Venkateshwarlu Nallamasa, v. The Lnion Of India,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH * * * * WRIT PETITION No.25012 of 2015 BETWEEN Venkateshwarlu Nallamasa.

... PETITIONER AND The Union of India, Ministry of External Affairs, Rep. by its Secretary and another.

...RESPONDENTS DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 29.10.2015 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR 1.

Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgments?

No 2.

Whether the copies of judgment may be marked to Law Reporters/Journals?

No 3.

Whether Their Ladyship/Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the Judgment?

No

ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Solicitor General representing the respondents.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the second respondent is not processing his application for reissuing the passport in his name as 'Venkateshwarlu Nallamasa' instead of 'Venkateshwarlu Nalla'. Petitioner states that he was already granted passport bearing No.A5392191 on 01.05.1998 in his name as 'Nallamasa Venkateshwarlu'. However, the said passport of the petitioner was lost and he applied for fresh passport, which was issued to him on 13.02.2001 bearing No.B3401415 wherein also the name of the petitioner was shown as 'Nallamasa Venkateshwarlu'. While applying for renewal of the said passport, petitioner indicated his name as 'Nalla Venkateshwarlu' and that the full surname 'Nallamasa' was abbreviated on the advice of an astrologist.

3. Petitioner further states that the second respondent has, accordingly, issued a fresh passport with surname as 'Nalla', which is valid up to 23.10.2017. Petitioner, thereafter, realized that his surname in all his academic certificates, all his identity cards i.e. Aadhar card, voter ID card is not tallying with the shorter surname. Hence, petitioner made an application for changing his surname from 'Nalla' to 'Nallamasa' vide application dated 01.09.2014. Petitioner states that he has applied by fulfilling all the requirements but the application is not being considered. It is stated that on 11.03.2015 certain objections were received by the petitioner with regard to his request, which has since been complied with by the petitioner under his letter dated 22.06.2015, which is also acknowledged by the second respondent and alleging inaction, the present writ petition is filed.

4. Learned Assistant Solicitor General, on instructions, submits that the

second respondent would consider the application of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

5. In view of the above, the second respondent is directed to consider the application of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably, within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

The writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J October 29, 2015 DSK