M/S VAZCO HAJ GROUP V. UNION OF INDIA

WA/1160/2018

AI Insights

M/s. Vazco Haj Group, a Private Tour Operator for Haj pilgrims, was declared ineligible for registration and allocation of quota for Haj 2018 due to not meeting the financial requirements specified for PTOs. The financial records submitted did not satisfy the minimum capital requirement of \\u20b915,00,000 in any of the last two financial years. The petitioner contested this decision, highlighting procedural delays and referencing a similar case in the Karnataka High Court where relief was granted. The Central Government's counsel indicated that a review petition against the Karnataka High Court's decision had been filed, which might influence the outcome. Ultimately, the court decided not to alter the petitioner's status for the current year but assured that this year's ineligibility would not impact their category-I status for the next year's Haj pilgrimage.

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 722317 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 20-06-2018
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Writ Petition No.24899 of 2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: C G PREETHA
• Assessee Lawyers: M NAMBIAR; P GOPINATH
• Keywords: Eligibility; Haj Pilgrimage; Registration; Private Tour Operator; Financial requirements

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.HRISHIKESH ROY & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE 2018 / 30TH JYAISHTA, 1940 WA.No. 1160 of 2018 IN WPC. 18259/2018 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 18259/2018 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 08-06-2018 APPELLANT/PETITIONER M/S. VAZCO HAJ GROUP, ROOM NO.4/231-F, SECOND FLOOR, ALANKAR BUILDING, BEYPORE P.O., KOZHIKODE - 673 015, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR MR.VAZEERUDHEEN M.V. BY ADVS.SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR SRI.P.GOPINATH SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN SRI.KURYAN THOMAS SRI.PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM SRI.NAVOD PRASANNAN PATTALI RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS : 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF MINORITY AFFAIRS, 11TH FLOOR, PANDIT DEENDAYAL ANTYODAYA BHAWAN, CGO COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 003. 2. UNDER SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF MINORITY AFFAIRS (HAJ), 3RD FLOOR, ISIL, V.K. KRISHNA MENON BHAWAN, 9 BHAGWAN DAS ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 001. R1-R2 BY ADV. SMT.C.G.PREETHA, CGC THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-06-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: vpv Hrishikesh Roy, Ag. CJ & C.K.Abdul Rehim, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.A.No.1160 of 2018 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this the 20th day of June, 2018 JUDGMENT Hrishikesh Roy, Ag. CJ This case was adjourned on 18.6.2018 with the following order: “The appellant had moved the W.P.(C)No.18259/2018, on being aggrieved by the Ext.P4(a) order, which declared that the petitioner, who is a Private Tour Operator [for short, PTO] for Haj pilgrims, is ineligible for registration and allocation of quota for Haj 2018. This was on account of their failure to satisfy the specifications in clause (vi) of the Ext.P1 relating to the Terms and Conditions for Registration of Private Tour Operators. The clause (vi) requires that the PTO should have minimum capital of ₹15,00,000/- in any one of the last two financial years. The Balance Sheet produced in support of the application relates to the financial year 2015-2016. But the income tax liability of ₹17,59,540 for the assessment year 2012-2013 was added to the income tax figure and accordingly, the ineligibility of the applicant PTO was declared, under the Ext.P4(a) order. 2. The learned counsel Sri.P. Gopinatha Menon submits that when the authority had assessed the tax liability for the previous year, they should have consequently also assessed the income relating to the year 2012-2013 but this was not done. 3. That apart, the rejection communication was forwarded to the petitioner only on 01.06.2018 and therefore, the petitioner is put to serious disadvantages for non-communication of the disqualification order on the specified date i.e. 31.05.2018. 4. The counsel then refers to a similar case in the High Court of Karnataka where on the instruction of the Assistant Solicitor General of India, the concerned W.A.No.1160 of 2018 -:2:- PTO was permitted to furnish the Balance Sheet of another year and on this basis, Shri Menon submits that the Balance Sheet for the year 2016-2017 for the petitioner should be considered since the requirement is on minimum capital of ₹15,00,000/-, in any of the last two financial years. 5. The learned Central Government counsel Smt. C.G. Preetha, who is appearing on behalf of the learned Additional Solicitor General of India, has no instructions today as to whether the authorities have decided to comply with the direction for reconsideration issued by the Karnataka High Court ordered in the Writ Petition No.24899 of 2018 or whether, they have challenged the said order. If the party before the Karnataka High Court could secure the relief in a similar circumstance, the petitioner before us may also be entitled to the same relief. 6. Accordingly, the matter be posted in the admission list on 20-06-2018 to enable the learned Central Government counsel to receive urgent instructions in the matter.” 2. Representing the respondents, Sri.K.M.Natraj, the learned Additional Solicitor General of India, on instructions submits that a review petition, R.P.No.182 of 2018, has been submitted against the order passed in Writ Petition No.24899 of 2018 and accordingly it is argued that the writ petitioner herein is disentitled to claim any relief, on the basis of the proceedings in the Karnataka High Court. 3. The writ petitioner is conducting Hajj pilgrimage as a Private Tour Operator (hereinafter referred to as the 'PTO' for short) since 2006 and this year, on account of the circumstances noted above, they were declared to be ineligible. The continuity of operation places a PTO in category-I which entail some advantage and therefore, the learned counsel Sri.P.Gopinatha Menon submits that in the next year's Hajj pilgrimage allotment, the petitioner should be considered as a category-I PTO, notwithstanding their current disqualification for condonable lapse. W.A.No.1160 of 2018 -:3:- 4. We have considered the respective submission made by the learned counsel for the parties. As the process of shortlisting of the PTOs for this year's Hajj pilgrimage is already concluded, no relief can be granted to the petitioner for the current year. However, it is made clear that their ineligibility this year should not impact their consideration as a category-I PTO for the next year's selection. It is declared accordingly. 5. With the above order, the case stands disposed of. Sd/- Hrishikesh Roy, Acting Chief Justice Sd/- C.K.Abdul Rehim, Judge vpv "