FEDERATION HAJ PTOS OF INDIA versus UNION OF INDIA

Citation: [2019] 2 S.C.R. 627 · Decided: 04-02-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.K. SIKRI · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 5 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
627
FEDERATION HAJ PTOS OF INDIA
v.
UNION OF INDIA
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 4 of 2019
FEBRUARY 04, 2019
[A. K. SIKRI, S. ABDUL NAZEER AND M. R. SHAH, JJ.]
Haj Pilgrimage :
Haj policy for 2019-23 – Grievance of the petitioner was
that some of their vital suggestions, were not incorporated while
finalising the Haj policy – Petitioner contended that while fixing
the criteria of experience-cum-financial strength, the respondent
had given more emphasis on the financial aspects thereby sidelining
the aspect of experience – Held: Public authorities must have liberty
and freedom in framing policies – It is well accepted principle that
in complex social, economic and commercial matters, decisions have
to be taken by governmental authorities keeping in view several
factors and it is not possible for the courts to consider completing
claims and to conclude which way balance tilts – In instant case,
Haj Policy for 2019-23 is based on data collected and complied in
the study by IIT-Delhi, an expert body – Further, views of the
stakeholders, including petitioners, were invited and duly considered
– Ministry has considered both experience and financial strengths,
as recommended in the IIT Delhi study itself – Financial strength is
important because when the pilgrims travel, the Private Tour
Operators (PTOs) are required to make all arrangements for
transportation, air travel, boarding and lodging, local
transportation and provision of guide etc. – Also, views of the
petitioners were not only considered but accommodated to the extent
possible and permissible – Thus, difficult to agree with the petitioners
– Administrative Law – Policy decision.
Administrative Law – Policy decision – Haj policy for 2019-
23 – Scope of judicial review – Held: The scope of judicial review
is very limited in such matters – It is only when a particular policy
decision is found to be against a statute or it offends any of the
provisions of the Constitution or it is manifestly arbitrary, capricious
or mala fide, the court would interfere with such policy decisions –
In instant case, no such case was made out.
[2019] 2 S.C.R. 627
627
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
628                    SUPREME COURT REPORTS            [2019] 2 S.C.R.
Disposing of the writ petitions, the Court
HELD: 1. The Haj Policy for 2019-23 is based on data
collected and compiled in the study by IIT Delhi, an expert body.
Further, views of the stakeholders, including the petitioners, were
invited and duly considered.  The respondent has categorically
submitted that the aforesaid demand of the petitioners is not based
on any factual data, whereas the decision taken by the Ministry
is based on data collected and compiled in the study by IIT Delhi.
Secondly, the petitioners’ suggestion is only to take experience
into account, whereas the Ministry has considered both
experience and financial strength, as recommended in the IIT
Delhi study itself.  It is submitted that where 1,75,000 people
embark upon a pilgrimage, financial strength of the (Private Tour
Operator) PTO is of utmost importance and cannot be overlooked.
Financial strength is important because when the pilgrims travel
to Saudi Arabia, the PTOs are required to make all arrangements
for transportation, air travel, boarding and lodging, local
transportation and provision of guide, etc.  It is submitted that
the Ministry cannot afford to take any chance on this aspect as
the lack of adequate financial strength of the PTOs may result in
the pilgrims becoming stranded in a foreign country or facing
other hardships. [Para 16][638-D-F]
2.  Additionally, it is submitted by the respondent that if the
suggestion of the petitioners is accepted, there would be eleven
sub-categories amongst Category-I, inasmuch as what is sought
by them is allocation of seats on a pro-rata basis depending on
the number of years of experience.  This would result in major
structural changes, which is not advisable and cannot be accepted.
[Para 17][638-G]
3. Going by the aforesaid considerations, the respondent
has carved out the categories of (Haj Group Organisers) HGOs
on the parameters of experience as well as financial strength of
HGOs.  Such a decision is based on policy considerations.  It
cannot be said that this decision is manifestly arbitrary or
unreasonable.  It is settled law that policy decisions of the
Executive are best left to it and a court cannot be propelled into
the unchartered ocean of Government policy.  Public authorities
A
B
C
D
E
F
G

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.