Judgment The petitioner was issued Passport bearing No.B-108974, which was valid for 10 years and the petitioner went to Bahrain on the strength of Passport. It is stated that the Indian Embassy at Bahrain issued another Passport on 25.05.2008, which is valid up to 24.05.2018. The date of birth of the petitioner was mentioned as 10.06.1968 in the Passport. At present, the petitioner is residing at Portugal. 2. An application was filed on behalf of the petitioner before the respondent with a request to correct Date of birth as 10.06.1972. The basis pleaded is that the SSC certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, reflects the Date of birth as 10.06.1972 and inadvertently the Date of birth is mentioned as 10.06.1968 in the Passport. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent is not entertaining the application and that the action of the respondent is arbitrary and illegal and violative of principles of natural justice. 4. The respondent filed a detailed counter-affidavit together with supporting documents. According to him the writ petition is not maintainable as it is filed 19 years after the issuance of Passport. It is also stated that the SSC certificate was very much available with the petitioner when the application was made for the Passport and it is just unbelievable that the petitioner is not aware of the entry in the Passport for such a long time. Reference is made to the guidelines issued in circular dated 29.10.2007 and it is stated that wherever the difference in the Date of birth as entered in the Passport on the one hand and the one, which is sought to be entered is more than two years, the holder of the Passport has to file a suit. The other contentions are also urged. 5. Heard Sri Habeeb Jaffer Bin Hasan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.Radhakrishna, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the Central Government. 6. There is a serious flaw in the writ petition. The petitioner is resident of Portugal and the petition is filed through GPA holder by name Nafees Unisa Begum. The affidavit in support of the petition filed by GPA. The contents thereof, however indicate as though the relief is claimed for the GPA and not for her principal. 7. Be that as it may, the Passport was issued to the petitioner way back in the year 1991. The affidavit in support of the petition filed by GPA. The contents thereof, however indicate as though the relief is claimed for the GPA and not for her principal. 7. Be that as it may, the Passport was issued to the petitioner way back in the year 1991. He is said to have passed SSC in April, 1987. It is not known as to whether the petitioner enclosed SSC certificate or has stated his educational qualification with reference to SSC. Obviously on the basis of the particulars furnished by him, the Passport was issued in the year 1991 indicating the Date of birth as 10.06.1968. If the petitioner felt that the Date of birth entered in the Passport does not tally with the one in the SSC certificate, he ought to have taken steps immediately. Not only the 10 years period of Passport expired, but also another Passport was issued to the petitioner at Bahrain. At least while seeking renewal or while taking fresh Passport, the petitioner ought to have made efforts to get the entry corrected if otherwise permissible. 20 years after the initial issue of Passport, the petitioner came forward with an application to alter the entry pertaining to date of birth. 8. Further, the change is sought in a Passport that was issued by the Indian Embassy, at Bahrain. The alteration if any has to be made by that very authority. The respondent cannot be expected to alter the entries in a Passport issued by a different authority. Apart from that, the circular dated 29.10.2007 mandates that wherever the difference of age is more than two years in the context of alteration of entry as to date of birth, the applicant must be required to approach the Civil Court. The Passport office cannot be expected to maintain the entire record for decades together. 9. The Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no Order as to costs.