Dismissed¶31

Thuraka Pujitha, v. The Union of India

Andhra Pradesh HC14 Jul 2026WP/13483/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition (Article 226, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, W.P. No. 13483/2026, decided 15.07.2026 by Ravi Cheemalapati, J.) challenging closure/holding of passport application File No. VJ2066521174826 as violative of Articles 14 and 21. Court found documents were called for by letter dated 08.06.2026 and the application was closed on 09.06.2026 for non-submission; writ petition dismissed; liberty to file a fresh application.

What did the court decide?

No relief granted. Writ petition dismissed as meritless; petitioner not precluded from filing a fresh application in accordance with law; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, stand closed. ¶31

Thuraka Pujitha, Vs The Union of India — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

Date of reserved for orders :

¶3

Date of pronouncement : 15.07.2026 Date of uploading :

¶4

APHC010235362026

¶5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶6

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶7

[3332]

¶8

WEDNESDAY, THE 15^th DAY OF JULY 2026

¶9

PRESENT

¶10

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

¶11

WRIT PETITION NO: 13483/2026

¶12

Between:

¶13

THURAKA PUJITHA,, D/O SRINIVASA RAO THURAKA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/O 6-38, SEETHARAMAPURAM MAINS, KONDAMODU, KUBADPURAM, PALNADU DISTRICT - 522413.

¶14

...PETITIONER

¶15

AND

¶16

THE UNION OF INDIA, REP., BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, SOUTH BLOCK. SECRETARIAT BUILDING. NEW DELHI 11011.

¶17

THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE, MG ROAD, OPP RADIO STATION (AIR), VENKATESWARA THEATRE COMPLEX, VIJAYAWADA-520010.

¶18

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶19

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in keeping the passport application bearing File No. VJ2066521174826 on hold as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to process and issue passport to the petitioner,

¶20

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶22

1.BILAAL AHMED SYED

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶24

1.P SARASWATHI CENTRAL GOVT COUNSEL

¶25

The Court made the following order:

¶26

The short grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent authorities have kept her passport application bearing file No:VJ2066521174826 on hold.

¶27

Heard Sri Bilal Ahmed Syed, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.Saraswathi, learned central government counsel.

¶28

Learned central government counsel submitted that the petitioner’s application was closed due to non-submission of required documents and if the petitioner intends to make a fresh application, the authorities would consider the same in accordance with law.

¶29

A perusal of the material available on record shows that authorities have issued letter asking the petitioner to submit required documents on 08.06.2026 and since the petitioner has not submitted them, they have closed her application on 09.06.2026 and issued a letter to the petitioner also. In view of the same, no relief can be granted to the petitioner and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed being meritless. However, if the petitioner makes a fresh application, the authorities have an intention to consider the same in accordance with law.

¶30

¶31

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner is

¶32

not precluded to file a fresh application in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶33

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶34

________________________ JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI

¶35

15.07.2026 BRS

¶36