Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 394 (AP)

B. R. Naresh Kumar v. Regional Passport Office

2002-03-11

body2002
V. V. S. RAO, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner obtained Passport from the respondent in the year 1995. He contends that though his date of birth is 16-9-1975 in the Passport it is recorded as 16-9-1972. When he tried to approach the respondent with an application for correction of date of birth the respondent refused to receive the same. Hence, he filed this writ petition for appropriate directions. W. P. No. 4453 of 2002 : ( 2 ) IN this writ petition, the petitioner obtained Indian Passport from the Office of the respondent. According to the petitioner though his date of birth is 15-1-1947 in the passport the date of birth is recorded as 15-1-1939. Therefore, he made an application to the respondent on 18-2-2002 with a request to make necessary corrections in the passport. The respondent refused to receive the application and therefore, the petitioner seeks a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent in not changing the date of birth of petitioner in the Passport as illegal and consequently direct the respondent to change his date of birth as 15-1 -1947 duly deleting the recorded date of birth as 15-1-1939. As both the writ petitions raise same question, they are being disposed of by this common order. ( 3 ) THE subject of issue of Passports and travel Documents is regulated by a Parliamentary enactment called Passports Act, 1967 (for short the Act ). Section 5 of the act requires an application to be made by a person for issue of Passport under the Act for visiting any foreign country or countries. When an application is made under sub- section (2) of Section 5, the Passport Officer/ passport Authority is required to make an enquiry and subject to the provisions of the act issue an order directing the issue of passport or Travel document. If a Passport is refused under Clause (c) of sub-section (2) of Section 5. the Passport Authority is required to give reasons as per sub-section (3) of Section 5. Section 6 contemplates various grounds for refusing Passport or Travel document. Refusal of Passport gives right to appeal under Section 11 to any higher authority to which the Passport Authority subordinate. The Act nowhere empowers the passport Authority to correct a Passport or travel Document issued under either clause (a) or Clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 5. Section 6 contemplates various grounds for refusing Passport or Travel document. Refusal of Passport gives right to appeal under Section 11 to any higher authority to which the Passport Authority subordinate. The Act nowhere empowers the passport Authority to correct a Passport or travel Document issued under either clause (a) or Clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 5. It is well settled that a statutory authority is bound to act within the scope of power vested in it and such authority cannot transgress and usurp the power, which does not inhere in it. ( 4 ) IN exercise of power conferred on them under Section 24 of the Act, the Central government Promulgated the Passport rules 1980 (for short, the Rules ). The Rules prescribed various authorities and the Form (Rule 5) in which an application for issue of passport is required to be made. The schedules appended to the Passport Rules do not contain any Form seeking correction or amendment of the entries made in the Passport validly issued to a citizen, though a citizen is entitled to seek an emergency certificate by making an application as is prescribed in Schedule-Ill. ( 5 ) A learned Single Judge of this Court (S. Parvatha Rao, J.) in Mohd. Dilwar Shariff v. Union of India, (1994) 3 ALT 225 : 1995 AIHC 4069 considered Rule 5 of the rules and scope of schedule III of the Rules and ruled that an application for correction of date of birth under the Act or the Rules is not maintainable before Passport Authority. His Lordship placed reliance on the Form of application itself. His Lordship noticed that in the Rules the list of birth documents is mentioned and at the end of the list the applicants were cautioned that the date of birth/place of birth once included in the passport will not be changed under any circumstances. In case of error the applicant has to make fresh application enclosing evidence for correction of date of birth/place of birth. ( 6 ) THEREFORE, in the absence of any provision conferring such power the Passport authority was Justified in not accepting the application made by the petitioners. Be it also noted that the judgment in Mohd. Dilwar Shariff s case (supra) was subsequently followed by another learned Single judge (B. Sudershan Reddy, JO of this Court in W. P. No. 14018 of 2001 Dt. 11-7-2001. Be it also noted that the judgment in Mohd. Dilwar Shariff s case (supra) was subsequently followed by another learned Single judge (B. Sudershan Reddy, JO of this Court in W. P. No. 14018 of 2001 Dt. 11-7-2001. ( 7 ) THE writ petitions are misconceived and are dismissed at the admission stage. It is, however, open to the petitioners to make fresh applications, enclosing evidence for correction of date of birth, for fresh Passports, if they so advised. Petition dismissed.