IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA.No. 1632 of 2009()
1. ABDUL JALAL,AGED 70 YEARS,
... Petitioner
2. IBRAHIM, AGED 64 YEARS,
Vs
1. HAJ COMMITTEE OF INDIA,
... Respondent
2. KERALA STATE HAJ COMMITTEE, HAJ HOUSE,
3. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY
For Petitioner :SRI.M.M.ABDUL AZIZ (SR.)
For Respondent :SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR
The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.S.R.BANNURMATH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER
Dated :15/09/2009
O R D E R
S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. & A.K. Basheer, J.
------------------------------------------
W.A No.1632 of 2009
------------------------------------------
Dated this the 15th day of September, 2009
JUDGMENT
S.R.Bannurmath, C.J.
Aggrieved by the rejection of the writ petition filed
by the petitioners seeking for a direction to respondents 1 and 2
to consider their applications on a preferential basis considering
their age and previous non-allotment for the purpose of Haj
Pilgrimage, the present writ appeal is filed.
2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the
appellants that the appellants herein are two group leaders aged
about 70 years and 64 years respectively, of the group of nine
persons in all, who are their spouses and very close relatives,
and they had applied for Haj Pilgrimage before the Committee
for the past three occasions and were unsuccessful. As the Haj
Committee failed to consider their request, the present writ
petition was filed.
WA.No.1632 of 2009
– 2 –
3. It is vehemently contended that though large
number of seats are available and especially taking into
consideration that almost ten percent of the same has been
reserved for VIPs and VVIPs, the appellants/petitioners who are
at the fag end of their life, were denied illegally opportunity to
perform Haj which is very sacred for the Muslim community.
4. On issuance of the notice, the respondents
represented by the Assistant Solicitor General of India have filed
their detailed counter affidavit, inter alia, contending that no
doubt there was no preference given to the previously non
allotted pilgrims, but from next year onwards it is proposed to
do so. Taking into consideration the fact that the appellants are
very old and especially when large number of seats are reserved
for VIPs and others and a chunk of nearly 50000 seats is given
to the private tour operators, in our view, the appellants’ case
requires positive consideration, especially taking into
consideration their ripe age and the fact that they had applied for
WA.No.1632 of 2009
– 3 –
Haj unsuccessfully for the previous two years, namely 2007 and
2008. It is not much in dispute that so far there is no policy to
make difference between first timers and repeaters. This is
practically discriminatory. Taking into consideration the overall
aspects of the matter, we find that the rejection of the writ
petition by the learned Single Judge on technical ground is not
well founded. No doubt, the learned Single Judge has given
certain directions for the future, but that may not solve the
problem of the appellants herein.
5. Hence while retaining the directions issued by the
learned Single Judge for the future, we allow the writ petition
and direct respondents 1 and 2 to accommodate the appellants
and their group members consisting of nine in number for the
Haj Pilgrimage of 2009. Respondents 1 and 2 are directed to
take immediate steps in this regard and ensure that the direction
issued by this Court is complied with expeditiously and
immediately. We have also kept in mind the interim order of
WA.No.1632 of 2009
– 4 –
reserving nine seats by the Committee is in operation and hence
there will not be any difficulty to follow the direction. However,
it is made clear that this order is passed in the peculiar facts and
circumstances of the case and the same shall not be treated as a
precedent for others.
With this observation the writ appeal stands allowed.
S.R.Bannurmath,
Chief Justice
A.K. Basheer,
Judge
vns/vku.