I surprised by the proposal of the Ministry of Civil Aviation for increasing Haj subsidy to a record Rs.122 crores for Haj 1998 at the rate of Rs.18,000 per pilgrim.
I think it is not in the larger interest of the country and the Muslim community to allow such run-away subsidy.
Normally the Haj Charter fare has been fixed, through negotiation with competitors, at close to 2/3 of the IATA fare in US dollars. It is indeed an extra- ordinary deal that bulk business for 65,000 persons at 100% capacity utilisation should cost more. In 1997, the per capita subsidy was doubled primarily because Air India was permitted to charge regular Delhi-Jeddah- Delhi IATA airfare for charter flights. Thus the loss incurred by Air India in other sectors was compensated by the profit made in Haj traffic to that extent. This year for 1998, the Haj charter fare is said to exceed the normal return fare!
As for the subsidy, it had traditionally amounted to 1/ 3 of the Haj charter fare. In 1996, for the first time, it exceeded 1/3 and came close to 38.4 per cent. In 1997, it went upto 54.4 per cent. This year, in 1998, it is proposed to raise it to 60.9 per cent.
In my view, Haj being a religious duty only for those Muslims who can afford it, the very concept of subsidy is both religiously and constitutionally questionable. Certainly when it forms 50 per cent or more of the Haj Charter fare, it can no longer be considered a concession but State's financial support for performance of a religious act.
I have long pleaded for abolition of Haj Subsidy. At least, the Haj Charter fare, payable by the pilgrim, can be reviewed every year in steps with the rise in the normal return fare and the fall in the value of the rupee in relation to the dollar.
It did and would make sense to protect the Haj pilgrim against sudden rise in airfare and/or de facto devaluation of the rupee - but no more. Above all, such an extra-ordinary decision would provide grist for the mills of hatred against the Muslim Indians.
You may kindly recall that the Parliamentary Standing Committee on External Affairs has repeatedly asked for gradual reduction and eventual abolition of the Haj subsidy.
I would, therefore, suggest that the Haj Charter fare be fixed at 2/3 of the IATA fare Rs. 20,000/- and the Haj subsidy be limited to 1/3 i.e. Rs.6,500/- leaving Rs.13,500 to be paid by the Haj pilgrim. This would be in accordance with the de facto devaluation of the Indian rupee since January, 1997. Considering that the total per capita cost of Haj has increased to about Rs. 75,000/-, an increase of Rs.3,000 in the air fare and should constitute no problem.
Supreme Court
I - On Management of Khanqah (Wakf)
The Intezamia Committee's allegation is that it is managing the Chilla Sharif (Khanqah). There is no dispute that the structure is ancient and of great importance. But it is in bad state of repair. It is adjacent to Humayun's Tomb which has been declared to be a property of world heritage. In our view this Chilla Sharif (Khanqah) should be maintained by the Archaeological Survey of India.
The next question is who will manage it. There is no dispute that the religious activities are taking place in that area. The right of management of this to being claimed by the Intezamia Committee ... and the Delhi Wakf Board. The case of the Delhi Wakf Board is that the Board is incharge of this and they should be allowed to manage this Chilla Sharif (Khanqah).
We are of the view that the dispute between the Delhi Wakf Board and the Intezamia Committee should be resolved by proper proceeding in a court of law. We are not expressing any opinion on the right of management of Chilla Sharif. We direct that having regard to its importance, the Archaeological Survey of India should maintain and preserve it. The Archaeological Survey of India will not interfere with holding of religious functions or offering of prayers at that place.
If the Archaeological Survey of India wants to notify this monument as a monument of national importance of sants to take any special measure for preserving this monument, it can apply to this Court for modification of this Order.
II - On I.T. Exemption for Trusts
M/s Thiagarajan Charities, Madurai, Appellant v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax and another, Respondents.
K.S. PARIPOORNAN, K. VENKATASWAMI AND B.N. KIRPAL, JJ.
Charitable trust - Income Tax - Exemption -Objects of trust - Main objects of trust were education, medical relief and poor relief - One of objects being to promote etc. rural reconstruction work, cottage industry can also be taken as object to afford 'relief to poor' - objects of 'trust' on basis of such clause held by Department to be enabling trust to carry on business with profit motive - Order denying exemption under Section 11 of Income Tax Act on that ground - Not legal - Income from business carried on by trust for achieving main object of trust - Is exempt under Section 11. (Source: AIR 1997 Supreme Court 2541)
