Telangana High Court
WP/24636/2004 of Mohammed Omer Shareef, Vs Regional Passport Office, on 29 December 2004
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 24636 of 2004 Between: Mohammed Omer Shareef, S/o Mohammed Amjad Shareef, R/o B. Bazar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA
WRIT PETITION NO : 24636 of 2004
Between:
Mohammed Omer Shareef, S/o Mohammed Amjad Shareef,R/o B. Bazar Chowrasta, Moghalpura, Hyderabad.
AND
..... PETITIONER
Regional Passport Office, Near Clock Tower, Secunderabadrep., by the Regional Passport officer.
.....RESPONDENT
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased toissue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ ofMandamus declaring the inaction of the respondent to receive the application of thepetitioner for issuance of fresh passport with correct date of birth of the petitioner asillegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India andconsequently direct the respondent to receive the application of the petitioner andconsider the same for issuance of fresh passport with the correct date of birth of thepetitioner as 22-4-1977.
For the Petitioner: Mr. Satyanarayana Rao Kandukuri, AdvocateFor the Respondent: Smt. R. Raghamma, Addl. SC for CG
The Court at the stage of admission made the following :
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:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional StandingCounsel for Central Government for respondent, and with their consent the writpetition itself is disposed of at the stage of admission.
The grievance of the petitioner is that when he approached therespondent for correction of his date of birth as 22-04-1977 as per SecondarySchool Certificate, instead of 12-07-1971 recorded in the passport obtained byhim on 11-08-1997, the respondent refused to entertain the application. Hence,the writ petition.
The petitioner has not filed any material before this Court to show that hehas approached the respondent and made an application for correction of hisdate of birth in the passport issued to him.
In the circumstances, the petitioner is directed to file an application alongwith relevant material before the respondent for correction of his date of birth inthe passport issued to him on 11-08-1997 in accordance with the procedure laid down by law and on suchfiling, the respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate ordersthereon in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. Nocosts.
Date: 29-12-2004
Svv
______________
N.V. RAMANA, J
To
1. The Regional Passport Officer, Near Clock Tower, Secunderabad
2. Two CD copies.