RUBY TOUR SERVICES PVT. LTD. versus UNION OF INDIA

RUBY TOUR SERVICES PVT. LTD. versus UNION OF INDIA

Rejection of PTO registration under Haj Policy-2018 based on non-compliance of substantive criteria is valid; however, rejection on trivial or insignificant procedural grounds is not supportable. Compensation is appropriate where petitioners suffered loss due to arbitrary and illegal rejection by the State.

Parties
Petitioner: Ruby Tour Services Pvt. Ltd.; Respondent: Union of India; Petitioner: M/s. Nawab Travels Private Limited; Petitioner: M/s. Hiba Exports India
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
30 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition (civil) / Final Disposal by Supreme Court
Outcome
Writ Petition (C) Nos. 638 and 668 of 2018 dismissed; Writ Petition (C) No. 646 of 2018 allowed.
Legal Topics
Haj Pilgrimage, Private Tour Operator Registration, Government Policy Implementation, Compensation for Wrongful Refusal
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Public Law Haj Pilgrimage Private Tour Operator Registration Government Policy Implementation Compensation for Wrongful Refusal

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ruby Tour Services Pvt. Ltd.

Petitioner

Union of India

Respondent

M/s. Nawab Travels Private Limited

Petitioner

M/s. Hiba Exports India

Petitioner

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition (civil) / Final Disposal by Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the rejection of registration of PTOs for Haj 2018 by the Government was arbitrary and valid under the Haj Policy 2018.
  2. 2 Whether trivial grounds for rejection of PTO registration constitute valid reasons under the Haj Policy.
  3. 3 Whether PTOs are entitled to compensation for wrongful refusal of registration.

Ratio Decidendi

Rejection of PTO registration under Haj Policy-2018 based on non-compliance of substantive criteria is valid; however, rejection on trivial or insignificant procedural grounds is not supportable. Compensation is appropriate where petitioners suffered loss due to arbitrary and illegal rejection by the State.

Court Disposition

Writ Petition (C) Nos. 638 and 668 of 2018 dismissed; Writ Petition (C) No. 646 of 2018 allowed.

Orders

  • Union of India to pay Rs. 5 lakh compensation to M/s. Nawab Travels Private Limited within two months, failing which petitioner is entitled to 15% simple interest per annum.
  • Parties to bear their own costs.