Shaik Jalaludain Mohamed Mydeen v. The Regional Passport Officer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 18.09.2024 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI Shaik Jalaludain Mohamed Mydeen
...Petitioner
Vs.
1.
The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Chennai Royala Towers, No.2 and 3, IV Floor, Old No.785, New No.158, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.
2.
State Rep. by Inspector of Police, E2 Royapettah Police Station, Chennai - 600 014.
...Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to issue passport to the petitioner based on his vide File No.MA3076305462124 dated 27.02.2024.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Mohammed Aseef For Respondent : M/s.Anuradha, CGSC, for R1 : Mr.L.Baskaran, GA(Crl. Side), for R2 Page No.1 of 5
O R D E R
The petitioner has filed this Writ petition seeking direction to the respondent to issue passport to the petitioner based on his File No.MA3076305462124 dated 27.02.2024.
2. M/s.Anuradha, learned Central Government Standing Counsel takes notice on behalf of the 1st respondent, Mr.L.Baskaran, learned Government Advocate (Crl side) takes notice on behalf of the 2nd respondent. In view of the consent expressed by the learned counsel on either side, this petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
3. The case of the petitioner is that, in order to offer pilgrimage to Mecca and Madina, the petitioner applied for passport before the 1st respondent, vide File No.MA3076305462124. In this regard, the 1st respondent issued a clarification notice dated 15.04.2024 for explanation about the police verification report. Upon receipt of the same, the petitioner sent a detailed explanation dated 14.05.2024 stating that as informed by the police officials, the case in Crime No.1030 of 2012 would be closed as mistake of fact. However, the above said explanation submitted by the Page No.2 of 5
petitioner was not considered by the 1st respondent and till date, no orders have been passed on the petitioner's application seeking issuance of passport in his favour. Hence, the petitioner has come up with this Writ petition.
4. Though very many grounds have been raised, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, it would suffice, if this Court issues direction to the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's application in File No.MA3076305462124 dated 27.02.2024 and to consequently issue passport to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the respective respondents have no objection for the said order being passed and they fairly submitted that appropriate orders will be passed on the petitioner's application within the time stipulated by this Court.
6. In view of the aforesaid submissions, this Court without going into the merits of the case, directs the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's application No.MA3076305462124 dated 27.02.2024 as well as the explanation dated 14.05.2024 on merits and in accordance with law and pass Page No.3 of 5
appropriate orders within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and aggrieved persons, if any.
7. With the above directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.
18.09.2024 skt NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No To:
1.
The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Chennai Royala Towers, No.2 and 3, IV Floor, Old No.785, New No.158, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.
2.
The Inspector of Police, E2 Royapettah Police Station, Chennai - 600 014.
M.DHANDAPANI, J.
Page No.4 of 5
skt 18.09.2024 Page No.5 of 5