Shihab Chottur enters Pakistan to complete his journey on foot to Saudi Arabia for Hajj
Lahore, Feb 7: An Indian national, who was earlier denied a visa by a Pakistani court, entered the country on Tuesday to complete his marathon journey on foot to Saudi Arabia to perform Hajj.
Shihab Chottur, 29, arrived in Pakistan via the Wagah border and was welcomed by Sarwar Taj, who had filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court on behalf of Shihab, and Bhagat Singh Memorial Foundation Pakistan chairman Imtiaz Rashid Qureshi.
Qureshi told PTI that Shihab was very happy to get the visa to continue his journey to Mecca.
"He has brought a message of love, friendship and brotherhood," Qureshi said, adding he wanted to organise an event in Shihab's honour on the premises of Lahore High Court but could not do so because of security issues.
Shihab, who hails from Kerala, embarked on a 3,000-km journey on foot in October last year from his home state to the Wagah border where he was stopped by Pakistan's immigration authorities as he did not have a visa.
"Shihab pleaded before the immigration authorities that he was going to perform Hajj on foot and had already travelled 3,000 kms and should be allowed to enter the country on humanitarian grounds. He wanted a transit visa to reach Saudi Arabia via Iran," a Federal Investigation Agency official had said.
Hajj is an annual Islamic pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi Arabia, considered the holiest city for Muslims.
Taj, a resident of Lahore, filed a petition in the Lahore High Court (LHC) requesting that Shihab be granted a transit visa to allow him to travel to Saudi Arabia.
He argued that just like the Pakistan government issues visas to Sikh pilgrims from India to take part in the birth anniversary of Guru Nanak and on other occasions, it should also grant a visa to Shihab.
The LHC dismissed his petition, observing that the "petitioner was not related to the Indian citizen, nor did he hold his power of attorney to approach the court."
Taj later challenged the decision in the Supreme Court of Pakistan.
View this post on Instagram
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Kerala HC sets aside Sabarimala airport land acquisition process
Kochi (PTI): The Kerala High Court has set aside crucial stages of the land acquisition process for the proposed Sabarimala greenfield airport, holding that the state failed to properly assess the minimum land actually required for the project.
On December 30, 2022, the state government issued an order granting sanction for the acquisition of 2,570 acres of land, comprising the Cheruvally Estate and an additional 307 acres located outside it.
Justice C Jayachandran, delivering the judgment on a writ petition filed by Ayana Charitable Trust (formerly Gospel for Asia) and its managing trustee Dr Siny Punnoose, ruled the decision-making process under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, was legally flawed.
The court, in its December 19 order, directed the state to restart the process by conducting a fresh social impact assessment limited to examining the minimum land requirement, followed by a fresh appraisal by the expert group and reconsideration by the government.
The petitioners had challenged several government actions, including the Social Impact Assessment (SIA) report, the expert committee appraisal, the state government order approving the acquisition, and the subsequent notification under Section 11 of the 2013 Act.
The land in question, mainly the Cheruvally Estate in Pathanamthitta district, is proposed to be acquired for building a new airport intended to serve Sabarimala pilgrims.
The court found that while the state is entitled to acquire land for public purposes, the law clearly mandates that only the "absolute bare minimum" extent of land required for a project can be acquired.
According to the court, this mandatory requirement under Sections 4(4)(d), 7(5)(b), and 8(1)(c) of the 2013 Act was not properly complied with.
Justice Jayachandran observed that the authorities had shown "manifest non-application of mind" in assessing how much land was genuinely necessary.
As a result, the SIA report, the Expert Committee report and the government order were declared invalid to the extent they failed to address this crucial requirement.
Since the Section 11 notification could only be issued after a valid completion of these steps, it too was quashed.
On the petitioners' allegation of fraud on power and colourable exercise of authority, the court did not give a final finding. It held that this issue is closely linked to determining the minimum land required and can only be examined after that exercise is properly completed.
Before concluding, the court suggested that for technically complex projects like airports, the state should include technical experts in the SIA team to ensure informed and lawful decision-making.
The writ petition was accordingly allowed, keeping other issues raised by the petitioners open for future consideration.
