WP/3442/2026 of Sriram Sriram Bharath Vs Union of India on 31 March 2026

[ 3300 I IN THE HIGH COURT FORTHE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDE (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION O:,3442OF 2026 Sriram Bharath, S/o. Bharaiah Sriram, Aged 41 years, Occ. Business, N o.1-1-3871 1/2,New Rbl colony, Mohan nagar, Kothapet , Saroornagar, PO. P and T Colony, DIST. K.v.Rangareddy, Telangana - 5000060. ...PET!TIONER EIITj] 1 . Union of lndia, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Extemal Affairs, CTC Division, TV1 section, Patiala House Government of lndia, New Delhi- 110001.

2. The Regional Passport Officer, Passport Seva Kendra, Door No. 1-8-368 to 372 GowraTrinit, Chinni Fort Lane, Begumpet, Hyderabad - 500 016. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstiances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring actions of Respondents in not considering the Reissue application of petitioner for change of date of birth in the passport bearing no. R1591988 as illegal, arbitrary, and violating the article 14 and 21 of the constitution of lndia and consequently dkect the respondents to consider the representation daled O4t1112O25 for correction of date of birth and issue passport to'the petitioner with correct date of birth as 26.10.1984 in accordance with as mentioned in the government records such as Aadhar Card and Pan Card and Voter lD and Bonafide and carry ott necessary correction of the date of birth in the passport of the petitioner within a time frame as may be fixed by this Honourable Court. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. P VINAY KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: SRl. B JITHENDER, STANDING COUNSEL REPRESENTING SR! N. BHUJANGA RAO, DEPUW SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the following: ORDER

T 1I wp_3442_2026 NBK, J IN HTGH CO FOR THE STATE OFTE GANA AT HYDERABAD H 3l't

Between: Sriram Bharath, S/o Bharaiah Srirarn Petitioner

l. Union of lndia, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of ExternalAffairs, and another Respondents 9RDER: The case of the petitioner, precisely as per the writ affidavit, is that he submitted an application before the 2nd respondent-passport authority seeking rectification of the error in his Date of Birth, however, the passport authority vide letter dated 10.12.202.5 refused to make corrections in the Date of Birth printed in his passport. Hence, this writ petition' Z. Heard Mr. P. Vinay Kumar, Iearned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr- B. Jithender, learned Standing Counsel representing Mr. N. Bhujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, appearing for the respondents' Perused the record

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's actual date of birth is Z6.l}.lg84,whereas the Date of Birth is printed as26-10-1981. lt is contended that the petitioner was minor at the time of first issuance of \

AND \ \ i ,l !il I il itil it iI iiii ii il il ri iI Il u II i : :

I i ! !l wp_3442_2025 NBK, J passport and his application was handled by others, and thereafter his passport was subsequrently renewed for four times, however, the illegality cannot be allowed to continue by retaining incorrect data in his passport. [t is contended that a clerical error that has occurred at the time of first issuance cannot be allowed to <:ontinue merely because the passport was renewed subsequently with the sarae data. It is contended that the passport authority cannot rigidly enforce the ''5 year" rule, or cite that "24 yearc" have passed since the date of first issuance, so as to deny the correction of date of birth.

4. Per ccntra, learned Standing Counsel refers to the Office Memorandum dated 26.11.2025 issued by the I't respondent-Ministry of External Affairs, providing g,uidelines on the change / correction of date of birth entries in the already isstred passport. Learned Standing Counsel, by referring to Paragraph No. a(ii) ol'the said Office Memorandum contends that if there is a clerical / technical nristake on the part of the applicant or the passport authority, with regard to ttre entry relating to place/date of birth, the same would be corrected within a reasonable time (i.e., within 5 years), as per Circular No.VI/4O1/2/512001 dated 29.10.2007 by imposing a penalty. [t is contended that the petitioner declares his actual date of birth as 26.10.1984, and that his date of birth has been incorrectly printed as26.10.1981 and that he was a minor at the time of first issuance of the passport. It is contended that the petitioner, after attain ing majority, applied for a passport in 2007,,(he was almost 23 years old by that time even as per the new date of birth i.e., 26..10.1984), and the petitioner cannot seek corrections in the passport after two decades.

5. Having considered the respective contentions and perused the record, at the outset. the petitioner's grievance is tlrat his date of birth has been incorrectly printed in his passpoft as 26.10.1981. u,hen hisltual date of birth is 26-10.1984, and on account of he being a minor at the time of first issuance, he wp_3442_2026 NBK, J could not get the same corrected. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the 2nd respondent-passport authority seeking correction of the date of birth, by enclosing the Birth Certificate, Voter ID, Aadhar Card etc., in support of his correct date of birth. However, the passport authority refused to make any correction in the date of birth entry, on the ground that almost 24 years have passed from the date of first issuance.

6. Under the circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion, that the Offrce Memorandum dated 26.11.2025 provides guidelines in cases where corrections / modifications are required in respect of the entries in the passport document. Further, paragraph No. a(iii) of the said Office Memorandum dated 26.11.2025 states that if the passport was taken when a person was minor, such person upon attaining the age of majority brings to the notice of the passport authority the correct particulars, with supporting documents, the salne would be considered without imposing penalty.

7. In that view of the matter, this Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition by directing the 2nd respondent-passport authority to consider the request of the petitioner for change/modification of date of birth, strictly in accordance with the Office Memorandum dated 26.11.2025, and the Circular dated 2g.lO.2OO7.

8. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, with the above directions. if any, shall stand closed. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, Sd,-MOHD. ISMAIL To, ,/TRUE COPY/

1. The Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, DEPUW REG SECTION OFFICER , CTC Division, TV1 lndia section, Patiala House . Government of lndia, 1 10001

2. The Regional Passport Officer, PassPort Seva Door No. 1-8-368 to 3T2GowraTrinit, Chinni Fort Lane, BegumPet, HYderabad - 500016.

3. One CC to SRl. P VINAY KUMAR, Advocate [OPUC]

4. One CC to SRt N. BHUJANGA RAO Deputy Solicitor General of lndia [OPUC]

5. Two CD CoPies / DAN/PMK .!. ru- I ---- ---=*.--F,?r.,***':'-:=#r** *t-%;iffi!

t I HIGH GOURT DATED): 31 10312026 ('

ORDER

WP.No,.3442 of 2026 i Lr- $ IH * DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS CC TODAY s * \\ 'l, -t' ,,:, I r.tr ,.c { .e{d} X{. i t i l,l) li q