Haj differential pricing: HC asks committee to respond to pilgrim

Embarking from Ahmedabad meant paying an extra Rs 67,981, he underlined, despite the distance of Jeddah being nearly the same from Mumbai and Ahmedabad while the facilities provided are also equal.

Kharadi had also urged the court to declare different pricing for the two embarkation points as “unconstitutional, arbitrary, and discriminatory”.

Kharadi, before moving the court, had also made a representation to the Haj Committee of India on May 25, requesting to change his embarkation point from Ahmedabad to Mumbai, and sought a refund of the excess or varied amount of Rs 67,981.

As the authorities did not respond to the representation, in the petition before the Gujarat HC, it was pointed out that not responding to the representation is in violation of discharging the Committee’s statutory obligation as enumerated under Section 42 of the Haj Committee Act, 2002.

Meanwhile, the flights for Haj commenced on June 7 and the last flight will take off on June 23.

The court of Justice Vaibhavi 1 took into consideration the provisions of the Haj Committee Act.

Its Section 42 states that “any Haj pilgrim, who is aggrieved by the discharge of any of the duties performed by the Haj Committee or the State Haj Committee, shall make a representation for the redressal of his grievance to the Haj Committee or the State Haj Committee, as the case may be, and the same shall be disposed of by the said Committee, if necessary, after hearing the aggrieved person.”

Relying on the same, Justice Nanavati on Tuesday directed the respondent authorities, namely the Haj Committee, to decide the petitioner’s May representation “within a period of two days from the date of receipt of this order.”