MUMBAI: Following media reports that an Air India Boeing 787 aircraft suffered a ground fuel control switch failure in London, the UK’s civil aviation regulator has sought information from the airline regarding maintenance work carried out on the aircraft in London before it was allowed to fly to Bengaluru.The UK’s Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) said in a letter to Air India that it should submit a complete reply within a week or face regulatory action. It is standard procedure for foreign regulators to seek information from operators following an incident/incident to ensure continued compliance with safety standards. On February 1, the crew of Air India flight AI-132 in London twice observed that the left engine fuel control switch did not remain in the “run” position when slight vertical pressure was applied. On subsequent attempts, the switch locked correctly and remained stable, and the crew continued to operate the flight from Bangalore, where the aircraft was grounded for further inspections. The Civil Aviation Ministry on Tuesday said that during the inspection in Bengaluru, the left and right switches were inspected and the results were satisfactoryAir India on Wednesday said it has completed a preventive re-inspection of the fuel control switches (FCS) across its entire operating fleet of Boeing 787 aircraft and found no issues. “Based on the observations reported by one of our pilots, we conducted the inspection out of an abundance of caution,” Air India said.“We acknowledge the proactive oversight of the regulator (Indian regulator, Directorate General of Civil Aviation) in conducting independent inspections and subsequent clearance of the FCS,” the airline’s statement said. The airline added that it will fully comply with the regulator’s guidance and distribute the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) recommended operating procedures related to the operation of the fuel control switch to all cabin crew.Air India operates Boeing 787 Dreamliners on a number of long-haul international routes, including to the United Kingdom.In response to the ministry’s statement that the part was working satisfactorily, the NGO Safety Affairs Foundation lodged a complaint with the Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB) on Wednesday. The foundation warned that publicly providing “clean evidence” to the fuel control switch while the AAIB investigation was ongoing amounted to “bypassing the agency” and could contaminate evidence, damage the investigative narrative and erode public trust. It urged the AAIB to obtain all relevant evidence and reaffirm its independence.The foundation’s complaint alleges that this public exoneration of the system by regulators constitutes an “institutional bypass” while an independent safety investigation is ongoing. This action carries the risk of contaminating evidence, as components and records of the AI132 incident may be processed or altered without the strict, sealed chain of custody required for material evidence in major accident investigations. It also involves biasing the narrative, as publicly describing potential causal factors as “resolved” may affect witness memories, expert analysis and the investigative focus of the AI171 investigation. The foundation said these actions undermined public trust. It added: “This undermines confidence in the AAIB’s statutory independence and the finality of its conclusions, which is vital to learning lessons and restoring public confidence in aviation safety.”“AAIB’s mission is to find causes, not to confirm prestated conclusions,” said Capt. Amit Singh, founder and director of the Security Matters Foundation and senior security advocate. “When another agency publicly shuts down a system that may be relevant to a public accident investigation, it jeopardizes not just the evidence, but the entire search for the truth. The public deserves an investigation that is evidence-led, not narrative.”“The Foundation made an urgent request to the AAIB to immediately take custody of all evidence from the AI132 incident, place it under a sealed chain of custody of the AAIB, issue a preservation order instructing all parties to preserve and not interfere with any relevant evidence, and maintain its authority by publicly clarifying that its investigation remains independent and that no external claims are conclusive about its findings. The foundation added that the AAIB should also launch an investigation and examine whether DGCA’s communications had an adverse impact on the AI171 investigation.