← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/1242/2017disposed off

Manoj Verma v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-08-16Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 1242 of 2017 Manoj Verma S/o Shri R. P. Verma, Aged About 47 Years R/o Shahid Bhagat Chowk, Jal Grih Marg, House No. 663, Tikrapara, P. S. Tikrapara, Tahsil & District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1.

State Of Chhattisgarh Through : The Secretary, Home Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, P. S. Rakhi, Tahsil & District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2.

The Superintendent Of Police, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3.

Police Station, Tikrapara, Through : The Station House Officer, Police Station, Tikrapara, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 4.

The Divisional Passport Officer, Divisional Passport Office, First Floor, Commercial Complex, Sector 4, Pandit Deendayal Upadhyay Nagar, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri S.C. Verma, Advocate.

For Respondents No. 1 to 3 : Shri Dheeraj Wankhede, Govt. Advocate. For Respondent No. 4 : Shri Rajesh Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 16/08/2017 (1) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's application for grant of passport is pending consideration with the respondent No. 4 since 8th September, 2015 and, therefore, the same may be directed to decided expeditiously. (2) Counsel for the State/respondents No. 1 to 3 submits that the above-said application will be considered and decided within a period of three weeks from the date of submissions of certified copy of this order. (3) Accordingly, the respondent No. 4- Divisional Passport Officer is directed to decide the petitioner's application for grant of passport expeditiously preferably within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The petitioner is also at liberty to file additional representation, if any, to the authority concerned in support of his case.

(4) With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge

D/-