8 March 2024 5:02 AM GMT
The Union Government informed the Supreme Court on Thursday (March 7) of the updated status report on steps taken to complete the composition of the Central Haj Committee.
The counsel for the petitioner, Senior Advocate Mr.Sanjay Hegde and Mr. Talha Abdul Rahman, brought attention to vacancies in the Central Haj Committee, and the Additional Solicitor General(ASG) Mr. K M Nataraj, assured prompt remedial action, with a commitment to filling the vacancies within three months.
"The Additional Solicitor General states that this would be looked into and remedial action would be taken expeditiously. The exercise shall be completed within three months" noted the bench while dictating the order.
This development comes in light of the Court's previous directions to the Central to undertake adequate steps in completing the composition of the Central Haj Committee and apprise the Court of the progress status by March 7, 2024. The bench led by CJI DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra heard the matter.
Regarding the State Haj Committees, the bench was informed that only the State of Odisha is yet to constitute the committee. The Union Ministry for Minority Affairs will engage with such states to expedite the constitution of State Haj Committees within three months.
The bench, in its order observed, "The Ministry for Minority Affairs shall engage with such States as have not constituted the State Haj Committees so that necessary remedial steps are taken expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months."
The present contempt petition has been filed consequent to the Court's the orders of the Court in the main writ petition which sought to constitute the Central Haj Committee on lines with S. 3 and 4 of the Haj Committee Act 2002. and State Haj Committee under S.17 and 18 of 2002 Act.
On the earlier occasion, the Court noted that the orders of the Court in the main writ petition which sought to constitute the Central Haj Committee on lines with S. 3 and 4 of the Haj Committee Act.
Previously, the court noted that of the three members required to be part of the Haj Committee as per S. 4(1) of the Haj Committee Act, 2002, all of them have completed their Rajya Sabha terms and thus all the three positions were now left vacant. Like wise, the post of one member having "special knowledge of Muslim theology and law", as contemplated by Section 4(1)(b) is also vacant.
Senior Advocate Mr Sanjay Hegde appearing for the Petitioner submitted a chart detailing the composition of the Central Haj Committee. Referring to the same, the Court it in its order observed :
“Bearing in mind the above position, we direct the Union Government to take all necessary steps to pursue the completion of the composition of the Central Haj Committee in accordance with law and to apprise this Court on the next date of listing of the progress which has been made."
Background
This matter pertains to the constitution of a Central Haj Committee prescribed under Section 3 read with Section 4 of the Haj Committee Act, 2002.
The petition argues that the Centre and the Respondent States have failed to comply with the strict provision of the Haj Committee Act, 2002 and have failed to appoint Committees under the said statute. In the last hearing, the petitioner had submitted that India has not had an operational Central Hajj Committee since 2019. Also, as on October 2021, only 1 out of 19 States have a fully operational State Haj Committee, whereas all other states are either awaiting actions from State Government for appointment or don't even have a Committee for more than 3 years.
The petition, while relying on Section 8 of the Act, which provides for the formation of a new committee at least 4 months before the expiry of the incumbent committee, contends that the tenure of the previously appointed committees, which anyway had not been appointed in strict compliance of the statute, had admittedly lapsed. Thus, as per the petition, the planning and coordination for the Hajj 2022 which was scheduled for 7th July 2022 would be prejudicially affected unless a committee was immediately appointed by the Centre and the concerned State Governments at the Centre and State level respectively.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court had directed the Respondent states to inform the court, by way of an affidavit, if Hajj committees are constituted in their respective states and to additionally specify the names of the committee members of the Committees constituted. The same had to be informed to the court in two weeks.
Case Details : HAFIZ NAUSHAD AHMAD AZMI VERSUS KATIKITHALA SRINIVAS & ORS CONMT.PET.(C) No.1246/2023 in W.P.(C) No.1229/2021