Disposed

Mohammed Abdul Sayeed v. Union of India

Telangana HC21 Jan 2020WP/8056/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the closure of the petitioner's passport application file. The court permitted the petitioner to submit a fresh application for passport issuance with requisite documents, directing the respondents to issue the passport if documents comply with rules.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of on terms permitting petitioner to apply afresh for passport with requisite documents.

Mohammed Abdul Sayeed Vs Union of India — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

W.P.No.8056 of 2019

¶2

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

¶5

“…..to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring closing of the petitioner File.No. 1060443929917 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unreasonable and in violation of Articles 19(1)(d) and 21 of the Constitution of India and declare the action of the respondents in not issuing the passport to the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Articles 19(1)(d) and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to issue passport to the petitioner in the interest of justice and pass such other order or orders as this Honorable Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon’ble Court may deems fit just and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

¶6

When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing for the respondents contended that the petitioner has been given enough opportunity to furnish requisite documents for issuance of passport, but the petitioner has not furnished the same. Hence, the petitioner’s file was closed vide order dated 2.1.2018. However, the respondents would consider the case of the petitioner if he applies afresh with requisite documents.

¶7

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the petitioner would apply for passport afresh with requisite documents.

¶8

Having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court is of the view that

¶9

¶10

this writ petition can be disposed of permitting the petitioner to submit an application for issuance of passport afresh. It is needless to state that if the documents submitted by the petitioner along with the application are in accordance with the Rules, the respondents shall issue passport to him.

¶11

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶12

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand

¶13

closed.
_____________________________________
JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
Date: 10.01.2020
rkk

¶14

Mohammed Abdul Sayeed v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Abdul Sayeed v. Union of India

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

Mallaram Arjun Vs The Union of India and 3 others

M/s. Mallikarjuna Engineering Works Vs Telangana Southern Power Distribution Company Limited(Tsspdcl)

Chinthapally Anjaiah Vs The State of Telangana and 5 Others

M/s. Madhavaram Constructions Vs The State of Telangana and 3 Others

M/s. Sinivasa Petrol Pump, Vs Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited

Sri Bayya Sitaram Vs The State of Telangana