Take the 'scams' out of educating pilots: Govt

To tackle growing complaints of favouritism in various examinations and proficiency checks for pilots, government today directed aviation regulator DGCA to establish an institutional mechanism and standardise procedures to address such grievances.

Civil Aviation Minister Ajit Singh, after a review of the current examination system, directed the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) to propose an institutional mechanism so as to enable candidates, who are not satisfied with their examination results, to get a redressal forum for filing reviews and appeals.

The decision was taken in view of a large number of complaints of favouritism and harassment in various in-service examinations conducted by examiners of airlines for their pilots, an official spokesperson said.

Singh also asked DGCA to standardise the present system in a manner in which the discretion available with the examiners could be minimised, he said.

The regulator was also asked to issue detailed guidelines in this regard which could be incorporated in the aviation rules or the Civil Aviation Requirements (CAR).

The examiners are pilots who meet the requirements laid down by the relevant CARs and are approved by the DGCA as examiners, instructors or check pilots for scheduled commercial flight operations.

These examiners, on behalf of DGCA, conduct skill tests for issuance of Instrument Ratings and proficiency checks of commanders and co-pilots on aircraft and simulators.

Please read our terms of use before posting comments
TERMS OF USE: The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
comments powered by Disqus