Mantu Singh @ Uma Shankar Singh v. The Union Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9017 of 2019 ====================================================== Mantu Singh @ Uma Shankar Singh Son of Jay Nath Singh @ Jagannath Singh Resident of Village- Semariya Tola, Dhum Nagar, P.S.- Kateya, District- Gopalganj, PIN Code- 841441.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi.

2.

The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Home Department, Patna. 3.

The Regional Passport Office, Patna, Government of India, Ministry of External Affairs through its Secretary.

4.

The Director General of Police, Bihar, Patna. 5.

The Superintendent of Police, Gopalganj.

6.

The Statioon House Officer, (S.H.O.), Kateya Police Station, Gopalpur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shyama Kant Singh,Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Manoj Kumar, Acto GP-4 For the UOI :

Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Pandey, Sr. CGC ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 23-04-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. The grievance of the petitioner in the instant case is non-renewal of his passport by the passport authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was earlier granted the passport on 10.12.2009 and the same will expire on 9.12.2019 and as such the petitioner has applied for renewal of the same.

Learned counsel for the Union of India submits that the petitioner has to approach the authority and satisfy them in

Patna High Court CWJC No.9017 of 2019(2) dt.23-04-2019 2/2 the matter of renewal of passport and there is no difficulty in entertaining his explanation by the passport authority. It appears that instead of filing explanation before the passport authority, the petitioner has filed the present writ application. Since there is no adverse order, it would be appropriate that the petitioner may file reply before the passport authority which shall decide the case for renewal of passport in accordance with law. The present application is pre-mature as the respondents have not passed any adverse order. Considering the aforesaid, the present writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum/court in accordance with law if the passport authority passes any order adverse to the interest of the petitioner.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) spandey/- U