The Supreme Court recently addressed a petition concerning the airfare structure for Hajj pilgrims traveling from Kerala to Jeddah. The petitioners raised concerns about the higher airfare charged from Calicut compared to other embarkation points in the state. The Court, however, declined to intervene, stating that airfare pricing is a commercial policy decision best left to the airlines and the government.
The petitioners highlighted a significant disparity in airfare for Hajj pilgrims traveling from different airports in Kerala. While pilgrims departing from Kochi and Kannur are charged approximately Rs. 86,000 and Rs. 85,000 respectively, those traveling from Calicut are required to pay around Rs. 1,25,000. This difference exists despite Calicut being closer to Jeddah (4,086 km) compared to Kochi (4,170 km).
The petitioners argued that this pricing structure is arbitrary and violates Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to equality. They sought the Court’s intervention to rationalize the airfare structure for Hajj 2025, ensuring fairness and uniformity across all embarkation points in Kerala.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Stresses Need for Government Negotiations to Reduce Costs of Rare Disease Medicines
Court’s Observations
A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh noted that airfare pricing is tied to the viability of airlines and involves commercial policy decisions. The Court expressed concern that any interference could lead to airlines refusing to operate at the agreed rates, causing significant hardship to pilgrims.
"The fixation of airfare is relatable to the viability of airlines... it being part of a commercial policy decision, it will not be prudent for this Court to express any opinion or substitute such policy decision. Any intervention by this Court could be counter-productive for the Hajj pilgrims," the bench observed.
The Court also acknowledged that the petitioners had made a detailed representation to the Ministry of Minority Affairs but received no response. It directed the Ministry to examine the representation and, if the fare cannot be adjusted, to upload a reasoned order on its website within a week.
"If it is found that the fare cannot be acceded to, let an order with brief reasons be uploaded on the website of the Ministry to enable prospective visitors to know why the airfare on the Calicut-Jeddah route is higher compared to other routes in Kerala," the Court ordered.
Senior Advocate Shadan Farasat, representing the petitioners, argued that the price difference of approximately Rs. 40,000 is significant for Hajj pilgrims, many of whom are from economically weaker sections. He emphasized that the Hajj pilgrimage is preceded by a tender process conducted by the Ministry of Minority Affairs, which currently grants a monopoly to Air India.
Farasat contended that the lack of competition allows the airline to set arbitrary prices. He also informed the Court that around 5,500 pilgrims are similarly affected by the higher airfare from Calicut.
Read Also:- Kerala High Court Grants Police Protection to Interfaith Couple from Jharkhand Amid Family Threats
Court’s Final Decision
While the Court declined to interfere with the airfare structure, it directed the Ministry to provide a clear explanation for the price differential. The bench also suggested that the petitioners could approach the Kerala High Court if they wished to pursue the matter further.
"These are not matters where we should intervene... instead of relief, it can cause immense hardship to travelers. Airlines may refuse to operate if forced to adjust fares," Justice Kant remarked.
Key Takeaways
- The Supreme Court refused to intervene in the Hajj airfare pricing, citing it as a commercial policy decision.
- The Ministry of Minority Affairs was directed to explain the higher airfare from Calicut compared to Kochi and Kannur.
- The Court emphasized the need for transparency, asking the Ministry to upload a reasoned order on its website.
- The petitioners argued that the price differential is arbitrary and disproportionately affects economically weaker pilgrims.
Case Title: ABDUSSALAM AND ORS. Versus THE HAJJ COMMITTEE OF INDIA AND ORS., W.P.(C) No. 190/2025
