Cinthia Tanjappa Vs the Union of India, through Its Joint Secretary, (Psp and Cpo)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No.1117 of 2025

Cinthia Tanjappa, aged about 30 years, D/o Mr. Stanly Avon Tanjappa, Resident of 349, New Layout Sitaramdera Agrico, Jamshedpur, P.O.-Agrico, P.S.-Sitaramdera and District-East Singhbhum, Jharkhand .......... Petitioner.

¶4

-Versus-

¶5

The Union of India through its Joint Secretary, (PSP & CPO), Ministry of External Affairs, having its office at Room No.8, Patiala House, Tilak Marg, P.O. + P.S. Tilak Marg, New Delhi-110001.

¶6

The Regional Passport Office, Ranchi through its Regional Passport Officer, having its office at Passport office, Ranchi, JRD Floor, the Galaxia Mall, P.O.-Hehal, P.S. Sukhdeo Nagar, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand-834005.

¶7

.......... Respondents.

¶8

¶9

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

¶10

----For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhishek Kumar Dubey, Advocate Mr. Yuvraj Singh, Advocate Mr. Atif Anwar, Advocate Mr. Pranaw Kant Tiwary, Advocate For the UOI : Mr. Shiv Kumar Sharma, Advocate ----- Order No.03 Date: 11.03.2025

¶11

The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of a fresh passport to the petitioner with correct date of birth as 25^th October, 1994 by cancelling the passport bearing No.C1589858 in which the date of birth of the petitioner has wrongly been mentioned as 25^th October, 1992.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that when the petitioner was a minor, she was issued a passport bearing no.G6385110 valid from 15^th July, 2008 to 14^th July, 2018, wherein, inadvertently, her date of birth was mentioned as 25^th October, 1992. After attaining majority, the petitioner while intending to get her passport renewed, realized that

¶13

there was an error in the date of birth mentioned in her passport since her correct date of birth is 25^th October, 1994 as recorded in her all certificates. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the Regional Passport Office, Ranchi (the respondent no.2) for correction of date of birth mentioned in her passport, whereupon vide letter dated 12^th October, 2021, she was asked to re-apply with all supporting documents.

¶14

It is further submitted that the petitioner submitted the application form along with all the documents i.e., Class-X marks sheet, admission card of Annual Secondary Examination, 2010, PAN card, Voter Identity card and AADHAR card. However, the same was not entertained and she was orally asked to bring an order from a competent court with declaration that her date of birth is 25^th October, 1994. The petitioner also applied before the Jamshedpur Notified Area Committee for issuance of corrected date of birth certificate and the same was issued by the Registrar (Birth & Death), Jamshedpur Notified Area committee on 24^th January, 2023 mentioning her date of birth as 25^th October, 1994.

¶15

It is also submitted that the petitioner filed a declaratory suit being Original Suit No.74 of 2023 in the court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)-XI, Jamshedpur seeking a decree of declaration that her correct date of birth is 25^th October, 1994. The said suit was decreed in favour of the petitioner

¶16

2

¶17

W.P.(C) No.1117 of 2025

¶18

vide judgment and decree dated 21^st June, 2024 and 28^th June, 2024 respectively.

¶19

It is further submitted that in the meantime, the respondentauthorities closed her earlier application filed for correction of date of birth and intimated her about the same vide letter dated 25^th August, 2023. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a fresh application on 12^th August, 2024 along with all supporting documents including copy of the judgment and decree passed in Original Suit No.74 of 2023 specifically mentioning her date of birth as 25^th October, 1994. The petitioner was also asked to submit her Class-X certificate and Aadhar Card in which her date of birth is mentioned as 25^th October, 1994, however, the respondent no.2 issued her passport in non-ECR category ignoring her Class-X certificate. Since the petitioner’s application for reissuance of passport with her correct date of birth has been rejected, she has been compelled to prefer the present writ petition.

¶20

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that since in the earlier passport issued to the petitioner, her date of birth was mentioned as 25^th October, 1992 and she never objected the same till expiry of the said passport, the same date of birth has also been mentioned in her reissued passport.

¶21

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering that a decree of declaration dated 28^th June, 2024 has already been prepared by the court of Civil Judge

¶22

3 W.P.(C) No.1117 of 2025

¶23

(Senior Division)-XI, Jamshedpur in Original Suit No.74 of 2023 to the effect that the correct and actual date of birth of the petitioner is 25^th October, 1994 which was incorrectly entered as 25^th October, 1992 in the Passport No.G6385110 issued by the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, the petitioner’s request for correction of her date of birth mentioned in reissued Passport No.C1589858 as 25^th October, 1992 requires reconsideration of the respondent no.2.

¶24

Hence, the petitioner is given liberty to prefer fresh application along with relevant documents in this regard before the respondent no.2. On receipt of the said application, the respondent no.2 after examining the said documents, particularly the decree of declaration dated 28^th June, 2024 prepared by the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division)-XI, Jamshedpur in Original Suit No.74 of 2023, shall take appropriate decision in this regard within a period of one month from the date of filing of the said application.

¶25

The writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid liberty and direction.

¶26

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

¶27

Rohit/

¶28

4

¶29

W.P.(C) No.1117 of 2025

Cinthia Tanjappa v. the Union of India, through Its Joint Secretary, (Psp and Cpo)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cinthia Tanjappa v. the Union of India, through Its Joint Secretary, (Psp and Cpo)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rakesh Pal Vs the State of Jharkhand.

New Advocates Clerk Association Jharkhand High Court through Its President Jitendra Kumar Malityar Vs the Registrar General Jharkhand High Court

Baratu Ganjhu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Keramat Ali Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sheoji Singh Vs Indian Overseas Bank, Represented through Its General Manager

Suresh Mahto Vs State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary