Dismissed

Sabruth Begam v. the Regional Passport

Madras HC13 Oct 2011WP(MD)/10198/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court, in a writ petition under Article 226, dismissed the petitioner's claim for passport renewal. The court held that a period of nearly eight years had elapsed since the alleged application, rendering the request unfeasible. The petitioner was left open to apply for a fresh passport.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed. The petitioner was left open to apply for a fresh passport. No costs.

Sabruth Begam Vs the Regional Passport — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2011)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 13.10.2011

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN

¶6

Writ Petition(MD)No.10198 of 2011

Sabruth Begam

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Regional Passport Officer, The Regional Passport Office, Trichy.

¶11

... Respondent

¶12

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to consider the representation dated 11.05.2011 to renew the passport bearing No.Q192059 and to dispose of.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.V.A.Dhana Aravindhabalaji

¶14

For Respondent : Mr.C.Ramachandran

¶15

S.C.G.S.S.C

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

The petitioner has come up with the above writ petition seeking a Mandamus directing the respondent to consider her representation for the renewal of the passport.

¶18

2.Heard Mr.V.A.Dhana Aravindhabalaji, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.C.Ramachandran, learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel for the respondent.

¶19

3.Admittedly, the passport held by the petitioner expired on 19.09.2003. According to the petitioner, she submitted an application for renewal on 21.08.2003 and paid necessary fees and also appeared before the respondent upon being summoned on 25.09.2003. Thereafter, her passport was not renewed and hence, she has come up with the above writ petition.

¶20

4.Today, her request for renewal cannot be granted in view of the long efflux of time. A period of nearly eight years have passed from the date of her alleged renewal application. Therefore, it is not feasible to consider her request for renewal.

¶21

5.In such circumstances, leaving it open to the petitioner to file an application for the issue of a fresh passport, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

¶22

Sd/-

¶23

Deputy Registrar(Writs)

¶24

/True Copy/

¶25

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶26

Assistant Registrar

¶27

2 To

¶28

The Regional Passport Officer, The Regional Passport Office, Trichy. +1cc to Mr.C.Ramachandran, Advocate, Sr.No.35698 sms ssk/09.11.2011 /3c -2p/- Writ Petition(MD)No.10198 of 2011

¶29

13.10.2011

¶30

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Sabruth Begam v. the Regional Passport

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sabruth Begam v. the Regional Passport

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lanco Tanjore Power Vs the District Collector

G.Paramasivam Vs the Commissioner of Police

P. Subramanian Vs the District Collector

M. Selvarani, Vs the District Collector

R. Papanasam, S/O.Ramasamy, Vs the Superintendent of Police

S. Sumshu Neesha Begum Vs the Chief Executive