is expected to pick up only after the repatriation exercise to several countries is completed. UAE-based travel agencies are not seeing any bookings for summer, which is traditionally the peak holiday season.

“Majority want to stay put unless full confidence is restored,” said Abdulnazar. “I expect full normalcy to be restored not until March 2021.

“People have also taken a hit to their income. Without disposable income, you will curtail your travel.”

What constitutes normalcy?

Airfares are expected to remain high, given the need to keep the middle seats empty to practise safe distance onboard.

“We expect holiday travel to resume by October or November - but, the travel sentiment will not go back to pre-COVID-19 levels anytime soon,” said Manvendra Roy, Vice-President – Commercial at holidayme, an online travel agency. “The need to keep the middle seat vacant will add 30-40 per cent pricing pressure per seat from an airline perspective.

“This will make holidays more expensive.”

As for business travel, it will take some time to recover. Corporate staff are now used to getting work done via conference calls. “Companies will also curtail their travel expenditure since their income has taken a hit,” said Abdulnazar.

Bengaluru, Feb 14: In a major embarrassment to the police, the Karnataka High Court has termed as illegal the prohibitory orders imposed under Section 144 of CrPC by the City Police Commissioner in December 2019 in the light of the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests in Bengaluru.

The orders were passed “without application of mind” and without following due procedures, the court noted. Giving reasons for upholding the arguments of the petitioners that there was no application of mind by the Police Commissioner (Bhaskar Rao) before imposing restrictions, a division bench of the High Court said he had not recorded the reasons, except reproducing the contents of letters addressed to him by the Deputy Commissioners of Police (DCPs). 

The state government had contended that prohibitory orders were passed based on reports submitted by the DCPs who expressed apprehension about anti-social elements creating law and order problems and damaging public property by taking advantage of the anti-CAA protests.  

The High Court bench said the Police Commissioner should have conducted inquiry as stated by the Supreme Court to check the reasons cited by the DCPs who submitted identical reports. Except for this, there were no facts laid out by the Police Commissioner, the court said.

“There is complete absence of reasons. If the order indicated that the Police Commissioner was satisfied by the apprehension of DCPs, it would have been another matter,” it said.  

“The apex court has held that it must record the reasons for imposition of restrictions and there has to be a formation of opinion by the district magistrate. Only then can  the extraordinary powers conferred on the district magistrate can be exercised. This procedure was not followed. Hence, exercise of power under Section 144 by the commissioner, as district magistrate, was not at all legal”, the bench said. 

“We hold that the order dated December 18, 2019 is illegal and cannot stand judicial scrutiny in terms of the apex court’s orders in the Ramlila Maidan case and Anuradha Bhasin case,” the HC bench said while upholding the arguments of Prof Ravivarma Kumar, who appeared for some of the petitioners.   

Partly allowing a batch of public interest petitions questioning the imposition of prohibitory orders and cancelling the permission granted for protesters in the city, the bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar observed that, unfortunately, in the present case, there was no indication of application of mind in passing prohibitory orders.

The bench said the observation was confined to this order only and it cannot be applicable in general. If there is a similar situation (necessitating imposition of restrictions), the state is not helpless, the court said.