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 Mehram accompanying the woman is also a woman;

(ii) declare that the stipulation in Clause 3(c) in Ext.P1 is arbitrary and discriminatory, and violative of Articles 14, 25 and 26 in so far it discriminate Woman applicants, who are not allowed to perform Haj by insistence of male Mehram;

(iii) issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to consider Ext.P2 application of the petitioner, accepting the Mehram as shown in Ext.P2. And

(iv) to issue such other directions or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case."

4. The second respondent has filed a counter affidavit pointing out that, the second respondent had issued Ext.P1 in the local language, which is nothing but a translation of the Guidelines issued by the first respondent ( in English), a copy of which has been produced as Ext.R2(a). It is for the first respondent, who is the competent body, to make policy decisions for 'Haj' every year. The second respondent, who is an authority constituted under the Haj Committee Act, 2002, aids in making arrangements for the pilgrimage of Muslims for 'Haj'. It is stated that, as per Clause 4(v) of Ext.R2(a) Guidelines issued by the first respondent, ladies not accompanied by "Sharai Mehram" are not eligible for applying for 'Haj' 2013. It is also stated that, Ext.P2 application for 'Haj' stated as preferred by the petitioner, has not reached the office of the second respondent till date, even though the last date for submission of the application was extended upto 30.03.2013.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the first respondent and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the second respondent, at length.

6. The basic question to be answered is, whether a woman pilgrim can be permitted to perform 'Haj' without a ' Male Mehram' as envisaged in the Guidelines, or in other words, whether the petitioner can be permitted to proceed for 'Haj' with a female companion by name Sainaba shown as 'Mehram' in Ext.P2 application.

7. Clause 6 (i), (ii) and (iii) of Ext.R2(a) Guidelines issued by the first respondent are relevant, which are extracted below :

" 6. HOW TO APPLY :

Application in duplicate The average size of a cover is three (3). Hence, the Haj Committee of India has printed Haj Application set with 6 application forms for use by a cover size of Three Applicants. If the cover contains more than three applicants then another set of application form is to be filled and attached together. The cover head shall make a cover of all the applicants and submit it to the State/Union Territory Haj Committee. Application for each Pilgrim should be filled in duplicate. The cover head shall be male ( adult)