Disposed

Ravichandran v. the Regional Passport Officer

Madras HC6 Jul 2023WP/19878/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single-judge bench disposed of a writ petition seeking direction to the Regional Passport Officer for passport renewal. Relying on Arumugam judgment, the Court held that mere pendency of an FIR is not a ground to deny passport and directed the officer to hold an enquiry and decide within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 1st respondent to hold an enquiry, consider the Arumugam judgment, and decide the issue within four weeks.

Ravichandran Vs the Regional Passport… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.19878 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 06.07.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

MR.JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE

W.P.No.19878 of 2023

Mr.Ravichandran

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Regional Passport Officer Office of the Regional Passport Office Chennai Royala Towers, No.2 & 3 IV Floor, Old No.785, New No.158 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002

¶11

2.State Rep. by the Inspector of Police Kandili Police Station Tirupattur Taluk, Vellore 635 601 ... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER: The writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1^st respondent to consider the petitioner's passport renewal application No.MA51C5065283522 dated 29.08.2022 and consequentially direct the 1^st respondent to pass orders on renewal of the passport on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 24.04.2023 in accordance with law.

¶13

1/4

¶14

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judishttps://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶15

W.P.No.19878 of 2023

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Arfat Mohammed

¶17

For Respondents : Mr.K.Gangadaran CGC for R1

¶18

Mr.C.Kathiravan Special Government Pleader for R2

¶19

ORDER

¶20

By consent, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶21

2.The petitioner has applied for renewal of his passport vide his application dated 24.04.2023 but it is not considered by the authority concerned. The learned counsel made a fair statement that after applying for the renewal of the passport it has come to light that he has been arrived as an accused in Crime No.93 of 2020 before Vellore Police Station under Section 430 I.P.C. and 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957. Relying on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD).No.301 of 2018, dated 27.03.2018 in Arumugam V. the Regional Passport Officer, the learned counsel submitted that mere pendency of an F.I.R. cannot be a ground to deny renewal of passport.

¶22

2/4

¶23

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judishttps://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

W.P.No.19878 of 2023

¶25

3.Mr.K.Gangadaran, the learned CGC takes notice for the 1^st respondent and Mr.C.Kathiravan, the learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the 2^nd respondent.

¶26

4.The 1^st respondent is now directed to hold an enquiry and take into consideration the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD).No.301 of 2018, dated 27.03.2018 in Arumugam V. the Regional

¶27

Passport Officer and decide the issue within a period of four (4) weeks.

¶28

5.This writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs.

06.07.2023

kas

1.The Regional Passport Officer Office of the Regional Passport Office Chennai Royala Towers, No.2 & 3 IV Floor, Old No.785, New No.158 Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002

¶33

3/4

¶34

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judishttps://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.19878 of 2023

N.SESHASAYEE, J.

kas

2.State Rep. by the Inspector of Police Kandili Police Station Tirupattur Taluk, Vellore 635 601