Imtiyaz Syed v. Min. Of E.A., Goi, New Delhi And Ano.

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT W.P.No.16235 OF 2017 ORDER:

Ms.Shilpa, holding for Mr.K.V.Raghuveer, counsel for petitioner, and Ms.Ch.Kanaka Durga, holding for Ms.S.Siva Kumari, standing counsel for respondents.

The Passport Office at Hyderabad issued passport bearing No.H 1865213 showing the name of petitioner as " Syed Intiyaz Ahmed" . The case of petitioner is that his name is Intiyaz Syed, s/ o Fiaz Syed and he applied for correction of his name as " Intiyaz Syed" in the place of " Syed Intiyaz Ahmed" . The counsel for petitioner relies on the decision in JERIN KAINIKARAPARAYIL MATHEW v. REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, SECUNDERABAD1 and contends that the application should not be straight away rejected but the application is required to be received, bona fide mistakes verified and necessary orders passed. The prayer of petitioner is substantially against refusal in receiving the application. I do not propose to get into the merits of the matter, however, to meet the ends of justice, the writ petition is disposed of by this order.

(i) the petitioner is given liberty to submit the application within a period of four weeks from today together with the documentary proof for correction of his name as " Intiyaz Syed" in the place of " Syed Intiyaz Ahmed" ; (ii) the 2nd respondent verifies the details furnished by petitioner for obtaining passport No.H 1865213 and on 1 2008(1) ALT 19

being satisfied that the description of petitioner in the passport already he is holding requires correction, pass necessary orders;

(iii) if the 2nd respondent has any other view in this behalf, the respondents may be communicated to petitioner for working out the legal remedies; and (iv) the 2nd respondent is directed to complete the said exercise within eight weeks from the date of receipt of request.

There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed. ____________ S.V.BHATT, J 20th December, 2017 Lrkm