High Court dismissed writ petition seeking passport DOB correction. Court enclosed case for reconsideration on merits after线上的 application and explanation of discrepancy. Petition disposed without immediate order.
Petition disposed with direction to file online application with explanation.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/4TH CHAITHRA, 1937
WP(C).No. 5238 of 2015 (D)
PETITIONER(S):
JAYAN.T.A, S/O.APPUNNY.T.K, THEKKINKATTUVALAPIL HOUSE, MUTHUVARA POZHAKKAL P.O, THRISSUR.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.SANTHOSH (PODUVAL) SMT.R.RAJITHA SRI.K.D.SREEVISAKH
RESPONDENT(S):
1. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI.110001.
2. THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, PASSPORT OFFICE, PANAMPILLY NAGAR P.O, COCHIN-682 036.
BY ADV. SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
PJ
WP(C).No. 5238 of 2015 (D)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT;P1: TRUE COPY OF PASSPORT OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 4.2.2015
EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF SECONDARY SCHOOL LEAVING CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
NIL.
/ TRUE COPY /
P.S. TO JUDGE
PJ
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
========================
W.P.(C). No. 5238 of 2015
-------------------------------------------Dated this the 25th day of March, 2015
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the holder of the passport bearing No. G 4380663. The same is valid till 2.12.2017. The date of birth shown in the passport is '20.04.1960' which according to the petitioner is actually 20.04.1965 . The petitioner wants to effect correction of date of birth in the passport with reference to the entires in Ext.P3 and accordingly, the 2nd respondent was approached by filing necessary application. The petitioner has been given to understand that, unless the petitioner obtains some favourable orders from a competent Court of law, the request made by the petitioner will not be acceded to, and hence the writ petition.
W.P.C. No. 5238 of 2015
-2-
are relevant which read as follows:
“6. The contention of respondent is not against Ext.P3 submitted by the petitioner. On interview, the petitioner could not satisfactorily explain the circumstances in which the huge difference of date of birth occurred in his passport. As such the respondents had no option but to direct the petitioner to obtain a declaratory Court Order with regard to his correct date of birth. Passport is primarily a document of identity of a person. The date of birth entered in a passport is an important criteria that establishes the identity of a person. The Passport issuing authority has to exercise extreme caution while effecting changes in the details once entered in the passport. The petitioner is trying to force the issue by demanding that the corrections be done as a matter of routine.
W.P.C. No. 5238 of 2015 -3-
file an 'on-line' application for correction of date of birth, along with an affidavit explaining the queries raised by the respondents as above in their statement and the documents relied upon by the petitioner before the 2nd respondent forthwith; on which event, the same shall be accepted and considered by the second respondent, passing appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of three weeks thereafter.
The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 2nd respondent for further steps. The writ petition is disposed of.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
kp/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petitioner claiming a 5-year discrepancy in passport due of birth can succeed on the ground of passing orders in cases like Nizar and Swapna Siju.
Whether the petitioner can be compelled to undergo a strict investigation before approaching a tribunal for correction of date of birth.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Nizar v. Union of IndiaReferred¶32
Nizar v. Union of India (2014 (4) KLT 609
Swapna Siju Vs. Union of IndiaReferred¶32
Swapna Siju Vs. Union of India (2012 (4) KLT 419
Jayan.T.A
Union of India
The Regional Passport Officer, Cochin
P.R. Ramachandra Menon
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
