Gauhati High Court Orders Central Haj Committee to Process Pilgrims’ Refund Request for Extra Airfare Within 90 Days.

The Gauhati High Court instructed the Central Haj Committee to address the requests from Haj Pilgrims for refunds of excess airfare within 90 days, following the Haj Committee Act of 2002. Justice Soumitra Saikia, on the Single-Judge Bench, stated, “The respondent No. 2 must respond to the petitions with a detailed order after hearing the petitioners, in line with section-42 of the Haj Committee Act, 2002.” Advocate H K J Ahmed represented the petitioners, while the Deputy Solicitor General of India represented the respondent. The petitioners are Haj pilgrims from the 2023 pilgrimage. In 2023, a tender was issued for chartered flights, and selected Haj pilgrims from Assam were required to pay Rs. 3,82,297 for Haj expenses, which included the airfare. It was noted that Rs. 1,54,694 of this amount was for the chartered flight from Guwahati to Jeddah. However, at the boarding point in Guwahati, the pilgrims were instructed to take a regular passenger flight instead of the chartered one.

The petitioners claimed that although the Haj Committee of India canceled the chartered flight from Guwahati, they had not received a refund for the excess amount paid for the chartered flight. The petitioners submitted several requests to the Chief Executive Officer of the Haj Committee of India for the refund of the extra amount collected from them, but the Haj Committee had not yet addressed these requests or issued any refunds. Consequently, the petitioners sought the High Court’s intervention to ensure that the Haj Committee of India processes their requests as per section-42 of the Haj Committee Act, 2002.

The Bench reviewed the case’s facts and legal points and stated, “Considering the arguments from both sides, this Court will resolve the writ petition by instructing respondent No. 2 to address the representations made by the petitioners according to section-42 of the Haj Committee Act, 2002.” The Bench ordered the Chief Executive Officer of the Central Haj Committee of India (respondent No. 2) to respond to the petitioners’ representations with a detailed decision after listening to them and following the rules of section-42 of the Haj Committee Act, 2002.

The Bench wrapped up the case by adding, “All actions to comply with this order must be completed within 90 days from the date of this order.”

Cause Title: Samsul Hussain and 90 Ors vs. Union Of India & 2 Ors. [Case No. WP(C)/6257/2024]
Appearance:
Petitioner:Advocate H K J Ahmed
Respondent: Deputy Solicitor General of India, Government Advocate Assam