Premium
This is an archive article published on September 22, 2010

SC backs MEA on Haj Policy

The Supreme Court endorsed the Ministry of External Affairs Haj Policy 2010.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday endorsed the Ministry of External Affairs Haj Policy 2010,banning new private tour operators from applying to ferry over 45,000 pilgrims even as the Saudi deadline to send the list of registered operators was over on August 25.

A Bench led by Justice Mukundakam Sharma stayed a recent Kerala High Court judgment,which termed the governments Haj policy to the extent that it avoided new players from joining as arbitrary.

The Ministry had contended that the High Court judgment encroached into the governments exclusive right to form policies for the pilgrimage logistics as per an annual bilateral agreement between India and Saudi Arabia.

There cannot be an unregulated number of private tour operators to ferry the pilgrims to Saudi Arabia. Since the Haj pilgrimage takes place on foreign soil,the Government of India has to be extremely careful and cautious about the conduct of operations by these operators as any mistake by them would reflect badly on India, the Ministry said through advocate Harris Beeran.

The reason for the delay is that the government is locked in a bitter legal battle against private tour operators on its Haj Policy 2010,which bars new operators from coming into business. The legal wrangle is set to spill over to the Supreme Court.

The Kerala High Court on September 13 ruled that the Haj Policy 2010,to the extent that it did not allow any new operators,was arbitrary and illegal.

The External Affairs Ministry is now set to make an urgent mentioning against the High Court judgment on Tuesday,contending that it encroaches on the governments right to form policies.

Story continues below this ad

The decision to exclude new operators and continue this year with the old list of 615 is to tighten the regulations in the interests of the pilgrims, the Ministry said.

The apex court,however,clarified that it was allowing the government to go ahead with the present policy as interference at this juncture may cause confusion and open the Pandoras Box.

The court was reassured after the government submitted that it would consider new operators in the next policy.

 

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement