Disposed

Jafar Abdul Samad v. the Regional Passport Officer

Kerala HC24 Jan 2023WP(C)/676/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition was filed by a petitioner seeking directions to the Regional Passport Officer to facilitate passport renewal and consider a representation submitted regarding FIR implications. The Court disposed of the matter at the admission stage by issuing directions.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation (Ext. P4) on merits within one month and pass appropriate orders.

Jafar Abdul Samad Vs the Regional Passport Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V TUESDAY, THE 24^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 4TH MAGHA, 1944

¶2

 WP(C) NO. 676 OF 2023

¶3

 PETITIONER/S:

¶4

 JAFAR ABDUL SAMAD
 AGED 57 YEARS
 S/O ABDUL SAMAD,
 LIYA LARK, NELLETTIL PO, BHOOTHAKULAM,
 KOLLAM CITY, PIN - 691302

¶5

 BY ADV M.R.SASITH

¶6

 RESPONDENT/S:

¶7

 1 THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER
 THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE,
 TRIVANDRUM, SNSM BUILDING, KARALKADA JUNCTION,
 PETTAH PO, TRIVANDRUM, PIN - 695024

¶8

 2 THE KOLLAM PASSPORT SEVA KENDRA
 74 BUILDING NO.MC VIII/1578/715 A,
 S.N TRUST COMPLEX, NEAR KOLLAM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
 OFFICE, VELLAPPALLY NAGAR, KOLLAM, PIN - 691320

¶9

 3 THE MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS OF THE GOVERNMENT OF
 INDIA
 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
 MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
 NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001

¶10

 BY ADV MANU S. DSG OF INDIA

¶11

 SRI TR RENJITH SR GP

¶12

 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
 ADMISSION ON 24.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

 WP(C) NO. 676 OF 2023

¶14

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

The petitioner states that he is the holder of a passport bearing No. Z-2412483. When he applied for re-issuance of the passport, it was noted that the petitioner has already applied for a passport, and the said aspect was not disclosed while applying for the second passport. Based on directions issued by the respondents, the petitioner surrendered his earlier passport. However, the 1st respondent is stated to have issued Exhibit P3 and ordered to register FIR. It is in the said circumstances that the petitioner has preferred Ext. P4 representation before the 1st respondent. It is in the above backdrop that the petitioner is before this Court seeking the following reliefs:

¶17

a) To issue a writ or order or directions in the nature of or similar to writ of mandamus directing the respondents to facilitate renewal of the petitioner’s passport/re-issue a fresh passport to the petitioner after extending its validity, in a time bound manner.

¶18

b) To issue a writ or order or directions in the nature of or similar to writ of mandamus directing the respondents to consider Ext. P4 representation of the petitioner within a time fixed by this Hon’ble Court.

¶19

When the matter was taken up for consideration, Sri. M.R. Sasith, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied if directions are issued to the 1st

¶20

 WP(C) NO. 676 OF 2023

¶21

¶22

respondent to consider Ext. P4 representation and take a decision in accordance with the law.

¶23

Sri. S. Manu, the learned DSGI, who appeared for the respondents, submits that there is no impediment in considering the said request. However, it is submitted that the representation shall be considered strictly in terms of the relevant Acts, Rules, and other guidelines.

¶24

I have heard Sri. T.R. Renjit, the learned Government

¶25

Pleader as well.

¶26

After having carefully evaluated the contentions raised in this writ petition, the submissions made across the Bar, and the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of at the admission stage itself by issuing the following directions:

¶27

a) There will be a direction to the 1st respondent to take up,

¶28

consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P4 representation, strictly on its merits, after affording an opportunity of being heard, either physically or virtually, to the petitioner herein.

¶29

b) Orders, as directed above, shall be passed

¶30

expeditiously, in any event, within one month from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.

¶31

 WP(C) NO. 676 OF 2023

¶32

¶33

c) It would be open to the petitioner to produce a copy of

¶34

the writ petition along with the judgment before the concerned respondent for further action.

¶35

This writ petition is disposed of.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE

¶38

avs

¶39

 WP(C) NO. 676 OF 2023

¶40

¶41

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 676/2023

¶42

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶43

`Exhibit P1`	`THE TRUE COPY OF THE PASSPORT BEARING NUMBER` `R-366250`
`Exhibit P2`	`THE TRUE COPY OF PASSPORT BEARING NUMBER` `Z-2412483 WITH VALIDITY EXTENDING FROM` `05.02.2013 TILL 04.02.2023`
`Exhibit P3`	`. THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY` `THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 07.09.2022`
`Exhibit P4`	`THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE` `PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED` `15.09.2022`
`Exhibit P5`	`THE TRUE COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.1145/2022 OF` `PARAVOOR POLICE STATION DATED 16.11.2022`
`Exhibit P6`	`THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN ARCHANA NAIR VS` `UNION OF INDIA W.P.(C) NO. 19767 OF 2013-U DATED` `13.10.2013`

Jafar Abdul Samad v. the Regional Passport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jafar Abdul Samad v. the Regional 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Navamukunda Higher Secondary School Vs State of Kerala

Unais.P.P Vs Director of General Education

Silja K.P Vs the Director of General Education

Manager. Vs Muhammed Haneesh

Bibitha Bhasi Rep. by Poa Holder Bhanu Bhasi Vs Union of India, Represented by the Secretary to Government

Shahul Hameed .K.P. Vs the Secretary