Kerala High Court
Babu Chellappan vs The Regional Passport Officer on 7 July, 2025
Author: Amit Rawal
Bench: Amit Rawal
W.A.No.1362 of 2023
:1:
2025:KER:49638
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. V. BALAKRISHNAN
MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2025 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1947
WA NO. 1362 OF 2023
(AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 08.03.2023 IN WP(C)
NO.6202 OF 2020)
APPELLANT:
BABU CHELLAPPAN
AGED 56 YEARS
S/O. RAMAN CHELLAPPAN, MANNOOR VADAKKATHIL,
CHINGOLI P.O KARTHIKAPPALLY, ALAPPUZH DISTRICT.,
PIN - 690532
BY ADVS.
SHRI.S.SAMEER
SMT.T.U.ANUKRISHNA
RESPONDENTS
1 THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER
REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE, REGIONAL PASSPORT
OFFICE, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI, PIN - 682036
W.A.No.1362 of 2023
:2:
2025:KER:49638
2 THE ASSISTANT PASSPORT OFFICER
PASSPORT SEVA KENDRA, ALEPPEY AVENUE CENTRE, BEACH
ROAD, NEAR KANNAN VARKEY BRIDGE, ALAPPUZHA, PIN -
688001
BY ADV SHRI.C.DINESH, CGC
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
07.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.1362 of 2023
:3:
2025:KER:49638
AMIT RAWAL,
&
P.V.BALAKRISHNAN,JJ.
-------------------------------------
W.A No. 1362 of 2023
---------------------------------
Dated this the 7th day of July 2025
JUDGMENT
P.V.BALAKRISHNAN,J
This intra-court appeal is filed by the petitioner in W.P.(C)
No.6202/2020, challenging the judgment dated 08.03.2023
passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition.
2. The writ petition was filed seeking the following
reliefs;
"i) Call for the records leading to Ext.P5, and quash the same by
issuing a Writ of Certiorari.
ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction
directing the 1st respondent to issue appropriate directions to the 2 nd
respondent to reissue passport to the petitioner as sought for through
Ext.P4 by effecting correction in the Date of Birth as 20.05.1967 instead
2025:KER:49638
of 29.04.1961."
3. The appellant, a holder of Indian Passport bearing
No.M9593265, approached the respondents to correct his date of
birth from 29.04.1961, as recorded in the passport, to
20.05.1967. According to the appellant, Ext.P2 SSLC Book and
Ext.P3 Aadhar Card, issued to him reflects the correct date of
birth i.e., 20.05.1967. His request for correction was declined by
the Passport Authorities and hence, he approached this Court by
filing the afore writ petition.
4. The learned Single Judge, after considering the
materials on record and hearing both sides, dismissed the writ
petition.
5. Heard Adv.Sameer.S., the learned counsel appearing
for the appellant and Adv.C.Dinesh, learned Central Government
Counsel appearing for the respondents.
6. The learned Counsel for the appellant contended that
it is only recently, the appellant came to know about the mistake
which has crept in the passport and has filed the application to
2025:KER:49638
correct the same. He submitted that the passport was taken by
the appellant, for the first time, when he was aged 19 years and
at that time, he was very young to understand the details and
importance of a passport. He also argued that the appellant has
produced his birth certificate and marriage certificate along with
this appeal and hence, prayed that a direction may be issued to
the respondents to correct the date of birth in his passport.
7. Per contra, the learned Central Government Counsel
appearing for the respondents submitted that the passport has
been initially obtained by the appellant when he was 19 years of
age and thereafter, the same has been renewed three times. He
argued that as per the norms, an application for
correction/change in the date of birth can be entertained by the
passport authorities only if the same is made within five years
and, in the instance case, the version of the appellant, that he
had noticed the mistake only recently, cannot be digested
without a pinch of salt. He further submitted that the application
2025:KER:49638
for correction cannot be entertained in a routine manner and
unless such an application is filed with genuine explanation for
the delay in approaching the authorities, the same cannot be
accepted.
8. It is the case of the appellant that his date of birth is
20.05.1967, but in the passport issued to him, his date of birth
was wrongly shown as 29.04.1961. According to the appellant,
when he realised the mistake, he approached the passport
authorities seeking correction by filing Ext.P4 application dated
20.12.2019 and the same was rejected by Ext.P5
communication. It is to be seen that the Government of India,
Ministry of External Affairs, has issued Guidelines dated
22.09.2016 with regard to the change/correction of entries of
date of birth in the existing passport of an applicant and the
same reads as follows:
"i.Only bonafide claims of the applicants for a
change/correction of the date of birth in the
passport should be accepted. All the PIAs shall
2025:KER:49638
follow the instructions/guidelines given below in
order to consider the claim/request of the applicant
for change/correction of entries regarding date of
birth in their passports.
