High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/22436/2024disposed of

Subhash Chander v. Union Of India And ORS

2026-02-02Mr. Justice Harsh Bunger2 pages

CWP-22436-2024 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-22436-2024 (O&M) Date of decision: 02.02.2026 Subhash Chander ....Petitioner V/S Union of India and others ....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER

Present:

Mr. Pushp Jain, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Shreyanshi Verma, Central Govt. Counsel for respondents No.1 to 3 (through V.C.).

Mr. Nirmaljit Singh Diwana, Sr. DAG, Punjab along with Mr. Karan Bansal, Advocate.

***** HARSH BUNGER J. (Oral) Prayer in the present writ petition, filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India inter alia is for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari, for setting aside the letter dated 21.11.2023 (Annexure P-8) as well as order dated 08.08.2024 (Annexure P-12) passed by respondent No.2 - Appellate Authority, New Delhi, whereby the application of the petitioner seeking re-issuance of his passport with his correct date of birth as 05.06.1969 instead of 15.02.1976, has been rejected. 2.

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the petitioner can be considered and decided by the passport authorities in terms of the observations made by this Court in CWP No.10188-2025 titled as "Ajay Bhola Vs. Union of India and others" (decided on 12.12.2025).

ANKIT 2026.02.06 12:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

CWP-22436-2024 (O&M) -23. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 3, very fairly submits that the case of the petitioner would be considered in the light of the observations made by this Court in the case of Ajay Bhola (Supra), and a final order shall be passed thereon, within a period of 8 weeks from today, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 4.

Keeping in view the above, no further order is required to be passed and the present writ petition stands disposed of, accordingly. 4.1.

It is further clarified that the decisions rendered earlier i.e. Annexures P-8 and P-12 shall not constitute any hinderance to the passport authority in proceeding further in the matter. 5.

All the pending application(s), if any, shall also stand closed. (HARSH BUNGER) 02.02.2026 JUDGE ankit Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No ANKIT 2026.02.06 12:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court, Chandigarh