Congress has demanded the immediate withdrawal of a Haj Committee of India circular asking pilgrims to pay an additional ₹10,000 each towards airfare for Haj 2026, turning a late-stage cost revision into a political dispute over affordability, planning and the government’s handling of one of the world’s largest annual pilgrim movements.Party leaders said the April 28 circular had imposed a fresh burden on families after many pilgrims had completed payments across instalments and, in some cases, had already begun their journey to Saudi Arabia. Congress MP and general secretary Syed Naseer Hussain alleged that the decision was made without adequate notice, consultation or a credible explanation matching the timing of the demand.
“Pilgrims had already paid in full across multiple instalments over many months. Many of them are elderly. Many are already in Saudi Arabia to perform the Haj,” Hussain said, arguing that the added demand reflected “mismanagement” rather than an unavoidable cost adjustment.
The circular, issued by the Haj Committee of India under the Ministry of Minority Affairs, says a one-time airfare revision for Haj 2026 was approved because of extraordinary circumstances arising from the crisis in West Asia. It states that airlines had sought an upward revision of more than $400 per passenger in the base fare, citing a sharp increase in aviation turbine fuel prices, but the final additional amount was fixed at $100 per pilgrim, irrespective of embarkation point. Pilgrims have been asked to deposit ₹10,000 by May 15.
The government has rejected the charge of mismanagement, maintaining that negotiations with airlines lowered the demand sharply and helped contain the increase. Minority Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said airlines had sought a far higher adjustment and that the ministry should not be blamed without a full understanding of the facts. He said the increase for pilgrims travelling through the Haj Committee of India had been brought down to $100, while pilgrims using private operators faced an increase of about $150.
The controversy comes at a sensitive point in the Haj 2026 schedule. The Haj Committee’s own guidelines had indicated that outbound charter operations were expected to begin in the second half of April and continue until May 19, with return flights scheduled between June 1 and June 30. The additional charge has therefore landed close to the main travel window, leaving state Haj committees with limited time to communicate the requirement and collect payments.
Congress has framed the matter as part of a broader affordability issue, claiming that the cost of performing Haj under the Modi government has risen to a point where ordinary families find the pilgrimage difficult to manage. Hussain said the pilgrimage was not a luxury expense but a religious obligation for which many households save over years. He also questioned why pilgrims were being asked to absorb an unexpected fuel-related burden when the government had repeatedly asserted that citizens were being shielded from global energy shocks.
The party has called for the April 28 circular to be withdrawn, any amount already collected under it to be refunded, and structural reforms to be introduced before the 2027 Haj season. These include mandatory competitive tendering and a Haj price stability mechanism designed to absorb abrupt cost fluctuations without passing them to pilgrims at the last moment.
Government officials have pointed to the complex logistics of Haj travel, including charter arrangements, accommodation, health protocols, transport in Saudi Arabia and coordination with multiple agencies. The Haj Committee of India is a statutory body under the Haj Committee Act, 2002, and works with state and Union Territory Haj committees, the Ministry of Minority Affairs, the Ministry of Civil Aviation and authorities in Saudi Arabia. The final cost of Haj is shaped by contracts and services arranged both domestically and in Saudi Arabia, while pilgrims are informed in the guidelines that cost variations may arise from changes in service contracts, foreign exchange rates and travel arrangements.
The airfare dispute has also revived questions over the structure of Haj travel after the end of the central Haj subsidy several years ago. While the government has argued that direct subsidy withdrawal brought the system in line with court directives and policy changes, critics say stronger procurement and price protection are now more important because pilgrims bear a larger share of the total cost directly.