FEDERATION HAJ PTOS OF INDIA versus UNION OF INDIA

FEDERATION HAJ PTOS OF INDIA versus UNION OF INDIA

The Haj Policy for 2019-23, including criteria based on both experience and financial strength for Haj Group Organisers, is a policy matter founded on expert study, stakeholder consultation, and rational considerations. Courts cannot substitute their judgment for that of the executive in such complex policy matters, and judicial review is limited to cases where the policy is proved to be unlawful or arbitrary, which is not established here. Petitioners' views were considered.

Parties
Petitioner: Federation Haj PTOs of India; Respondent: Union of India
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
04 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition (civil) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Writ petitions disposed of
Legal Topics
Policy Decision, Judicial Review, Criteria for Haj Group Organisers, Eligibility Conditions, Haj Policy for 2019 23
Administrative Law Policy Decision Judicial Review Criteria for Haj Group Organisers Eligibility Conditions Haj Policy for 2019 23

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Federation Haj PTOs of India

Petitioner

Union of India

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition (civil) / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the eligibility criteria, especially experience and financial strength, for registration/allocation of Haj quota for Private Tour Operators/Haj Group Organisers under Haj Policy 2019-23 is arbitrary or unreasonable
  2. 2 Scope of judicial review over policy decisions of the government involving complex social, economic and commercial matters

Ratio Decidendi

The Haj Policy for 2019-23, including criteria based on both experience and financial strength for Haj Group Organisers, is a policy matter founded on expert study, stakeholder consultation, and rational considerations. Courts cannot substitute their judgment for that of the executive in such complex policy matters, and judicial review is limited to cases where the policy is proved to be unlawful or arbitrary, which is not established here. Petitioners' views were considered.

Court Disposition

Writ petitions disposed of

Orders

  • Petitioner in W.P. (C) No. 93 of 2019 has his case to be considered by the competent authority on turnover for 2017 in light of his peculiar circumstances within a period of one week.