Abubakar Sithik A v. The Regional Passport Officer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 02.02.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR W.P(MD)No.269 of 2026 A.Abubakar Sithik ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Race Course Road, Madurai-625002.

2.The Tahsildar, Natham Taluk, Dindigul District.

3.The Tahsildar, Manamelkudi Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

(R2 and R3 are suo motu impleaded vide Court order dated 19.01.2026 in W.P.(MD).Nos.497 and 269 of 2026) ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of MANDAMUS, to direct the respondents to reissue his passport by considering the explanation letter submitted by him dated 17.12.2025.

1/5

For Petitioner :

Mr.R.Rajesh For R1 :

Mr.A.Balaji, Central Government Standing Counsel For R2 & R3 :

Mr.B.Saravanan, Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

The present writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to reissue the passport in view of the explanation letter submitted by the petitioner on 17.12.2025.

2. The petitioner was issued a passport on 02.01.2023, wherein his date of birth was mentioned as 31.01.2000, based on the birth certificate issued by the third respondent. Thereafter, at the time of reissuance of the passport, the petitioner produced another birth certificate, said to have been issued by the second respondent. In view of the two birth certificates issued by different authorities, the first respondent entertained doubts and sought an explanation. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed. 2/5

3. According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the birth certificate issued by the third respondent was obtained by his father while the petitioner was a minor, and therefore he was not aware of it. He further submits that the birth certificate issued by the second respondent is the genuine one.

4. This Court entertained a doubt and directed the third respondent to conduct an enquiry and submit a report. The third respondent has given written instructions to the Government Advocate to the effect that the birth certificate issued by the third respondent/Tahsildar, Manamelkudi Taluk, Pudukkottai District, is not genuine.

5. In view of the above facts, considering that the birth certificate was obtained when the petitioner was a minor and that the genuine birth certificate has been issued only by the second respondent/Tahsildar, Natham, the first respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's request for issuance of the passport based on the birth certificate issued by the second respondent and to pass orders within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

3/5

6. With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

02.02.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No pal To 1.The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Race Course Road, Madurai-625002.

2.The Tahsildar, Natham Taluk, Dindigul District.

3.The Tahsildar, Manamelkudi Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

4/5

R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.

pal W.P(MD)No.269 of 2026 02.02.2026 5/5