Disposed

Akash Ezhuthupurakkal v. the Passport Officer

Kerala HC1 Oct 2021WP(C)/9518/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court directed the Passport Officer to decide afresh within three weeks the petitioner's application for correcting the father's name and other errors in the passport, citing the passport's identity character and reliance on Deepnamol Sebastian.

What did the court decide?

Instructions to the respondent to decide the application for correction of the petitioner's passport details within three weeks and issue a fresh passport if corrections are granted.

Akash Ezhuthupurakkal Vs the Passport… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS FRIDAY, THE 1^ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 9TH ASWINA, 1943

¶4

WP(C) NO. 9518 OF 2021

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

AKASH EZHUTHUPURAKKAL AGED 25 YEARS S/O. SURENDRAN, EZHUTHUPURAKKAL HOUSE, KANJIRAKODE POST, WADAKKANCHEERY VIA, THRISSUR DISTRICT PIN 680 590

¶7

BY ADV C.A.JOJO

¶8

RESPONDENT:

¶9

THE PASSPORT OFFICER REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE, PANAMPALLY NAGAR POST,

¶10

ERNAKULAM, COCHIN 682 036

¶11

BY ADVS. SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA SRI.JAISHANKAR V.NAIR, CGC

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

W.P.(C)No. 9518 of 2021

¶14

¶15

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.

¶16

W.P.(C)No. 9518 of 2021

¶17

Dated this the 1^st day of October, 2021

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

Petitioner had filed an application before the respondent seeking correction of his father’s name and his own surname in his passport and to include his spouse's name. Petitioner’s passport bears the name of his father as ‘Ezhuthupurakkal Krishnan Mohanan’. He claims that his father’s real name if ‘Ezhuthupurakkal Krishnan Surendran’.

¶20

Pursuant to the application from the petitioner and on verification, it was noted that petitioner’s mother’s passport carried the name of her spouse as ‘Ezhuthupurackal Ayyappan Mohanan’ and not ‘Ezhuthupurackal Krishnan Surendran’. Other anomalies were was detected by the respondent and clarifications were sought for from the Petitioner by Ext.P6. An explanation was submitted by petitioner as per Ext.P7. It is pleaded that without any proper details or consideration

¶21

W.P.(C)No. 9518 of 2021

¶22

¶23

and merely on the basis of "an adverse information", the respondent has canceled petitioner's passport instead of incorporation the changes.

¶24

The learned Counsel for petitioner

¶25

Adv.C.A.Jojo, pointed out, that all records which petitioner presently possess shows his father’s name as ‘Ezhuthupurackal Krishnan Surendran’ including Ext. P13 birth certificate, Ext. P14 PAN card and even Ext. P15 Driving License. According to him, the only record that shows petitioner’s father’s name as ‘Ezhuthupurackal Krishnan Mohanan’ is the passport which obviously was incorporated as a mistake and that too, occurred not at his behest, but done by some agent, when he was a minor child. It is also contended by the petitioner that irrespective of the reason behind the mistake, petitioner is entitled to have the actual name of his father incorporated in the passport especially when he has identified the mistake and the same is proved by reference to all other records available.

¶26

A statement has been filed by the

¶27

W.P.(C)No. 9518 of 2021

¶28

¶29

respondents stating that Petitioner's passport was issued from Doha and while processing the application for reissue of passport, it was noticed that the three passports which petitioners held, bore different particulars with regard to his parents. It is also pleaded that in the discrete enquiry conducted by the respondent, it was revealed that the name of the petitioner's father shown in the passport was that of his father's elder brother and the surname attached to his mother's name was also of the same person and that petitioner had obtained passport No.L0055609 with fake particulars, that too, after attaining the age of majority. It is in such circumstances that the respondent initiated passport refusal process under section 5(2)(c) of the Passports Act, 1967 (for short 'the Act'). It is also pleaded that an appeal under section 11 of the Act is available to the petitioner.

¶30

In the reply affidavit filed by the petitioner, it is stated that the application for his passport was submitted by his father when he was a minor, aged 5 years, and thereafter, at the age of 12 years. All these

¶31

W.P.(C)No. 9518 of 2021

¶32

¶33

passports had at the time of renewal valid Visa for Qatar and that even after petitioner attained the age of majority, he held a valid Visa. According to the petitioner, the final renewal of the passport was done at a time when he was only aged 18 years and that too a Plus two student at Doha and that being resident in a foreign country, that all an Arab Nation, the complications that could arise were many. The Visa issued from the foreign country was based on the passport of the parent and if the parents' name differed that would have affected the dependent child's Visa resulting in automatic cancellation.

