Parvathy.S.J vs Union Of India
2022 Latest Caselaw 2076 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
                               &
           THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022/4TH PHALGUNA, 1943
                      WA NO. 259 OF 2022
 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 4165/2022 OF HIGH COURT OF
                     KERALA DATED 8.2.2022
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

           PARVATHY.S.J.,
           AGED 29 YEARS, W/O.ARUN MOHAN,
           NANDANAM, NELLIPPALLY P.O.,
           PUNALUR, KOLLAM-691 305.
           BY ADV B.MOHANLAL


RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

    1      UNION OF INDIA,
           REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
           MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, SOUTH BLOCK,
           RAISINIA HILL, NEW DELHI-110 001.
    2      THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER,
           SNSM BUILDING, IVTH FLOOR, KAITHAMUKKU,
           PETTAH P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 024.
           BY ADVS.
           SRI. MANU S., ASG OF INDIA
           SMT. MINI GOPINATH, CGC (B/O)


     THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
    W.A.259/2022
                                      2




                              JUDGMENT

Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2022

S. Manikumar, CJ.

The appellant is the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.4165 of 2022. The

appellant/petitioner filed the writ petition praying inter alia for a

direction to the Regional Passport Officer, 2 nd respondent, to correct the

date of the birth of the petitioner from 04/04/1994 to 05/10/1992 in

Ext.P7 Passport, as per Clause (ii) of Exhibit P12, in Ext.P11 application

submitted by the petitioner before the 2 nd respondent by adverting to

the date of birth shown in Exhibit P2 Birth Certificate and Exhibit P5

certificate issued by the CBSE in obedience to Exhibits P3 and P4 order

of this Court, on or before 15/02/2021 and other reliefs.

2. A learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition in limine by

holding that the writ petition is premature. The learned single Judge

ought to have found that considering the urgency in producing the

corrected date of birth in the Passport before the Consulate for Spouse

Visa and to join for the course O S P A P in U.K. Before 15/02/2022 the

appellant filed the writ petition for above reliefs.

3. As far as the case of the appellant is concerned, she obtained W.A.259/2022

Exhibit P7 Passport on 05/02/2020. Within 2 years, she submitted

Exhibit P11 application on 16/02/2022 adverting to the date of birth

shown in Exhibit P2 as 05/10/1992 and the corrected date of birth

issued in Exhibit P5 by the CBSE in obedience to the direction of this

Court in Exhibits P3 and P4 order of this Court, it squarely falls within

the limb of Clause (ii) of Exhibit P12, the respondents ought to have

corrected the date of birth of the appellant from 04/04/1994 to

05/10/1992 taking into consideration Exhibit P11 application submitted

by the appellant.

4. Now consequent on Exhibit P11, appellant appeared before

the 2nd respondent on 16/02/2022 the 2 nd respondent indefinitely

adjourned the application without giving a posting date, there is

inordinate delay in getting the corrected date of birth in the Passport of

the appellant, the apprehension of the appellant in the writ petition that

the 2nd respondent will not make corrected entries in the date of birth

in the Passport, the writ petition is not premature, the findings of the

learned single Judge is liable to be set aside. The appellant is entitled to

get the corrected date of birth in Exhibit P7 Passport in the light of

Exhibits P2 and P5 records in view of Clause (ii) of Exhibit P12 order.

Being aggrieved, instant writ appeal is filed. W.A.259/2022

5. On 21.2.2022, when the matter came up for admission, we

directed Ms. Mini Gopinath, learned Central Government Counsel to take

notice on behalf of Regional Passport Officer and to get instructions.

6. Reverting, learned Central Government Counsel submitted that

corrections in the passport will be made after conducting due

verification with concerned local body. However, she further submitted

that the application which was submitted earlier, was through online

mode. However, it is required that hard copy of the application along

with supporting documents are to be submitted to the Regional

Passport Officer, Thiruvananthapuram/respondent No.2.

7. She further added that if any such application is submitted,

the same will be considered and a decision would be taken as

expeditiously as possible.

8. Responding to the above, Mr. B. Mohanlal, learned counsel for

the appellant submitted that the required application with necessary

documents will be submitted within two days from today. Submission

of learned counsel for the appellant is placed on record.

9. Having regard to the necessity and urgency explained in the

foregoing paragraphs, on receipt of the application, the Regional

Passport Officer, Thiruvananthapuram/2nd respondent is directed to W.A.259/2022

conduct verification and take a decision as expeditiously as possible,

without causing undue delay.

Writ appeal is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

S. Manikumar, Chief Justice

Sd/-

Shaji P. Chaly, Judge

sou.