(J. Chelameswar and Sanjay Kishan Kaul, JJ.)
Subhan Tours and Travel Services _______________________ Petitioner
v.
Union of India & Ors. _____________________________ Respondent(s)
Writ Petition(C) No(s). 931/2016, decided on April 26, 2018
With
Writ Petition(C) No. 959/2016, Writ Petition(C) No. 950/2016 Writ Petition(C) No. 937/2016 Writ Petition(C) No. 975/2016 Writ Petition(C) No. 1033/2016 Writ Petition(C) No. 1039/2016 Writ Petition(C) No. 45/2017 Writ Petition(C) No. 151/2017
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The limited issue now which is before us relates to the consideration of Private Tour Operators(PTOs) for Haj Pilgrimage for the year 2018.
3. We may refer to the orders passed by this Court in Union of India v. Rafique Shaikh Bhikan 2013 (4) SCC 699. The interested PTOs were put in following two categories:—
| Category I | PTOs registered with MEA and facilitated Hajis at least for 7 Haj operations or more. |
| Category II | PTOs registered with MEA and facilitiated Hajis for at least for 1 to 6 Haj operations and PTOs which have facilitated at least 50 umrah pilgrims in a year for any five years. |
4. Insofar as petitioner(s) are concerned, they claim their right to be considered in view of the first part of the Category II. The apprehension expressed is that the respondent(s) are raising the issue that despite their having successfully carried out the Haj pilgrimages for the years prior to the year 2013, part of the payments for travel were made by cash. It is not disputed before us that prior to the year 2013, there was no such restriction on making payment in cash and thus, the accepted position is that such of the PTOs who have facilitated the Hajis to travel through the Haj operators in any year prior to 2013 would be considered as eligible for consideration for year 2018. The requirement is of a Haj operation in any one of the years which would make them eligible for the year 2018.
5. Needless to say, only such applicants who have applied for the year 2018 would be so considered.
6. The writ petitions stand disposed of accordingly.
Writ Petition(s) (Civil) No(s). 931/2016
Subhan Tours and Travel Services _______________________ Petitioner
v.
Union of India and Ors. & Ors ______________________ Respondent(s)
(IA No. 97613/2017-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS)
WITH
W.P.(C) No. 959/2016 (X)
(IA No. 24424/2018-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS)
W.P.(C) No. 950/2016 (X)
(FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ANNEXURES ON IA 1/2016)
W.P.(C) No. 937/2016 (X)
(IA No. 96616/2017-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS)
W.P.(C) No. 975/2016 (X)
(FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ANNEXURES ON IA 1/2017)
W.P.(C) No. 1033/2016 (X)
W.P.(C) No. 1039/2016 (X)
W.P.(C) No. 45/2017 (X)
W.P.(C) No. 151/2017 (X)
Date : 26-04-2018 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
(Before J. Chelameswar and Sanjay Kishan Kaul, JJ.)
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sulaiman Mohd. Khan, Adv.
Mr. Ainul Ansari, Adv.
Ms. Taiba Khan, Adv.
Mr. Mohit Prasad, Adv.
Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, AOR
Mr. Rajat Bhardwaj, AOR
Mr. Kripa Shankar Prasad, AOR
Mr. Inamul Haq, Adv.
Mr. Pardeep Jatav, Adv.
Mr. Harshad V. Hameed, AOR
Mr. Dileep Poolakkot, Adv.
Ms. Ashly Harshad, Adv.
Mr. Sayid Marzook Bafaki, AOR
For Respondent(s) Ms. Pinky Anand, ASG
Mr. A.K. Panda, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Bhuvan Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Hemant Arya, Adv.
Mr. Sumit Teterwal, Adv. Ms. Snidha Mehra, Adv.
Mr. Amit Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Sachin Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Vinay K. Yadav, Adv. Mr. Sumit Goel, Adv.
Ms. Anil Katiyar, AOR
Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR
Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR
Mrs. Priya Puri, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
ORDER
7. The writ petitions are disposed of in terms of the signed order.
8. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
———
