1. Whether the stipulation in Clause 3 of Ext.P1 Guidelines issued by the second respondent, insisting that a woman pilgrim proceeding for 'Haj' has to be accompanied by a 'Mehram' ( a male member of the family within the prohibited degree of relationship) is correct or sustainable, is the point sought to be considered in this writ petition.

2. The petitioner, who is a lady aged 64 years, sought to perform 'Haj' and filed Ext.P2 application in tune with Ext.P1 Notification, which stipulates the Guidelines issued by the second respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that, she does not have a male member in the family, as her son is working in Saudi Arabia and hence the name of 'Mehram' was shown in the application as 'Sainaba', a close friend/neighbour aged 60 years. But the petitioner was given to understand that, by virtue of Ext.P1 Guidelines, the application of the petitioner will not be considered favourably, for want of a male 'Mehram', which made the petitioner to approach this Court by way of this writ petition.

3. The prayers in the writ petition are as follows :

"(i) declare that the stipulation in Clause 3(c) in Ext.P1 shall be satisfied, even if the Mehra