Who Owns the Sky? India's Government Wrestles With a High-Stakes Aviation Question

India's Civil Aviation Minister K Rammohan Naidu stirred considerable buzz in the aviation industry when he publicly acknowledged that the government is actively weighing the possibility of allowing airport operators to hold ownership stakes in airlines — a move that could fundamentally reshape how India's aviation ecosystem is structured.

Naidu made the remarks while speaking to reporters on the sidelines of a signing ceremony for the next phase of the Udaan regional connectivity scheme.

The Scale India Needs

Before addressing the ownership question, the minister laid out an ambitious baseline for India's aviation future. He stated that to fully capitalise on the country's current surge in air travel demand, India needs a minimum of five airlines each operating fleets of at least 100 aircraft — a scale the country is yet to reach.

He also reiterated the government's commitment to expanding airport infrastructure, saying India should ideally have over 350 airports. "People, even in small towns, want airports in their vicinity," Naidu said, framing the expansion as both a present aspiration and a long-term necessity tied to the Viksit Bharat 2047 vision.

The Adani Question That Sparked It All

The conversation took a sharper turn when a reporter raised the Adani Group's reported interest in acquiring a stake in an airline. The minister did not address the conglomerate by name, but his response was pointed: the country needs more airlines, and if someone is willing to invest in starting one, the government is supportive.

"The first idea is to provide the passenger with more airlines as an option," Naidu said.

A Legal Grey Zone — With Exceptions

Naidu also clarified an important legal nuance. While Operation, Management and Development Agreements — known as OMDA agreements — governing major PPP airports such as Delhi and Mumbai do contain restrictions on airport operators owning airlines, not all airport operators are bound by such clauses.

Pointing specifically to Delhi International Airport Limited (DIAL), a private operator, the minister noted there is currently no rule that explicitly prevents it from launching an airline. "That is why we have to see; we have to take a balanced approach," he said.

No Decision Yet — But the Deliberation Is Underway

Naidu was careful to note that no final decision has been made. The government, he said, will assess the pros and cons of the cross-ownership model before moving forward. The broader intent, however, appears clear: India's aviation policymakers are seriously entertaining a structural shift that could open the skies to a new class of airline investors — ones who already own the runways.

Air India's financial wounds deepened sharply in the fiscal year ending March 2026, with the Tata Group-owned carrier posting a consolidated net loss of Rs. 22,238.23 crore — more than double the Rs. 10,858.83 crore loss recorded in the previous year. The numbers, drawn from regulatory filings, paint a stark picture of an airline that has been battered from nearly every direction simultaneously.

When the Books Turned Red

The airline's total consolidated income contracted to Rs. 71,869.94 crore in FY26, down from Rs. 78,635.61 crore in FY25 — a significant erosion in revenue at a time when costs were climbing in the opposite direction. Total consolidated expenses swelled to Rs. 93,733.31 crore, compared to Rs. 89,317.12 crore a year earlier. The figures include the financials of Air India Express.

The Crash That Changed Everything

The most defining event of the fiscal year came in June 2025, when Air India Flight AI171 went down in a fatal accident, killing 260 people — one of the deadliest aviation disasters in recent memory. The tragedy cast a long shadow over the airline's operations, reputation and finances throughout the year.

Regulatory filings confirmed that the parent company is covered under aviation hull and liability insurance, and has received the agreed settlement from its insurer towards the aircraft loss and related costs. The net impact has been recorded as an exceptional item in the books. Management has stated that no material financial impact on reserves or losses is presently expected from associated claims.

Where the Money Went

Aircraft repair and maintenance costs climbed to Rs. 14,976.45 crore from Rs. 13,901.82 crore in the previous year. Fuel expenses, however, offered a rare silver lining — falling to Rs. 26,871.80 crore from Rs. 29,023.37 crore, likely a reflection of easing global fuel prices.

The most alarming surge came in foreign exchange losses, which exploded to Rs. 7,388.23 crore in FY26 from just Rs. 1,545.01 crore a year prior — a near-fivefold jump that underscores the brutal impact of currency volatility on an airline with significant dollar-denominated obligations.

Standalone Numbers Tell a Starker Story

On a standalone basis — excluding Air India Express — the airline's loss widened to Rs. 15,367.75 crore in FY26 from Rs. 3,975.75 crore in FY25. Standalone total income also fell sharply to Rs. 53,662.15 crore from Rs. 64,343.09 crore.

The Long Road Ahead

Tata Sons Chairman N. Chandrasekaran, writing in the group's 2025-26 Annual Report released in July, acknowledged the scale of the challenge head-on. He described Air India's transformation as a five-to-ten year journey, citing years-long supply chain disruptions in critical components, the overhaul of legacy systems and culture, fleet renewal and the building of a large cadre of aviation professionals.

The numbers confirm that the journey is far from over — and far more turbulent than anticipated.

The ghost of Jet Airways continues to haunt India's aviation and legal corridors. In a significant ruling, the National Company Law Tribunal's (NCLT) Mumbai bench has dismissed a plea filed by Jet Airways' liquidator seeking recovery of Rs 500 crore — roughly USD 92.13 million — in advance payments made to American aerospace giant Boeing for aircraft that were never delivered.

A Deal Struck in 2013, A Crisis by 2019

The roots of the dispute trace back to 2013, when Jet Airways entered into purchase agreements with The Boeing Company for two aircraft — the 737-8 and the 787-9 — making substantial advance pre-delivery payments totalling USD 92.13 million to secure the order.

But Jet Airways never saw those planes. As the airline began haemorrhaging cash, Boeing suspended the purchase agreements in May 2019, citing payment delays on Jet's part. Just weeks later, in June 2019, Jet Airways was admitted into the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).

Boeing Files a Claim — and Adjusts Its Books

With insolvency proceedings underway, Boeing lodged a claim before the Resolution Professional, adjusting the USD 92.13 million advance already received from Jet against its outstanding dues. The net admitted claim stood at Rs 721.19 crore, which later swelled to Rs 873.78 crore due to currency fluctuations during the prolonged liquidation process.

In December 2020, Boeing formally terminated the purchase agreements by issuing a termination notice, drawing a definitive line under the transaction.

The Supreme Court Steps In — Liquidation Ordered

After years of failed revival attempts, the Jalan Kalrock Consortium — the successful resolution applicant — was unable to implement the approved resolution plan. On November 7, 2024, the Supreme Court ordered Jet Airways into liquidation. The NCLT formally commenced the liquidation process on November 26, 2024.

Liquidator Demands Money Back; Boeing Refuses

Once the liquidator was appointed, he sought the return of the USD 92.13 million in advance payments, arguing the funds formed part of the liquidation estate under Section 36 of the IBC and were recoverable since Boeing never supplied the aircraft.

Boeing pushed back firmly. The company argued that the advance payments had already been adjusted against its larger admitted claim, and stood legally extinguished through set-off under Regulation 29 of the IBBI (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016.

NCLT Rules: This Is Not Our Fight

A two-member bench of NCLT comprising Prabhat Kumar and Sushil Mahadeorao Kochey ruled that the dispute was fundamentally contractual in nature and beyond the tribunal's jurisdiction under Section 60(5) of the IBC.

The bench observed that whether Boeing was justified in suspending and terminating the agreements, forfeiting the advance payments, and invoking set-off were questions requiring a full-fledged trial — with evidence and evaluation of the underlying agreements, which neither party even placed on record, citing confidentiality concerns.

The matter now heads to a competent civil court, leaving Jet Airways' creditors and the liquidation estate with yet another long legal road ahead.

It is not every day that a sitting Civil Aviation Minister publicly acknowledges that a domestic airline is under regulatory surveillance. But that is precisely what happened when Minister K Rammohan Naidu, speaking on the sidelines of a conference in New Delhi, confirmed that both the Ministry of Civil Aviation and the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) are actively monitoring SpiceJet's financial health and day-to-day operations. The statement was brief, but its implications were anything but.

The Slide Began Early — And Has Not Stopped

To understand where SpiceJet stands today, the numbers from February tell the real story. At the start of 2024, the airline held a 3.9 percent share of India's domestic aviation market — modest, but functional. What followed was a slow, painful erosion. By June, that figure had fallen to 1.9 percent. By July, it slipped further still, to just 1.6 percent, according to the latest official data released by aviation authorities. In a fiercely competitive market dominated by IndiGo and others, losing more than half your market presence in a matter of months is a structural crisis.

Salaries Withheld, Fleet at Bare Bones

Behind the statistics lies a situation that is deeply unsettling for thousands of SpiceJet employees. Sources with knowledge of the airline's internal affairs revealed that salary payments have been significantly delayed, with many staff members not having received their wages since May. For an airline workforce that operates under demanding conditions, the financial uncertainty has compounded an already difficult environment.

The operational picture is equally grim. According to fleet tracking platform Planespotters.net, SpiceJet is currently operating with just 11 aircraft — a number that would struggle to serve a regional carrier, let alone a budget airline that once aspired to compete on a national scale.

September Brings a Lifeline — On Paper

On September 3, SpiceJet made an announcement designed to shift the narrative. The airline confirmed it had finalised lease agreements with three aircraft operators for the addition of 20 planes to its fleet — 15 Boeing and 5 Airbus aircraft — to be inducted under damp and wet lease arrangements ahead of the winter schedule.

According to the airline, the aircraft are set to arrive in phases between mid-October and mid-November, timed to align with the Durga Puja travel surge that traditionally marks the beginning of India's peak winter travel season. SpiceJet stated that the inductions would bolster both its domestic and international network capacity through winter and into the following summer peak.

