Abdul Manaf v. Union Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/14TH MAGHA, 1936 WP(C).No. 2109 of 2015 (K) --------------------------- PETITIONER :

----------------------- ABDUL MANAF, S/O.KADER HAMEED, AMBALATH VEETTIL, KADAPPURAM P.O., THRISSUR - 680 514.

BY ADV. SRI.NIDHI BALACHANDRAN RESPONDENT(S):

----------------------------

1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY IT'S SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, PATIALA HOUSE, NEW DELHI - 110 001.

2. THE PASSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE, PANAMPILLINAGAR, ERNAKULAM - 682 036.

R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

sts

WP(C).No. 2109 of 2015 (K) ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- P1:

TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER P2:

TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE ADMISSION REGISTRAR OF THE PETITIONER P3:

TRUE COPY OF THE DRIVING LICENSE OF THE PETITIONER P4:

TRUE COPY OF THE ADHAAR CARD ISSUED BY THE UNIQUE IDENTIFICATION AUTHORITY OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT OF THE PETITIONER P5:

TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE PASSPORT OF THE PETITIONER P6:

TRUE COPY OF THE ONLINE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

======================== W.P.(C). No.2109 of 2015 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3 rd day of February, 2015

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the holder of the passport bearing No. M5370818. The date of birth shown in the passport as '14.08.1965' which according to the petitioner is actually 28.05.1971. The petitioner wants to effect correction the date of birth in the passport with reference to the entires in Exts.P1 to nd respondent was approached by filing P4 and accordingly, the 2 necessary application. The petitioner has been given to understand that, unless the petitioner obtains some favourable orders from a competent Court of law, the request made by the petitioner will not be acceded to, and hence the writ petition.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in view of the law declared by this Court in Nizar v. Union of India (2014 (4) KLT 609 and that of in Swapna Siju Vs. Union of India (2012 (4) KLT 419), the stand taken by the respondent is liable to be intercepted and the petitioner is entitled to have the relief sought for.

W.P.C. No.2109 of 2015 -23. The learned Central Government Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that petitioner will have to file an online application along with an affidavit explaining how the delay has occurred.

4. In the said circumstances, the petitioner is relegated to file an 'on-line' application for correction of date of birth, along with an affidavit as above and the documents relied upon by the nd respondent forthwith; on which event, petitioner before the 2 the same shall be accepted and considered by the second respondent, passing appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of three weeks thereafter.

The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along nd respondent for with a copy of the writ petition before the 2 further steps. The writ petition is disposed of. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.

kp/-