Telangana High Court
WP/45196/2016 of Shaik Sadik Ali, Vs Union of India on 30 December 2016
RAJA ELANGO WRIT PETITION No.45196 of 2016 ORDER: This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner to declare the action of the 3rd respondent in not issuing letter about closure of the application filed by the petitioner for issuance of fresh
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO
WRIT PETITION No.45196 of 2016
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner to declare the action of the 3[rd] respondent in not issuing letter about closure of the application filed by the petitioner for issuance of fresh passport, as illegal and arbitrary, and further direct the 3[rd] respondent to reopen the file to issue fresh passport in lieu of passport bearing No.V15060526 of the petitioner, duly rectifying mistakes by incorporating the particulars mentioned in the affidavit submitted by petitioner before the 3[rd] respondent.
Heard and perused the material available on record.
The case in brief is that the petitioner surrendered his passport before the 3[rd] respondent since his place of birth was wrongly mentioned and subsequently, he obtained another passport but the same was lost while traveling. Therefore, the petitioner, after complying all formalities, applied for issuance of fresh passport before the 3[rd] respondent, but he could not pursue the matter as he was employed at Aligadh. The 3[rd] respondent issued a letter indicating that the file relating to issuance of passport to the petitioner would be closed and subsequently, the petitioner came to know that the file was closed on 12.09.2016, but the said letter was not communicated to the petitioner.
The grievance of the petitioner is that he is intending to go to Haj, and since there is no communication about closure of his file from the 3[rd] respondent, he could not able to apply for issuance of fresh passport by submitting the relevant documents, and prayed this Court to direct the 3[rd] respondent to supply a copy of the order, dated 12.09.2016.
When a decision is taken on the application filed by the petitioner, the same should be communicated to him, so that the petitioner can seek his remedy in accordance with law. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the grievance of the petitioner, this Court is inclined to pass the following order:
The 3[rd] respondent is directed to communicate the petitioner regarding closure of his application for issuance of passport, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the petitioner is aggrieved over the decision taken by the authority concerned, he is at liberty to seek his remedy in accordance with law.
With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
______________
RAJA ELANGO, J
December 30, 2016. KTL