ORDER : This Writ Petition has been filed praying for a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent to process the petitioner's application and issue the passport by using the name of the step father Ebenezer John in the passport within a time frame. 2. The case of the petitioner is that out of the wedlock between Shasi and late Mr.L.Shanmukam, the petitioner was born. The said Shanmukam is the biological father of the petitioner. However, the marriage between Shasi and Shankukam got dissolved on 12.11.2001, while the petitioner was minor. His mother, namely, Shasi, remarried one Ebenezer John, under whom, the petitioner was brought up. 3. In the meanwhile, the petitioner wanted to go abroad for the purpose of employment, for which, he applied for a passport with the respondent. The said request was turned down by the respondent on the ground that he has been already granted with a passport while the petitioner was a minor on the application of his biological father and hence, he was asked to surrender the old passport to enable the respondent to issue a fresh passport. Since the petitioner is unaware of the said fact, he had lodged a police compliant as to the missing of his old passport, who in turn, issued a 'Non-traceable Certificate' to the petitioner. Along with the said Certificate, once again, the petitioner approached the authorities for issuing the passport. 4. While the situation stood thus, the petitioner got placement in Cambridge University Hospital NHS Trust at United Kingdom as a Band 5 Staff Nurse with certain conditions stipulated therein. Since there was no response from the respondent, the petitioner sent a mail to the grievance cell of the respondent, who in turn, stated that the passport can be issued only in the name of his biological father's name alone and not in the name of step father. 5. It is further averred in the affidavit the all the Certificates possessed by the petitioner such as transfer certificate, ration card, driving licence, birth certificate etc., the stepfather's name alone has been mentioned and only in the old passport, about which the petitioner had no knowledge, the biological father's name has been entered. In spite of all these facts, the respondent did not change their stand and refused to issue a new passport. In spite of all these facts, the respondent did not change their stand and refused to issue a new passport. Having been left with no other remedy, the petitioner is before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 6. The respondent has filed a counter affidavit stating that the petitioner had initially applied and obtained passport No.B5267587 dated 11.04.2001 valid upto 10.04.2006 from passport office, Chennai. At that time, his personal particulars are Shri.John Ebenezer son of Shanmugam born on 09/02/1991 at New Delhi. An adverse police verification report was received from the Commissioner of Police, Chennai. Confirmation was sent to the Regional Passport Officer, Chennai, regarding adverse police verification report. In response to the reply received from the Regional passport Officer, Chennai, it was stated that 'the applicant was not available in the given address'. Suppressing the said fact, again he had applied for a passport with different personal particulars, namely, Shri.John Ebenezer son of Ebenezer John born on 09.02.1991 at Madurai. Though he was earlier advised to surrender the old passport, he produced a missing certificate from the police authorities. According to the respondents since he deliberately did so, it attracts Section 12(1)(b) of Passport Act, 1967. 7. Further, initially, he applied for passport at Regional Passport Office, Chennai, along with the Birth Certificate issued by the Union Territory of Delhi attached to his passport application and in which his father name is R.Shanmugam, mother's name is Shashi and place of birth is at New Delhi. Subsequently, the petitioner had applied and obtained another Birth Certificate issued by the Sanitary Inspector cum Births and Deaths Registrar, Madurai Corporation mentioning his father name is Ebenezer John and his mother name is Shashi Sharon and the place of birth is Madurai. A person cannot have two different Birth Certificates issued by two different authorities with different personal particulars. 8. As per the notification issued by the Ministry of External Affairs, dated 05.10.2009, on the subject of inclusion of step-parents name in the passport against the column of father or mother in the passport on the following grounds:- “ In the event of remarriage after divorce, the name of stepfather/stepmother cannot be written in the passport of children from the previous marriage. The relationship of the child to his biological parents subsists, even after divorce by parents. The relationship of the child to his biological parents subsists, even after divorce by parents. It is also not possible to leave the column of father or mother blank in the passport in such cases. Therefore, such applicants must write the name of their biological parents in the application form. However, if the stepfather or stepmother is appointed by a court as legal guardian, the name of such step-parent can be written as legal guardian” Eventually, the respondent insists that the application submitted by the petitioner for the issuance of a fresh passport will be considered only in the name of biological father's name alone and prayed for the dismissal of this Writ Petition. 9. When the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is true that the biological name of the petitioner's father is Shanmugam. However, in the year 2011, they got divorced. Further, the petitioner is not aware of the old passport taken by his biological father, since at that point of time, he was a minor. He is also not aware of the earlier birth certificate issued by the authorities at New Delhi. The respondent failed to note that in all the Certificates the stepfather's name has been entered. However, the respondent on one ground or other has been rejecting the claim of the petitioner. In an identical situation, though this Court has already come to rescue of the petitioner in W.P.No.14182 of 2013 in the case of R.Gayathiri Vs. The Regional Passport Officer, Chennai, dated 16.05.2013, but on the issue on hand, still the respondent has refused to accept the claim of the petitioner. 10. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the petitioner adopts different type of version in different circumstances and therefore, the case of the petitioner for the issuance of a fresh passport could not be considered by the respondent. Hence, he prayed for the dismissal of this Writ Petition. 11. Pursuant to the counter affidavit, an additional affidavit has been filed by the petitioner on 28.08.2015 stating that the petitioner was a minor aged about nine years at the time of issuing passport in the name of his biological father. The said fact came to light only at the time of applying a new passport incorporating the name of his stepfather. The said fact came to light only at the time of applying a new passport incorporating the name of his stepfather. He was totally unaware of the steps taken by his biological father for getting passport while he was minor. Hence, he prayed this Court that a direction shall be issued to the respondent to consider the claim of the petitioner. 12. In reply, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that since it is specifically pleaded that the original father and the step father are no more, they do not have any objection in issuing a fresh passport in the name of his step father. 13. I heard the submissions made on either side and perused the materials available on record. 14. The undisputed facts are that the petitioner was given an old passport with his biological father's name after which the petitioner has sought for a new passport with his stepfather's name. The said request was negatived by the respondent on the strength of the Circular issued by the Ministry of External Affairs, CPV Division, Government of India, Notification No.V1/404/01/05/2008 dated 05.10.2009. At this juncture, it is apt to mention a judgment reported in 2015 (2) CTC 503, B.S.Deepa Vs. The Regional Passport Officer, wherein in the penultimate paragraph, it is held as follows:- “38. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:- (1)Ministry of External Affairs, Union of India may incorporate suitable provisions in the Passport Manual and incorporate suitable columns in the applications for the issue of passports, to enable the parties to indicate either the names of the Biological parents or the names of the Adoptive parents or the names of the step parents or all of them, according as the situation demands. It can be left to the will of thee parties either to indicate the names of one or more of the biological parents along with the name/names of the adoptive or step parent/parents or to indicate the names of all. (2)Insofar as the case on hand is concerned, the respondents shall issue a passport to the daughter of the petitioner, by indicating the name of R.Lakshmanan as the stepfather, in the Column reserved for filling up the name of the father. The respondents are directed to issue passport within four weeks, upon the petitioner's application bearing File No.MA3067806994714 dated 10.07.2014' 15. The respondents are directed to issue passport within four weeks, upon the petitioner's application bearing File No.MA3067806994714 dated 10.07.2014' 15. Subsequent to the said order, two Writ Petitions came to be filed, in similar lines, before this Court vide W.P.(MD).Nos.13182 and 13217 of 2015, which came to be allowed by this Court by citing earlier order of this Court. 16. This court visualizing the situation gave a direction to the Ministry of External Affairs as early as in the year 2015 to add a column for an applicant indicating the step father's name. It is not known to this Court whether any development has taken place subsequently in this regard. However, in the counter also, there is no mention that the judgment was taken on appeal by the respondent. Therefore, echoing the earlier orders of this Court, the following directions are issued to the respondent for the issuance of passport to the petitioner:- (i) In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case that the earlier birth certificate and the old passport were obtained by his biological father of the petitioner, at the time during the petitioner was a minor, he cannot be personally held responsible for the presence of those two documents. In order to clarify this aspect, the petitioner has filed an affidavit on 28.08.2015 before this Court to the effect that he would not take advantage of earlier birth certificate and hence, this Court deems it fit to consider the claim of the petitioner. (ii)Since the action of the petitioner is neither wilful nor wanton for the reason attributed above, the respondent herein is directed to process the pending application submitted by the petitioner by indicating the name of his stepfather, in the Column reserved for filling up the name of the father and issue a fresh passport within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (iii)It is made clear that, undoubtedly, issuing of passport is a sensitive issue and it is well within the domain of the passport authorities. However, depending upon the peculiar facts pleaded before this Court, more particularly, in the case on hand, a positive direction was issued to the respondent for the reasons that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents or adverse serious remarks against him in the past. However, depending upon the peculiar facts pleaded before this Court, more particularly, in the case on hand, a positive direction was issued to the respondent for the reasons that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents or adverse serious remarks against him in the past. Therefore, this case cannot be taken as a precedent for any of the cases. (emphasis supplied) This Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.