A Comeback Plan Under the Regulator's Gaze

Whether the 20-aircraft plan translates from announcement to tarmac remains the defining question. With the DGCA and the ministry watching, with salaries in arrears and only 11 planes airborne, SpiceJet's winter gamble is being placed under the harshest possible spotlight. The airline has room to recover — but the margin for error has all but disappeared.

What began as a commercial investment question spiralled into a two-week national debate in Singapore. At the centre of it: Singapore Airlines' 25.1% stake in Air India and a reported request for roughly $1.5 billion in fresh equity from its owners — Tata Sons and Singapore Airlines — to fund the Indian carrier's ongoing turnaround.

The controversy first broke into public view when opposition Workers' Party lawmaker Kenneth Tiong urged that funds from Temasek — the state investor that majority-owns Singapore Airlines — not be channelled toward propping up the Indian airline.

The Government Draws a Line

On Tuesday, Transport Minister Jeffrey Siow addressed parliament directly, drawing a firm line between state obligations and commercial strategy. He clarified that Singapore Airlines is a listed company that funds investments from its own balance sheet and had not sought additional capital from shareholders.

"Building globally competitive companies means entering potentially difficult markets against people who got there first and staying the course when there is turbulence," Siow said. He added pointedly: "We cannot tell our companies to go out and compete, and then treat every tough year abroad as proof that they should stay home."

Siow also noted that Air India's losses do not automatically become Singapore Airlines' liabilities, and that the capital request from Air India does not obligate the carrier to provide it.

A Loss That Looms Large

The financial context is difficult to ignore. Air India's losses widened to $2.33 billion in the year to March, part of a multibillion-dollar transformation programme that could take up to a decade to fully bear fruit. Singapore Airlines acknowledged on Tuesday that Air India's turnaround is a "complex, multi-year programme" and characterised its stake as a long-term strategic commitment aligned with its multi-hub growth strategy.

Temasek Holds Firm

Amid the parliamentary scrutiny, state investor Temasek publicly backed Singapore Airlines. On Saturday, Senior Minister K. Shanmugam stated that Temasek, as a shareholder, expects Singapore Airlines to make responsible investment decisions — and that such decisions are the company's to make.

When Debate Turned Toxic

The controversy did not remain polite. Shanmugam flagged a troubling undercurrent: the public debate had given rise to anti-Indian racist commentary online, with Temasek's CEO and senior management targeted over their ethnicity. He asked police to examine the comments. Prime Minister Lawrence Wong condemned the abuse on Sunday.

Tiong, whose parliamentary question triggered the debate, categorically rejected racism and xenophobia, maintaining that his concerns had always been strictly commercial.

The Verdict: Patience Required

Singapore Airlines reiterated on Tuesday that all investments in India are and will continue to be funded through its own internal resources, subject to board approval. The government's message was clear — global ambition demands patience, and not every bet pays off in the first innings.

With Inputs from Reuters

Regional carrier Fly91 has placed an order for 40 ATR-72 turboprop aircraft — one of the largest orders for the type in recent times — as the airline looks to dramatically expand connectivity to smaller towns and cities across India that have long been bypassed by larger commercial jets, according to people aware of the development.

At list price, the deal is valued at more than $1 billion, though airlines typically secure substantial discounts on orders of this scale. Spokespeople for both Fly91 and aircraft manufacturer ATR did not respond to queries seeking official confirmation.

Doubling the Fleet, Expanding the Map

The order represents a significant inflection point for the young carrier. Fly91 currently operates a small fleet of ATR-72 aircraft, connecting airports under the Indian government's UDAN regional connectivity scheme — including destinations such as Sindhudurg and Jalgaon. The 40 new aircraft will more than double the airline's fleet and substantially expand its footprint across tier-2 and tier-3 cities that remain chronically underserved by aviation infrastructure.

Deliveries are slated to begin towards the end of 2027 and are expected to be completed over a period of five years.

Fueling the Expansion

Alongside the aircraft order, Fly91 is in the process of raising approximately Rs. 250 crore from a combination of existing and new investors to support its broader expansion plans, the people said.

The Case for Turboprops in India

Manoj Chacko, Founder and CEO of Fly91, made the airline's strategic rationale clear. "We are heavily bullish on the India story and want to build a reliable transportation company out of India," he said. "There are 100 such airports in India where a big aircraft like Airbus A320 and Boeing 737 can't go. The ATR-72 aircraft perfectly suits those routes and for our cost model."

The ATR-72, a twin-engine turboprop built for short-haul and thin routes, is widely regarded as the aircraft of choice for regional connectivity in markets where infrastructure constraints rule out larger narrowbody jets.

A Market the Big Players Left Behind

India's aviation story has, for years, been dominated by carriers chasing the high-density metro corridors. Fly91's order signals a deliberate counter-bet — that the country's next wave of air travel growth lies not in the skies above Mumbai or Delhi, but across hundreds of smaller cities and towns that have rarely, if ever, seen scheduled airline service.

If the strategy holds, the carrier could emerge as a defining force in India's regional aviation landscape — one turboprop route at a time.

With Inputs from Economic Times