EBRAHIM GULAM NABI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of both the parties, heard finally at the stage of admission itself.

(2.) In this writ petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, a very short question is raised for consideration relating to the interpretation of Section 8(2) of Haj Committee Act, 2002. The exact nature of controversy is centered around the question as to whether a member, who was elected for more than 2 terms, can be eligible for renomination on the Haj Committee, considering the wording of Section 8(2) of the Act that, "an outgoing member shall be eligible for renomination on the Committee for not more than two terms."

(3.) For deciding this controversy, the relevant facts of the petition can be stated as follows: