AdminIn a shocking turn of events, a former Air India captain has been booked by Vile Parle police for allegedly siphoning nearly Rs 2.8 crore from the airline while serving on deputation with the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA). The police case, filed under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), points to a classic instance of aviation salary fraud that raises serious questions about the remuneration framework for deputed officials.
Background/Context
Deputation is a long‑established practice in Indian aviation, wherein senior officials from airlines are temporarily posted to regulatory bodies like the DGCA. The intent is to bring industry expertise into regulation and reduce conflicts of interest. Under the scheme, deputed employees are paid a salary directly by the DGCA, not their parent airline. This separation aims to prevent double‑counting of remuneration and maintain transparency.
Between 2014 and 2017, Capt. Atul Chandra served as the Chief Flight Operations Inspector (CFOI) at the DGCA after his stint at Air India. During this period, he allegedly continued to receive a salary from Air India while simultaneously drawing a DGCA stipend. The alleged dual payments amount to almost Rs 2.8 crore, according to a complaint lodged by Vyakant Rao, a retired Air India employee, in a private suit that was subsequently registered by the courts.
Such incidents are not isolated. Similar allegations have surfaced in the past involving other deputed officials from national carriers. However, the scale and the high profile of the current case have brought the issue into the limelight, prompting a debate on the safeguards in place to prevent aviation salary fraud.
Key Developments
The police case was registered early this week by the Vile Parle Police Station after a complaint was filed with the Andheri Metropolitan Magistrate. The complaint cites multiple IPC sections, including:
- Section 420 – Cheating
- Section 465 – Forgery of documents
- Section 406 – Punishment for criminal breach of trust
- Section 120B – Criminal breach of trust by a public servant
- Section 107 – Use of fake documents as genuine
When reached, Capt. Chandra denied knowledge of any FIR, stating, “I was not aware of any legal action against me. All my remuneration was processed through established channels as per deputation guidelines.”
The FIR alleges that from 2014 to 2017, Capt. Chandra received an average monthly salary of ₹15 lakh from the DGCA, while concurrently drawing ₹10 lakh per month from Air India, resulting in a cumulative overcharge of roughly ₹2.8 crore. The alleged amounts are based on payroll records, bank statements, and the pilot’s employment contract.
Experts say the case underscores a loophole in the process of validating deputed employees’ salaries, especially when the airlines are state‑owned entities. State‑owned carriers such as Air India have previously been criticized for blurred lines between employee remuneration and corporate payroll, leading to confusion over who is the legal employer.
Impact Analysis
For aviation recruiters, the case signals a need for stricter vetting and verification of remuneration data before hiring. In the broader sense, it erodes confidence in the regulatory framework that governs the industry, potentially affecting investor sentiment and the attractiveness of Indian aviation to foreign talent.
1. Credibility of Recruitment Channels
Recruiters who rely on alumni networks or internal databases may unintentionally perpetuate inaccuracies in salary figures if they do not cross‑check with official payroll systems.
2. Compliance Risks for Airlines
Airlines are under increasing scrutiny to demonstrate robust anti‑fraud measures. A single mishap can lead to regulatory sanctions, affecting workforce planning and financial audits.
3. International Students and Aspirants
Many international students dream of working in India’s aviation sector, attracted by the potential for high remuneration. News of aviation salary fraud can make the sector appear risky, possibly dissuading students from pursuing scholarships or internships.
4. Insurance and Legal Costs
Fraud allegations can trigger compulsory insurance claims, legal settlements, and may compel airlines to increase their audit budgets, indirectly pushing up costs for future employees.
Expert Insights/Tips
Given the heightened sensitivity around salary records, recruiters and HR professionals should consider the following best practices:
- Maintain a Unified Payroll Repository: Centralise all salary data—both direct employment and deputation—into a single secure ledger to prevent overlapping entries.
- Implement Multi‑Level Verification: Cross‑verify salary figures with third‑party payroll processors, especially for positions that involve deputation to regulatory bodies.
- Regular Audits: Schedule annual audits of remuneration data conducted by external audit firms to identify discrepancies promptly.
- Transparent Policies: Publish clear guidelines on how deputed officials are compensated, the timelines for disbursement, and the oversight mechanisms in place.
- Communication with Regulatory Bodies: Set up a two‑way data sharing protocol with the DGCA or comparable authorities to reconcile payroll records.
- Legal Safeguards: Ensure employment contracts explicitly state the single source of income during deputation periods, preventing double payments.
For students aspiring to work in aviation, the case is a reminder to:
- Verify the authenticity of internship or deputation offers through official channels.
- Ask questions about the source of salary payments and the length of deputation periods.
- Keep copies of all contracts, payslips, and bank statements for future reference.
Looking Ahead
Regulators are likely to review the deputation policy to avoid such salary frauds. The DGCA is expected to introduce a digital payroll reconciliation portal by early 2026, allowing real‑time cross‑checking of payments made to deputed officials. Airlines, in turn, may adopt blockchain-based payroll systems to enhance transparency.
Industry bodies such as the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association are also calling for a nationwide audit of all deputed senior officers, assessing whether they have breached the conflict‑of‑interest norms during their service. The legal framework may see amendments tightening the definition of “public servant” in the context of deputation, thereby narrowing the window for potential abuse.
Ultimately, the fallout from this case could catalyse a shift towards more rigorous oversight and a culture of accountability across Indian aviation. The lesson is clear: aviation salary fraud, whether intentional or inadvertent, has far‑reaching consequences that go beyond the individual involved.
Reach out to us for personalized consultation based on your specific requirements.
Admin