Ramesh Pattabiraman v. Union Of India And Another

$~74 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5010/2025 RAMESH PATTABIRAMAN .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Kirtiman Singh (Sr. Adv) along with Mr. Mukesh Kumar Tiwari, Mr.

Maulik Khurana, Ms. Reba Jena Mishra, Advs.

versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER .....Respondents Through:

Ms. Nidhi Raman (CGSC) along with Mr. Arnav Mittal, Mr. Akash Mishra, Advs. for R1 to R3.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA % 22.04.2025

O R D E R

CM APPLs.23046/2025 (for permission to file lengthy synopsis and list of dates) and 23047/2025 (Exemption from filing certified copies of annexures ) 1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2.

The applications stand disposed of.

W.P.(C) 5010/2025 3.

The present petition assails an order dated 01.03.2019 passed by the Regional Passport Office, Chennai, Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, whereby, the petitioner's application for issuance of a fresh passport has been declined by the concerned authority. The said order reads as under:

"Subject: Intimation regarding rejection of passport application, with File Number: MA3078938836115.

Dear Applicant, The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

Shri/Smt/Kum RAMESH PATTABIRAMAN had applied on date: 11/11/2015 for passport service Passport ReIssue in this Office. On scrutiny of his/her application, with file number: MA3078938836115, a lot of discrepancies were found due to which it will not be possible to process his/her application further. The reasons for rejection of the application are listed below:

1.

YOU HAVE LOST FOUR PASSPORTS ON TWO OCCASSIONS AND ADVERSE DISCREET POLICE VERIFICATION REPORT RECEIVED.

Your Sincerely."

4.

It transpires that the said order is appealable and the petitioner has availed the appellate remedy by filing an appeal dated 06.10.2023 under Section 11 of the Passports Act, 1967 read with Rule 14 of the Passport Rules, 1980 before the Joint Secretary (PSP) & Chief Passport Officer, Ministry of External Affairs, Patiala House, New Delhi. 5.

Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the appeal has been pending for a long period of time and inaction on part of the Appellate Authority is causing a great prejudice to the petitioner. 6.

In the circumstances, the Appellate Authority is requested to decide the aforesaid appeal preferred by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and in any event, within a period of eight weeks from today. Let hearings be scheduled by the Appellate Authority accordingly and the final order be duly intimated to the petitioner.

7.

Learned senior counsel for the petitioner also submits that the mere loss of the passport by the petitioner on previous occasion/s should not be an impediment in processing the petitioner's application for grant of a new passport. He relies upon the Judgment of this Court in W.P (C) 5141/2013 (Avikash vs. Union of India and Anr.). Let the said aspect also be duly The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

considered by the Appellate Authority.

8.

Needless to say, if the petitioner is aggrieved with the outcome of the aforesaid exercise, he shall be at liberty to avail appropriate remedies under law.

9.

The present petition is disposed of in the above terms. SACHIN DATTA, J APRIL 22, 2025/uk The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.