ii. Where an applicant claims that a clerical mistake
has been made in the entry relating to the Date of
Birth (DOB)/Place of Birth (POB) in the passport
and asks for rectification/correction, the
documents produced earlier having proof of
DOB/POB at the time of issue of passport may be
perused (if not already destroyed) by the PIA. In
case it is a clerical mistake either by the applicant
or by the PIA, the DOB/POB correction may be
rectified by the issuance of a new passport booklet
by levying fees in case of the former and on 'gratis'
basis in case of the latter.
iii. If an applicant applies for the change of DOB
within five years of the date of issue of passport
having the alleged DOB, the request of such an
applicant irrespective of the difference in the DOB
may be considered by the PIA if the applicant is
able to provide the Birth Certificate issued by the
Registrar of Births and Deaths and further states
that the DOB recorded in the passport was based
2025:KER:49638
on entries mentioned in documents other than the
Birth Certificate. However, before the issue of
passport with changed DOB, the PIA shall also levy
appropriate penalty on the applicant for obtaining
the earlier passport by providing wrong information
regarding his/her DOB.
iv. The cases where the applicant comes to PIA for
change/correction with regard to DOB in the
passport after a period of five years from the date
of issue of passport with alleged wrong DOB shall
not be entertained/accepted by the PIA. However,
an exception in this regard may be given to an
applicant who was a minor at the time when the
passport with the alleged wrong DOB was issued to
him/her, as and when such applicant after attaining
the age of major, applies for the passport with the
request of change of DOB in the passport issued to
him/her when he or she was a minor, the PIA
irrespective of the period of issuance of passport
may accept his/her case for consideration, and if
the PIA is satisfied with the claim and with the
document (submitted by the applicant), the PIA
may accept his/her request for change of DOB
without imposition of any penalty. Under no
2025:KER:49638
circumstances, the PIA will relegate the applicant to
obtain the declaratory court order to carry out
changes with regard to DOB in the passport and
take necessary action as per the above instructions.
2. Following judicial pronouncements made after
the issue of the OM dated 26.11.2015 and
13.01.2016, the following are the additional
guidelines for PIA on the above subject:
i. The PIA shall consider the explanation of each
applicant seeking change in the DOB to find the
genuineness of the claim even though more than
five years have elapsed after the issue of the
passport.
ii. The PIA need not entertain any application in a
routine manner for correction of DOB unless such
application is filed along with a genuine explanation
explaining the delay in approaching the PIA. If such
an application is filed, the PIA shall consider the
same and take appropriate decision as per the
instructions contained in the circulars dated
26.11.2015 and 13.01.2016.
iii. The PIA shall entertain all applicants for
correction of DOB, if such holder of the passport
2025:KER:49638
produces a court decree filed in a suit initiated prior
to issuance of O.M. dated 26.11.2015 wherein a
direction is given to the PIA to correct the DOB
notwithstanding the direction in the O.M.
iv. If any application for change in DOB is filed for
correction prior to issuance of the O.M. dated
26.11.2015, the same shall be considered in
accordance with the relevant regulations prevailing
prior to the date of the O.M.
3. All PIAs are requested to take note of the above
instructions and ensure that these guidelines are
followed scrupulously to consider the request of
change/correction of entries of Date of Birth in the
passports. The provisions contained in Passport
Manual 2010 stands revised accordingly..."
Going by the afore guidelines, it is very clear that
normally the passport authorities cannot entertain an application
seeking change/correction with regard to the date of birth in the
passport after a period of five years from its date of issuance,
except in cases of minors. The request for such correction can be
considered after five years only, if the applicant put forwards a
2025:KER:49638
genuine explanation, explaining the delay in approaching the
authorities. In the instant case, it is an admitted fact that the
appellant has obtained his passport in 1986 while he was 19
years of age. It is also to be seen that thereafter, the said
passport was renewed thrice and in all those occasions, the date
of birth, as shown by the appellant, was 29.04.1961. The reason
projected by the appellant that he came to know about the
mistake in the date of birth only before the filing of the writ
petition, in the circumstances narrated afore, is not at all
impressive and believable. It is again to be taken note that there
is no explanation from the side of the appellant as to why he did
not present Ext.P2 certificate before the passport authorities
while applying for the passport at the initial instance and for not
specifying/producing the documents which he had furnished to
the authorities at that time to prove his date of birth. In the light
of the facts and circumstances as discussed afore, we do not
find any ground to interfere with the impugned judgment. Ergo,
2025:KER:49638
we find no merit in this writ appeal and the same is accordingly
dismissed.
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL
Judge
Sd/-
P.V.BALAKRISHNAN
Judge
dpk
