Kerala High Court
Subhash K.S vs The Regional Passport Officer on 29 October, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 7TH KARTHIKA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 15094 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
SUBHASH K.S.,
AGED 47 YEARS
S/O KAMALAN, NANDHANAM, VENCODE, PALAYAMKUNN
P.O.,VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-695 146.
BY ADV V.VENUGOPALAN NAIR
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER
REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695
014.
2 UNION OF INDIA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI-110 001.
BY ADVS.
SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA
SRI.JAISHANKAR V.NAIR, CGC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
29.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 15094 OF 2021
2
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
................................................
W.P.(C) NO. 15094 OF 2021
........................................
Dated this the 29th day of October, 2021
JUDGMENT
Petitioner's application for
correction of date of birth in his passport
was rejected by the Passport Issuing
Authority as per Ext.P8. The reason for
rejecting the application as stated in Ext.P8
can be attributed to belated application and
the huge difference in the dates.
2. Petitioner was initially issued
with a passport in 1989, which was renewed
subsequently twice. The original passport and
those renewed were utilised by the petitioner
for more than 30 years altogether and the
claim of ignorance of the mistake in the date
of birth was found to be not worthy of
belief.
WP(C) NO. 15094 OF 2021
3. Petitioner contends that all
documents of identity issued to the
petitioner contains his date of birth as
25/05/1972, while the passport alone mentions
his date of birth as 16/09/1963. Petitioner
pleads that he was ignorant of the mistake
that inadvertently crept into his passport,
which was obtained initially from TamilNadu
and that immediately on realising the
mistake, he has filed an application on
25/7/2019 to correct the same. Petitioner
relies upon the decision of this Court in
Union of India Vs.Sunil Kumar (2015 (3) KLT
501) and contends that he is entitled to be
given the benefit of the aforesaid decision.
4. I have heard the learned counsel
for the petitioner Sri.V.Venugopalan Nair as
well as the learned Central Government
WP(C) NO. 15094 OF 2021
Counsel Sri.Jaishankar.V.Nair on behalf of
the respondents.
5. The initial passport issued to the
petitioner was admittedly several decades
ago. The present passport is only a renewed
document. Entries of date of birth as
originally entered in the first passport
issued to the petitioner is being repeated in
all re-issues/renewals of the passport. In
the absence of specific orders from Courts of
law or through valid proceedings under the
Act, the entries cannot be corrected. Thus
the entry of petitioner's date of birth in
the initial passport issued to him continued
in all the subsequent renewals including the
present passport also.
6. The date of birth in the passport
of the petitioner is 16/9/1963. Obviously
some documents would have been produced by
WP(C) NO. 15094 OF 2021
the petitioner to have the entry as seen in
the passport. Nothing is evident from the
pleadings or from the documents produced to
show the circumstances under which, such an
entry came to be included in the
petitioner's passport. Further, the
correction required is to incorporate the
date of birth as 25/5/1972- a difference of
nine years with changes even in the day and
month. This is obviously not even a
typographical error.
7. Date of birth is a fact known to
every person and it is difficult to digest
that petitioner was oblivious of the wrong
entry in the passport, that too, for the last
30 years. As a solemn document, utilised by
the petitioner for various purposes including
obtaining visa and for seeking employment
abroad, petitioner had admittedly taken the
WP(C) NO. 15094 OF 2021
benefit of the entries in the passport. After
getting the benefit of such entries,
petitioner cannot, at this belated stage,
that too, after several decades, turn around
and claim that the entry in his passport,
relating to his date of birth is a mistake
and that the same must be corrected. The
order of Passport Issuing Authority,
rejecting his application for correction of
date of birth and the reasons mentioned
therein are, according to me, justified in
the circumstances of the case.
8. Reliance by the petitioner on the
decision in Union of India Vs.Sunikumar (2015
(3) KLT 501) according to me is not relevant.
In the said decision this Court had, after
taking into reckoning the passport manual of
2010, come to the conclusion that correction
of entires in the passport are liable to be
WP(C) NO. 15094 OF 2021
effected on genuine reasons which has to
apply in all circumstances irrespective of
whether the difference in date of birth is
beyond 2 years or more. It was further
observed that, to ascertain whether this is a
mistaken entry or not, the original
application and the records submitted at the
time of issuance of the passport were
required to be verified and that nothing
prevents the applicants to approach the
Civil Court for effecting necessary
corrections in the passport.
9. It is apposite to mention that the
aforesaid judgment was rendered on the basis
of the Passport Manual of 2010, while the
present case is governed by the Passport
Manual of 2018. The distinction between the
passport manual of 2010 and that of 2018 was
considered by the Division Bench of this
WP(C) NO. 15094 OF 2021
Court in Vasu Sasi Vs.Union of India and
others (2020 (4) KHC 405). After
appreciating the relevant clauses of the
manual of 2018; it was observed that,
"This also means that the
writ petitioner was holding a
passport prior to the one
specified above, may be for an
earlier period of 10 years which
was renewed at Dubai. Therefore,
it is explicit that there is an
unexplained delay of several
years, and the writ petitioner
himself knew that it cannot be
explained, which may be the reason
for not specifying the date of
original issue of passport, a
mandatory requirement to consider
an application as per the office
memorandums supra."
10. The situation mentioned in the
aforesaid decision of the Division Bench
applies in all force to the instant case.
11. In the instant case, petitioner
has not mentioned, when the initial passport
was issued to him. There is no explanation
WP(C) NO. 15094 OF 2021
as to how the wrong entry came to be endorsed
in the passport issued to him nor is there
any satisfactory explanation, as to prevented
the petitioner in applying for the correction
of date of birth earlier.
12. Observations of the Division
Bench in Vasu Sasi's case (supra), that the
birth certificate issued by Statutory
Authorities are conclusive proof of the age
and no manner of prejudice is caused to the
petitioner in that regard, especially when
the petitioner had the advantage of securing
an employment from an anterior date abroad,
by virtue of date of birth in the passport,
also assumes significance and relevance in
the present case.
13. In view of the above
consideration, I find no reason to interfere
with the findings of the Passport Issuing
WP(C) NO. 15094 OF 2021
Authority in Ext.P8. The findings are based
on the relevant law in force and there is no
perversity or illegality warranting
interference by this Court.
Hence this writ petition is
dismissed.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
AJM
WP(C) NO. 15094 OF 2021
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15094/2021
PETITIONER' EXHIBITS :
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PASSPORT OF THE
PETITIONER DATED 8.9.2009.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE OF
THE PETITIONER ISSUED FROM THE
KALLUVADHUKAL GRAMA PANCHAYATH DATED
18.6.2019.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF
PETITIONERS SSLC BOOK DATED 7.4.1988.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ADHAR CARD OF THE
PETITIONER DATED NIL.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE VOTERS IDENTITY CARD
OF THE PETITIONER DATED NIL ISSUED BY
THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
25.7.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT PASSED BY THIS
HONBLE COURT IN WPC 21078 OF 2019
DATED 13.8.2019.
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED
BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28.10.2019
REJECTING EXT P-6 APPLICATION OF THE
PETITIONER.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL
AJM //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE
