DGCA Allows Go First To Resume Operations, But With Conditions

Indian airline Go First's resumption plan has been accepted by the cash-strapped company's regulator, the DGCA.

However, this acceptance has been subjected to certain conditions.

The DGCA announced on Friday (July 21) that it has accepted Go First's proposed resumption plan, which was dated June 28. However, this acceptance is contingent upon the outcome of writ petitions that are currently pending before the Delhi High Court and NCLT.

According to the DGCA, Go First will be allowed to resume flight operations as long as it complies with all the necessary regulatory requirements for holding an Air Operator Certificate.

Additionally, the airline must ensure the airworthiness of its aircraft that are engaged in operations.

Go First is prohibited from deploying any aircraft for operations without first conducting a satisfactory handling flight. The DGCA also emphasized that any changes within the company that could impact the resumption plan submitted by the resolution professional must be promptly notified to them.

Go First aims to resume flights with a fleet of 22 aircraft as soon as possible.

The DGCA has requested the Resolution Professional (RP) to submit a proposed flight schedule based on the available resources, including airworthy aircraft, qualified pilots, cabin crew, AMEs, and flight dispatchers. The RP must also make arrangements for the necessary interim funding to resume services.

Go First's RP, Shailendra Ajmera, had recently invited Expressions of Interest (EoIs) from potential bidders for the grounded airline. The deadline for submitting the EoIs is August 9, and the final list of prospective resolution applicants will be announced on August 19, as stated in the public notice.

The carrier has approximately 4,200 employees and generated a revenue of Rs 4,183 crore from operations in the financial year ending March 2022. Its liabilities amount to around Rs 11,463 crore.

The airline operator filed for bankruptcy in May, stating that a US-based engine maker was responsible for delays that prevented them from meeting their obligations.

This resulted in a portion of their fleet being grounded.