The Delhi High Court directed the Ministry Of Minority Affairs to issue fresh show cause notices against Hajj Group Organisers delineating clauses from Hajj Policy, 2023.

The Court was hearing Petitions challenging the orders passed by the Ministry of Minority Affairs where the Petitioners are blacklisted from applying for registration as Hajj Group Organizers for periods ranging from 5 to 15 years, effective from Haj, 2024.

The bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula observed, “The fundamental principle of natural justice necessitates that the notice must explicitly mention the proposed action of blacklisting/debarment, giving the recipient a clear opportunity to respond adequately to such a serious consequence. Failure to specify this action leaves the notice deficient and vitiates the basis for the subsequent blacklisting/debarment orders… the show cause notices do not refer to any particular violations of the Haj Policy, 2023..”

Advocate Sulaiman Mohd. Khan appeared for the Appellant and CGSC Mukul Singh appeared for the Respondent.

Brief Facts-

The Petitioners, Hajj Group Organizers (HGOs), facilitate pilgrimages to Saudi Arabia for Hajj and Umrah. Under a bilateral agreement, the Saudi government allocated a fixed number of seats for Indian pilgrims, with the process now requiring HGOs to operate through the Indian government. In 2023, the Petitioners were granted registration and quota for Hajj. However, following allegations of cartelization and black-marketing, the Petitioners received show-cause notices, which they denied. Despite being allowed to proceed with Haj 2023 by the Courts, the Respondent later blacklisted the Petitioners from future pilgrimages and forfeited their security deposits. Hence, the present Petitions.

The Court noted that the notices issued to the Petitioners fall short of the requisite legal threshold that must be met before taking such a drastic action as blacklisting or debarment.

The Court mentioned the Supreme Court decision in Vet India Pharmaceuticals Limited v. State of Uttar Pradesh where the SC observed, “the failure to provide an explicit notice of blacklisting as a potential penalty constitutes a fundamental violation of principles of natural justice. This is because blacklisting has far-reaching consequences that go beyond the immediate issue, often leading to a civil death for the organization in question.”

The Court said that there is no subsisting order of blacklisting/debarment against the Petitioners therefore, the Petitioners are eligible to apply for Haj, 2025.

Accordingly, the Court disposed of the Petitions.

Cause Title: Benzy Tours and Travels Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India

Appearance:
Appellant: Advocates Sulaiman Mohd. Khan, Taiba Khan, Bhanu Malhotra, Gopeshwar Singh Chandel, Abdul Bari Khan and Aditi Chaudhary
Respondent: CGSC Mukul Singh, CGSC Anurag Ahluwalia, CGSC Manish Mohan, CGSC Iram Majid, CGSC Mukul Singh, CGSC Anubha Bhardwaj, CGSC Nidhi Raman, CGSC Mukul Singh, GP Archana Kumari, GP Rishav Dubey, GP Hussain Adil Taqvi, GP Rashi Mangal, GP Vidur Dewivedi, GP Archana Kumari, GP Hilaq Haider, SPC Avshreya Pratap Singh Rudy, SPC Anshuman Singh, SPC Farman Ali,
SPC Syed A. Haseeb, SPC Vikrant N. Goyal, DSC Ankur Yadav, Advocates Kaushal Jeet Kait, Hridyanshi Sharma, Jatin Teotia, Mohd. Suboor, Samarth Talesara, Aishani Mohan, Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, Abhinav Bhardwaj, Supriya, Rajat Srivastava, Ira Singh, Ujjwal Chaudhary, Vishal Sharma and Akash Mishra