Disposed

Ashwin Kumar Thota v. The Union of India

Telangana HC8 Apr 2025WP/9228/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging impounding of the petitioner's passport pursuant to a letter dated 04.03.2025 that ignored his explanation and a prior High Court common order directing reconsideration. The Court set aside the impugned letter, allowed the petitioner to submit a fresh explanation within one week, and directed the authorities to pass orders in accordance with law within three months.

What did the court decide?

Impugned letter dated 04.03.2025 set aside; liberty to submit fresh explanation within one week; authorities directed to consider it and pass orders per law within three months.

Ashwin Kumar Thota Vs The Union of India — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[^32s5 ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 9228 OF 2O2s

¶7

Between:

¶8

Ashwh Kumar Thota, S/o. Satyanarayana Thota, Aged 36 years, Occ private Job, R/o. 179 Brandt Court, Milipitas, California^--95035 United States of America.

¶9

Repres_ented by GPA-Holder, Thota Satyan atayana, S/o. Laxmaiah, Aged about 65 years, Occ Retired employee, R/o H.No.36 Lakshamma Encla-ve,

¶10

Opp-qs_lle 4Et! Homes At Turkapally, Bollaram, Medchat Matkajigiri Dist. Ceil. No.9908066273

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

The Union of lndia, Rep by its Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs at New Delhi

¶14

The Regional lgsgpgrt Officer, Door No 8-2-215 to 219, Kummarguda, Secundabad, Pin 500003, Telangana.

¶15

3 Quleag of lmmigration, East Block, Vlll Level V Sector - l, R.K. puram, New Delhi Rep. by its Commissioner of lmmigration

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumslances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue writ, order or direction in the nature of Writ of lvlandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent as communicated in their letter vide HYD/30/POL/P1C123812023 dated 041O312025, confirming the impounding of the petitioner's passport as per the letter dated O2-OS-2024 vide lMp/317923439124 bearing passport No. 56454951 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, violative of principles of natural justice, violating provisions. of Passports Act,^.1967, violative of Articles 14 and 21 of constitution of lndia and set aside the same.

¶18

¶19

¶20

HONOURABLE SRI IUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶21

WRIT PETITION No.9228 of 2025

¶22

OI{DER:

¶23

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Gadi praveen Kumar, Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing on behalf of respondents. With the consent of the parties, the writ petition is being taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶24

This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:-

¶25

"to decLare the action of tfu 2"d respondent as communicated in their k'tter oide HYD/30/POUPIC/2382023 dated 04/03n025, confrmirtg tlrc impounding of the petitioner's passport trs per tlrc letter dated 02.05.2024 aifu IMP/317823439/2.4 beaing passport No.56454951 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, oiolatiae of piniciples of nalurnl jtrstice, dolating prouisions of Passports Act, 1967. oiolatitte of Artick,s 14 and 27 of constitution of lndia nnd set asidt the same.,,

¶26

3' Brief facts in this writ petition as stated are that petitioner got married to orre Ms.Saipriya and later when some family disputes arose, petitioner,s wife on L0.07.2023, filed criminal case under Section 4984 IpC, Sec 3 and 4 of DP Act, before the Police Station, Narsapur, against the petitioner, father_in_ law, mother-in-law, sister-inlaw and sister-in-lara/s husband. It is submitted that the Police, without any proper investigatiory included petitioner and his family member names in the charge sheet and later, the concemed Court had issued Non Bailable Warrants (NBWs). Subsequently, respondent No.2 issued show cause notice bearing No.scN/312g7627/24 dated, 26.04.2024, and directed the petitioner to submit explanation as to why action should not

¶27

<br>

¶28

.22i2

¶29

be taken to impound the passport. Thereafter, the petitioner on 29.04.2024

¶30

submitted a detailed explanation. However, without considering the same, respondent No.2 issued another letter bearing No.lMP/317823439 / 24 dated 02.05.2024,stating the following:-

¶31

"As per Hon'ble Court of lunior Cioil ludge anm ludicial Magistrate of First Class, Nnrsapur directions, it has been fucided to impound the passport beaing Passport No.S645495L issued on dlte 05-10-2018 under sections 10 (3) (e) €t (h) of Passports Act, 1967."

¶32

Challenging the same, petitioner along with his family members filed W.P.Nos.14370, 14387 and 14588 of 2024 and this Court zridc common orcler

¶33

datcd 25.07 .2024, passed the fol I owing order:-

¶34

"8. In aieto of the said submissions and since it is the cnse of the petitioners that respondent No.2 has issued impugned letters dated 02.05.2024, zoithout mnsidering their explanation, the impugned Letters aide Nos.lMP/317823439p.4, IMP/31782357924 and IMP/317823623Q4, dated 02.05.2024 are set aside and the respondents are directed to consider tfu explanation, dated 29.04.2024 submitted by the petitioners and pass aypropriate orders in accordance ruith lau, ruithin a peioil of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. TiIl such time, respondent No.2 is directed not to tnke any coercipe action on the passports of the petitioners.

¶35

With the abooe directions, all the zoit petitions are allowed. There slmll be no order as to costs,"

¶36

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.2 issued letter bearing No.HYD/30,zPOL/P[C/%8/2023 dated M.03.2025,

¶37

wherein it is stated that since there is no response from the petitioner on the show cause notice dated 26.04.2024, the petitioner's passport is impounded by this office. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed.

¶38

I \

¶39

::3::

¶40

6 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the impugned letter dated 04.03.2025, the respondent No.2 failed to observe that the petitioner on 29.M.2024 had submitted a detailed explanation on show cause notice dated 26.04.2024 anrl without considering the same and ttie common order dated 25.07.2024 passed in W.P.Nos.14370 ,74387 and14588 bf 2024, therespondent No.2 impouncied the petitioner's passport. Hence, pray this Court to set aside the impugned lctter dated 04.03.2025.

¶41

Learned standing counsel appearing for respondents fairly submits that in the letter dated 04.03.2025, there is no mention whether the respondents had received the petitioner's explanation dated 29.04.2024 and, further submits that if the petitioner makes a fresh explanation, the respondent authorities would consider the same a.rtd pass orders in accordance with law-

¶42

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the letter dated 04.03.2025 is not a reasoned order, the same is liable to be set aside and pray this Court to set aside the impugned letter dated 04.03.2025 enabling the petitioner to submit fresh explanation to the show cause notice dated 26.04.2024 and further pray this Court to direct the respondent authorities to consider the same and pass orders in a time bound period.

¶43

Recording the above submissions and in view of the fact that the respondent No.2 in tl're letter datecl 04.03.2025, tailed to observe that the

)

ii4ir

I L i

petitioner on 29.04.2024 submitted explanation to the show cause notice dated 26.04.2024 arrd since the letter dated 04.03.2025 is not in line to the corunon order dated 25.07.2l24passed in W.P.Nos.14370 , L438Z and,14588 of 2024, this Court deems it fit to set aside the impugned letter dated 04.03.2025. Accordingly, the impugned letter dated 04.03.2025 is hereby set aside and this writ petition is disposed of granting liberty. to the petitioner to submit fresh explanation to the show cause notice dated 26.04.2024, within a period of one (1) week from the date of receipt of copy of this order and thereafter in the light of the common order dated 25.07.2024 passed in W.P.Nos.14370, 74387 and 14588 of 2024, the respondent authorities are directed to consider the petitioner's explanation and pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possibie, preferably within a period of three (03) months and communicate the same to the petitioner.

¶50

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Misceilaneous petitions,

¶51

if any, pending in this writ petition shail stand closed. No costs.

¶52

Sd/.A,SREENIVASA REDDY

//TRUE COPY//

AS ISTANT REGISTRAR

SECTION OFFICER

To,

Secretary, Irilinistry of External Affairs at New Delhi, e Union of lndia

¶59

The Regional Passport Officer, Door No 8-2-215 to 219, Kummarguda, Secundabad, Pin 500003, Telangana.

¶60

Commissioner of lmmigration, Bureau of lmmigration, East Block, Vlll Level V Sector - I, R.K. Puram, New Delhi

¶61

One CC to SRI P.VISHNUVARDHANA REDDY Advocate [OPUC]

¶62

One CC to SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, Deputy Solicitor General of lndia Advocate [OPUC]

¶63

Two CD Copies.

/, GS

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0810412025

ORDER

WP.No.9228 of 2025

TA rG'
((
a
t) 2I illt\Y 2$25
+
.).,
DEspar'C

¶70

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶71

,4 4^I /v /5

Ashwin Kumar Thota v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashwin Kumar Thota v. The 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

Parigi Ranga Reddy, Vs State of Telangana

Khaja Bilal Ahmed Vs The Union of India

Md.Abdul Shukoor Vs The Union of India.

Pakalapati Hari Babu Vs The Union of India

Y.Thammaiah and 3 Others Vs the State of Tg., Rep by Its Prl.Secretary and 2 Others

Banaiah, Vs The Joint Collector