Raj Kumar v. Union Of India And ANR.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CWP-18263-2023 Date of Decision:25.09.2023 Raj Kumar ....Petitioner vs.
Union of India and another ....Respondents
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL
Present:
Mr. Amandeep Saini, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Neha Sharma, Central Govt. Counsel for the Union of India *** JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL) 1.
The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of communication dated 16.08.2021 (Annexure P-4) and order/E-mail dated 02.05.2022 (Annexure P-7) whereby passport of the petitioner was impounded and he has been granted liberty to file a fresh application.
2.
The petitioner online applied for renewal of his passport and passport authority issued passport on 20.07.2021. By notice dated 16.08.2021, the petitioner was called upon to provide explanation with respect to pending FIR and to show cause as to why proceedings under Section 12 of the Passport Act should not be initiated against him. The passport came to be impounded vide order dated 02.05.2022. 3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner vide letter dated 20.11.2021 filed reply to show cause notice, however, passport PARAMJIT KAUR SAINI 2023.09.25 14:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment
CWP-18263-2023 -22023:PHHC:125521 authority without considering reply has passed the impugned order. The petitioner has not further been granted opportunity of hearing, thus, the order has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice. The petitioner is working with Marchant Navy and passport is an indispensable document for the petitioner. The act of respondent amounts to violation of fundamental rights as well as principles of natural justice. 4.
Learned counsel for the respondent submit that petitioner has been granted liberty to file a fresh application disclosing particulars of earlier applications and pending FIR. If the petitioner files fresh application, it would be considered in accordance with instructions issued by Central Government as well as judgment of this Court in Mohan Lal @ Mohna vs. Union of India and others 2023 SCC Online P&H 1391 Faced with this, counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the instant petition with liberty to file a fresh application. 6.
In the wake of statements of both sides, the petition stands disposed of with liberty to petitioner to file a fresh application. On doing so, the passport authority without being influenced with its earlier order dated 02.05.2022, decide application of the petitioner considering the instructions issued by Central Government as well as afore-stated judgment of this Court. Needful shall be done within six weeks from the date of filing a fresh application.
25.09.2023 (JAGMOHAN BANSAL) paramjit JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: Yes/No PARAMJIT KAUR SAINI 2023.09.25 14:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment