[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Samriddhi Singh Yadav (Minor) Through ... vs Central Passport Organisation on 24 February, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:7001
1 WP-6588-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMIT SETH
ON THE 24th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 6588 of 2026
SAMRIDDHI SINGH YADAV (MINOR) THROUGH HER GUARDIAN
FATHER
Versus
CENTRAL PASSPORT ORGANISATION AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi and Shri Jai Prakash Kushwah- Advocate
for the petitioner.
Shri Praveen Kumar Newaskar- Dy. SGI for respondents Union of
India.
ORDER
1. Heard on the question of admission.
2. The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India seeks following reliefs:-
"a) that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be
pleased to allow the petition and to issue the
writ. and the directions in the nature of writ:
b) Kindly grant liberty to the petitioner to
apply afresh for passport;
c) Kindly direct respondent no. 1 and 2 to
grant passport to the petitioner on the basis of
the last and correct birth certificate annexure
P-1. Further, that the respondents no. 1 and 2
may kindly be restrained from rejecting it on
account of existence of previous birth
certificates (Annexure P/2 and P/4); |
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:7001
2 WP-6588-2026
d) Kindly restrain respondent no. 1 and 2
from treating previous rejection of passport
application of the petitioner as stigmatic;
e) In the alternative, respondent no. 4 may
kindly be directed to officially treat the
previous birth certificates (Annexure P/2 and
P/4) as cancelled and remove the same from
the portal/ public domain;
f) Cost of the petition may kindly be
awarded; and
g) Any other relief may be given which this
Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and
circumstances of the case."
3. The learned counsel for appearing for the petitioner submits that on
account of certain error in the birth certificate issued in favour of the
petitioner, the petitioner is in possession of three birth certificates dated
8.9.2010, 27.10.2021 and 1.8.2023. The petitioner filed a civil suit seeking
cancellation of earlier two date of birth certificates dated 8.9.2010 and
27.10.2021 which was dismissed vide order dated 25.10.2025 (Annexure
P/5). The first appeal preferred by the petitioner against the same was also
dismissed vide order dated 03.12.2025 (Annexure P/6). He submits that the
petitioner has applied for issuance of passport which application of the
petitioner has been declined vide communication dated 8.12.2025 (Annexure
P/7) and communication dated 01.01.2026 (Annexure P/8). He submits that
rules for issuance of passport have been amended vide Gazette notification
dated 24.2.2025 (Annexure P/9) and to establish the proof of date of birth,
for the persons born before 01.10.2023, new criteria as regards submission of
any of the documents has been laid down. The petitioner intends to apply
afresh for issuance of the passport but apprehends rejection in view of the
earlier orders (Annexures P/7 and P/8), and, therefore the petition has been
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:7001
3 WP-6588-2026
filed.
4. On the other hand, learned Dy. Solicitor General appearing for
respondent Nos. 1 to 3, submits that orders dated 8.12.2025 (Annexure P/7)
and dated 01.01. 2026 (Annexure P/8) have been issued by the passport
authority, Ofice at Kota. The petitioner applied for issuance of passport from
her then address at Udaipur, Rajasthan, therefore, at this stage, petitioner can
not be permitted to question those orders by filing a writ petition before this
court in Madhya Pradesh. The cause of action, if any, accrued in favour of
the petitioner is within territorial jurisdiction of Rajasthan High Court. The
petition therefore does not deserve to be entertained. He further submits that
even the rejection of civil suit and first appeal are required to be challenged,
in accordance with law.
5. Heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.
6. Taking into consideration the submissions advanced by the rival
parties and on due perusal of the communication dated 01.01.2026 issued by
the passport authority at Kota, closing the earlier application for issuance of
passport filed by the petitioner indicates that by the same communication,
liberty has been granted to the petitioner to apply a fresh for passport with all
the documents and required fees, any time, at the nearest passport Seva
Kendra. However, the petitioner shall be required to quote the previous file
number at appropriate places in the relevant form.
7. In view of the aforesaid liberty granted to the petitioner by the
passport authority at Kota, at this stage, it is not open for this Court to issue
any direction to respondent authority to consider the fresh application, if any,
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-GWL:7001
4 WP-6588-2026
to be filed by the petitioner in a particular manner. It is always open for the
petitioner to apply afresh by disclosing the earlier rejection and also by filing
documents as prescribed by the amended Rules of 2025, notified vide gazette
notification dated 24-2-2025 and it is only in the event of any decision on
merits the petitioner may have cause to ventilate. In so far as direction for
issuance of passport is concerned, in view of the above consideration,
interference at this stage is pre-mature and therefore declined, by setting out
the petitioner to avail the liberty as provided in the communication dated 1-
1-2026 (Annexure P/8) by the respondents themselves.
8. With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of.
(AMIT SETH)
JUDGE
ar