¶34

It is submitted that the name of his

¶35

parents are appearing in petitioner's passport were not inserted at the behest of the petitioner but at the behest of other persons and that petitioner had no role or control over such things.

¶36

Having heard Adv.C.A.Jojo, the learned

¶37

Counsel for the petitioner as well as Adv. Jaishankar V. Nair, the learned Central Government Counsel, I am of the view that petitioner’s application for grant of correction in

¶38

W.P.(C)No. 9518 of 2021

¶39

¶40

the passport has to be considered and decided by the respondent afresh in a time bound manner. Names of the parents of a person are significant proof of identity of a person. Entry of the correct name of the parents of an individual in a passport is essential not only for that individual, but to a large extent for the society. The passport is not just a travel document. It partakes the character of a document of identity, many a times. Proper and correct identity in all records is a necessity and an essential concomitant of personal liberty.

¶41

In a recent decisions, this Court had held in Deepnamol Sebastian Vs. Regional Passport Officer, Kozhikode and another 2021(5)KLT 197 , that mistakes in respect of parents name can be corrected even after their death based upon documents that are to be produced to the satisfaction of the officer. The latest guidelines of the Ministry of External Affairs was also relied upon, while laying down such a proposition.

¶42

Thus, if the documents of identity of a person reflect a different name, relating to any or both of

¶43

W.P.(C)No. 9518 of 2021

¶44

¶45

the parents of a person, it is necessary, that such mistaken entries be corrected.

¶46

While considering the application for correction of name of parents, the documents that may have a tendency to prove the real name of petitioner’s father should also be borne in mind since, it does not augur well for the society that a wrong name continues to remain in one of the essential documents of identity of a person, de hors the reason for the mistake that crept in. If there is sufficient evidence to prove the actual identity of the father of a person, and if the petitioner has approached within a reasonable time of noticing the mistakes, it is essential that such mistakes be corrected as otherwise various civil rights can accrue or be denied on the basis of such wrong names entered in a crucial travel document like the Passport.

¶47

With the above observations, the respondent is directed to take appropriate decision on the application of the petitioner for correction of the name of his father and other corrections in his passport as sought for. The said

¶48

W.P.(C)No. 9518 of 2021

¶49

¶50

decision shall be taken as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three weeks from the date of the receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶51

In the event, the name change as sought for is granted, petitioner shall be issued with a fresh passport after incorporating the changes and if on the other hand, the change of name is refused by the respondent the passport of the petitioner shall be returned with the appropriate renewal and with the necessary endorsements as are permissible in law.

¶52

The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions.

¶53

Sd/BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE

¶54

AJ/01.10.2021

¶55

W.P.(C)No. 9518 of 2021

¶56

¶57

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9518/2021

¶58

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶59

EXHIBIT P1	A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF HIS PASSPORT NO. L0055609 ISSUED FROM DOHA INDIAN EMBASSY DATED 19-03-2013
EXHIBIT P2	A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF HIS OLD PASSPORT NO. E 2241913 ISSUED FROM DOHA INDIAN EMBASSY DATED 27-11-2002
EXHIBIT P3	A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 27-10-2020 WITH A REFERENCE NO. SCN/310300987/20
EXHIBIT P4	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED TO THE RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER DATED 28-10-2020
EXHIBIT P5	A TRUE COPY OF THE E-MAIL ISSUED FROM THE ADMIN OF THE RESPONDENT OFFICE TO THE PETITIONER DATED 20-03-2021
EXHIBIT P6	A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 02-03-2021 WITH A REFERENCE NO. SCN/310735781/21
EXHIBIT P7	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED TO THE RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER DATED 20-03-2021
EXHIBIT P8	A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE FROM LAMBTON COLLEGE TORONTO DATED 15- 01-2021
EXHIBIT P9	A TRUE COPY OF THE E-AADHAR LETTER OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED BY GOVT. OF INDIA PROVING THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER AS WELL AS HIS FATHER WITH NO. 6622 6500 5070

Akash Ezhuthupurakkal v. the Passport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akash Ezhuthupurakkal v. the Passport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sojan Mathew @ Jose Vs the Kerala State Co-Operative Bank Limited,Idukki

Haris Padavingal Abu Vs the Regional Passport Officer

Cantech Plastics, Vs the Authorised Officer

Vellinezhi Panchayat Service Co. Operative Bank Ltd. Vs Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Anavilasam Service Co-Operative Bank Limited Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Perur Service Co-Operative Bank Limited No F 1614 Vs Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax