Himachal Pradesh High Court
Decided On: 26.08.2025 vs Union Of India And Others on 26 August, 2025
Author: Ajay Mohan Goel
Bench: Ajay Mohan Goel
2025:HHC:28868
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
.
CWP No. 13697 of 2025
Decided on: 26.08.2025
Mohan Singh ... Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and others ... Respondents
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
_____________________________________________________
For the petitioner r: Mr. Ganesh Barowalia, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Balram Sharma, DSGI, with Mr.
Rajiv Sharma, Advocate for
respondents No. 1 and 2.
: Mr. Pushpender Jaswal, Additional
Advocate General for respondents No.
3 to 5.
Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral)
Notice. Mr. Rajiv Sharma, learned Counsel and Mr.
Pushpender Jaswal, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts
notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2 and respondents No. 3
to 5, respectively. On the instructions of Mr. Rajiv Sharma, learned
Counsel, Mr. Balram Sharma, learned Solicitor General of India, also
appears for respondents No. 1 and 2.
2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter alia,
assailed the order passed by the Regional Passport Officer dated
07.12.2024, in terms whereof, the request of the petitioner for
Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2025:HHC:28868
issuance of a Passport inter alia has been rejected on the ground
.
that in the police verification report, as there was a remark of Nepali
citizen, therefore, the file of the petitioner is closed.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
the petitioner is an Indian national and in the police verification
report, he has been wrongly held to be a Nepali citizen.
4.
On the other hand, learned Deputy Solicitor General of
India has referred to Section 11 of the Passports Act, 1967 and
submitted that there is a statutory remedy available to the
petitioner, therefore, this writ petition, at this stage, is not
maintainable.
5. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and having
perused the pleadings as well as the documents appended therewith
as also the reliefs prayed for in the writ petition, this Court is of the
considered view that as there is a statutory remedy available to the
petitioner, he would be well advised to approach the Appellate
Authority first.
6. Mr. Ganesh Barowalia, learned Counsel for the
petitioner submitted that time to file the appeal is over.
6. Be that as it may, in case, the petitioner files an appeal
to assail order dated 07.12.2024, within a period of 15 days from
today, then it is ordered that the appellate authority shall treat the
same within limitation and same shall be decided on merit but if no
appeal is filed within 15 days from today, then the same shall not be
2025:HHC:28868
entertained.
.
The writ petition is disposed of in above terms, so also
pending miscellaneous applications, if any.
(Ajay Mohan Goel)
Judge
August 26, 2025
(narender)
r to
