Disposed

Puli Sanjeev, v. The Regional passport officer

Telangana HC1 Apr 2005WP/7183/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that while the Passports Act does not empower the Officer to correct entries, a 2001 Government of India circular allows rectification based on supporting documents or minor technical errors. The court set aside the order requiring a court petition and directed the respondent to consider the request for a fresh passport.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 06.01.2005 set aside; direction to respondent to consider fresh passport application afresh based on 2004 application and verify documents per 2001 Circular.

Puli Sanjeev, Vs The Regional passport officer — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2005)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

FRIDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 7183 of 2005

¶7

Between:

¶8

Puli Sanjeev S/o Puli Muthaiah, Occ: Private Employee, R/o 1-73, Metlachittapur, Metpally, Karimnagar District.

¶9

.... PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office Secunderabad.

¶12

...RESPONDENT

¶13

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue the writ or orders more particularly writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in not effecting the correction of date of birth in the passport and insisting the petitioner to obtain Court order and not making the change of date of birth in passport as arbitrary, illegal and inhuman and apart from the letter and spirit of constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondent to correct the date of birth as 14.03.1977 instead of 10-08-1973 in petitioners passport No. Q 794995 issued on 01.02.1994 and issue the fresh passport to the petitioner and pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of the justice.

¶14

Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.Mohd. Mumtaz Pasha Counsel for the Respondent: MR.A.Raja Sekhar Reddy

¶15

The Court at the stage of admission made the following:

¶16

ORDER:

¶17

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for Central Government appearing for the respondent-Passport Authority.

¶18

It is the case of the petitioner that his actual date of birth is 14.03.1977, but in the passport issued to him by the respondent-Passport Authority on 01.02.1994, his date of birth was wrongly mentioned as 10.08.1973. The petitioner submitted an application on 14.12.2004 to the respondent-Passport Authority to alter his date of birth in the Passport and issue fresh passport. The respondent, by proceedings dated 06.01.2005, informed the petitioner that he has no power to make correction of date of birth in the passport directing the petitioner to bring an order from the Court regarding correction of his date of birth. Aggrieved by the said action of the respondent, this writ petition is filed.

¶19

It is required to be noticed that there is no provision under the Passports Act, 1967, which empowers the Regional Passport Officer to correct entries in the Passport. However, pursuant to the judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, in W.P.No.1072 of 2000, the Government of India issued instructions/clarifications in Circular dated 18-04-2001, which are to the following effect:

¶20

“ (a) Where an applicant is seeking rectification/correction of a mistake in the entry on date of birth/place of birth is the passport, PIA (Passport Issuing Authority) may after verifying/satisfying himself, effect the correction treating the same as a technical correction. There is no need for a declaratory order in such cases.

¶21

(b) Where a competent authority issuing a birth certificate or an educational board registering a date of birth along with place of birth as valid were to issue any correction or amendment, PIA may effect the necessary amendment in the passport without insisting on a Court Order. As per the provisions of Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1997, a

¶22

competent authority issuing a certificate could also make necessary amendments to the same.

¶23

(c) Where the initial entry has been made on the basis of a supportive document issued by one competent authority i.e., school/educational authority and the applicant subsequently requests for a change on the basis of a certificate issued by another competent authority i.e., municipal authorities resulting in conflicting sources of valid proof, the PIA should direct the applicant to obtain a civil order from a competent court of jurisdiction, certifying the valid date of birth/place of birth.”

¶24

As on today, if any request for correction of date of birth in the passport is made, the Passport Issuing Authority is required to follow the aforementioned instructions. In that view of the matter, the respondent ought to have considered the application of the petitioner for fresh passport in the light of the above instructions in Circular dated 18-04-2001.

¶25

Accordingly, the impugned order dated 06.01.2005 is set aside and the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to consider the request of the petitioner afresh on the basis of his application dated 14.12.2004 for issuance of fresh passport with correct date of birth and process the same after verifying the genuineness or otherwise thereof basing on the documents the petitioner may file in support of his case for change of date of birth, in the light of the aforementioned guidelines, and pass appropriate orders.

¶26

With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

01.04.2005

1) The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office

¶31

Secunderabad.

¶32

2) 2 CD copies.

Puli Sanjeev, v. The Regional passport officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Puli Sanjeev, 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Municipal Workers Welfare Society gudivada, Vs The Commissioenr, Gudivada

Kola haranath, Vs Vishakapatnam Municipal Corporation

M/s. Mc. Dowell and Company Limited, Vs The Principal Secretary to Government

B.Laxman, Vs District Collector

V.Rambabu, Vs The District Collector

Buddana Srisaibabu, Vs Municipal Corporation of Kakinada