Sahibroop Kaur v. Union Of India And Others

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** Date of Decision: 22.04.2025 Sahibroop Kaur (Minor) Through Mother ....Petitioner

Versus

Union of India and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER Present :

Mr. Vikas Bali, Advocate for the petitioner.

*** HARSH BUNGER, J. (Oral) The instant writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India inter alia seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus for directing respondent No.2 (Regional Passport Officer, Jalandhar) to re-issue passport of the petitioner- Sahibroop Kaur (minor). 2.

Ms. Shweta Nahata, Senior Panel Counsel, appears on behalf of respondents No.1 and 2/Union of India, pursuant to the advance copy of petition having been sent to the Union of India and submits that there is a matrimonial dispute pending between father and mother of the petitioner- Sahibroop Kaur (minor). Learned counsel further informed the Court that in support of the application seeking re-issuance of the passport,

-2submitted by the petitioner, Annexure D was filled up by the petitioner through her mother, however, since the consent of the father was not forthcoming, the said application has been put on hold. 3.

At this stage, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, through her mother, was wrongly advised to fill in Annexure D rather it was Annexure C which was to be filled up and as on date, no Court has given any order prohibiting the issuance of passport, without the consent of the father neither there is any order from any Court as regards the custody of the minor child with a particular parent. It is stated that the petitioner is residing with her mother- Navdeep Kaur. 4.

Learned counsel for respondents No.1 and 2/Union of India submits that if the actual situation is what has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner, in that eventuality, the petitioner will have to withdraw the earlier application and submit a fresh one along with the requisite documents and Annexure C. Learned counsel submits that in case, any such application is submitted by the petitioner, then the passport authorities would process the application of the petitioner and render a final decision thereon, within a period of four weeks from the date when such application is submitted.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, in view of the submissions made by learned counsel for respondents No.1 and 2/Union of India, submits that he may be permitted to withdraw the instant writ petition, however, with liberty to the petitioner to withdraw the earlier application and submit a fresh one along with necessary documents and Annexure C. 6.

Keeping in view the aforesaid stand taken by learned counsel for the respective parties, the present petition stands disposed of accordingly.

-37.

It goes without saying that in case, the petitioner submits fresh application along with the requisite documents and Annexure C, the passport authorities shall consider the same take a final decision thereon within a period of four weeks from the date when such application is submitted by the petitioner.

8.

All the pending application(s), if any, shall also stand closed. 22.04.2025 (HARSH BUNGER) Himani JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No