Kerala High Court
Thulaseedharan G vs Union Of India 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. 11013 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
THULASEEDHARAN G.
AGED 56 YEARS
RESIDING AT UTHRADAM, THEKKINKADU, NAGAROOR P.O.
ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 601.
BY ADVS.
R.N.SANDEEP
SMT.KEERTHI VIJAYAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 UNION OF INDIA
REP. BY SECRETARY TO MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, NEW
DELHI 110001.
2 THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER,
PASSPORT OFFICE, SNSM BUILDING, 3 , 4TH FLOOR,
KAITHAMUKKU PETTA RD. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 024.
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. 11013 OF 2021
2
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
................................................
W.P.(C) NO. 11013 OF 2021
........................................
Dated this the 29th day of October, 2021
JUDGMENT
Petitioner seeks for a direction
commanding the Regional Passport Officer to
correct the date of birth in the petitioner's
passport bearing No.M8948729. The date of
birth, as entered in the passport issued to
the petitioner, shows the date as 05/06/1959.
It is claimed that the correct date of birth,
as evident from the birth certificate is
17/10/1965.
2. Petitioner alleges that his
application for correction of date of birth
was rejected by the passport officer for the
reason that there is a difference of five
years between the date entered in the
WP(C) NO. 11013 OF 2021
passport and the actual date of birth as seen
from the birth certificate. It is further
contended that, without an order from the
Court of law, the 2nd respondent will not
carry out the correction and in such
circumstances the jurisdiction of this Court
is required to be exercised.
3. I have heard Adv.Sandeep.R.N, the
learned counsel for the petitioner as well as
Adv.Jaishankar V.Nair, the learned Central
Government Counsel on behalf of the
respondents.
4. A perusal of the pleadings in the
case reveal that, petitioner has not
mentioned the date of issuance of his initial
passport. Petitioner admits that, he was
working in Abudabi. The endorsement in
Ext.P1, copy of the present passport shows
WP(C) NO. 11013 OF 2021
that petitioner was issued with passports
earlier. This reveals that the entry of his
date of birth had been in existence in his
passport for several years, even prior to
2015. The date of birth now sought to be
corrected is also a completely different
date. It is therefore evident that the
mistake is obviously not a typographical
error.
5. This Court has time and again
observed that, a passport is a solemn
document and the entries therein, especially
those relating to date of birth, cannot be
corrected after the same was utilised by the
petitioner for obtaining employment, or for
getting visa's and other purposes.
6. The fact that the petitioner had
not bothered to correct his date of birth,
WP(C) NO. 11013 OF 2021
immediately after obtaining the initial
passport itself is a reflection on the
attempt of the petitioner to gain some undue
advantage. Process of this Court cannot be
utilised for such purposes.
7. The Passport Manual of 2018
specifies the manner in which correction of
entires of date of birth in existing
passports can be carried out. Petitioner has
not explained the reason for such belated
application and nor has he explained as to
how a wrong date of birth came to be entered
in his initial passport. Obviously, some
document would have been produced by the
petitioner to obtain such an entry in his
passport. Without explaining satisfactorily,
the reason for such endorsement, it is not
open for the petitioner to seek correction of
WP(C) NO. 11013 OF 2021
his date of birth, that too at this distance
of time. The decision of this Court in Vasu
Sasi Vs. Union of India and Others (2020 (4)
KHC 405) is relevant in this context.
8. I am satisfied that, this is not a
fit case where, this Court can direct the
Passport Issuing Authority to correct the
date of birth as entered in petitioner's
passport. There are no circumstances for
exercising the discretionary jurisdiction of
this Court under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India.
This writ petition fails and is hence
dismissed.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
AJM
WP(C) NO. 11013 OF 2021
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11013/2021
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PASSPORT NO.M8948729 OF
THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2 A COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
16/07/2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF BIRTH CERTIFICATE OF THE
PETITIONER DATED 25/10/2019.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL
AJM //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE
