Telangana High Court
WP/36922/2025 of Pawan Kumar Jain Vs The Union of India on 16 February 2026
] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION NO: 36922 OF 202s Between: Pawan Kumar Jain, S/o. Mangal Chand Jain, Aged
\
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
WRIT PETITION NO: 36922 OF 202s
Between:
Pawan Kumar Jain, S/o. Mangal Chand Jain, Aged about 64 years, Occ, Business, Rl/o. H. No. 6-311OAC1206, Hidden Treasure Apartment, Near Ayyappa Temple, Somajiguda, Khairatabad, Hyderabad - 500082.
..PETITIONER
AND
The Union of lndia, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, South Block, New Delhi - 1 1001 1 .
The Regional Passport Office, Hyderabad, D.No.8-2-215 to 219, Near Prashant Theatre, Kummarguda, Secunderabad, Telangana - 500003.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of lt/andamus, declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in not renewing the Passport of the Petitioner made vide File No. HY1074951954325 dated 09/05/2025
as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and to consequently direct the Respondents to forthwith renew the Passport of the Petitioner made vide File No- HY1074951954325 dated 0910512025 for a period of 10 years under section '10 of the Passports Act, 1967 and under Rule 12 of Passport Rules, 1980 without reference to the criminal proceedings pending against the Petitioner in C.C. No.
5920 of 2021 on the file of the Hon'ble XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad and also the Gazette Notiflcation issued by the Central Government vide GSR No. 570E dated 25108/1993.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI R.A.ACHUTHANAND
Counsel for the Respondents: SRI A KRANTI KUMAR REDDY, SC FOR CENTRAL GOW.
The Court made the following: ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TT),,ANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESII BHE EMAPAKA
WRIT PETITION No.36922 of 2'?,25
L6.02.2026
Between:
Pawan Kumar Jain
...Petitioner
AND
The Union of India,
Represented by its Secretary,
Ministry of External Affairs,
South Block, New Delhi & another
.,. R.espondents
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 Sri R.A.Achuthanand, lear:red counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.Kranti Kumar Reddy, learned Standing Cou'r ;el for Cen[ral Government appearing for respondents. Perused the re<< rd
2. From lhe perusal of the impugned order, dated 22.10.2025, it is clear that the 2.d respondent had clearly mentioned that "2. under the existing provisions and after careful r xamination of your case, it has been decided by the Cor-peterr Authority to refuse passport services to you under Section ;(2)(C) of the Passports Act, 7967, to be read with Section 6(:l if , in view of Criminal Proceedings vide C.C.No.592O l2O2I and ; rse is pending at 12th Additional CJM Court, Nampally against you.
3. This office can reconsider your application, i you submit acquittal orders or obtain permission r"o deport frorr ndia from the same Hon'ble court where the criminal procre: ngs are still pending. In this regard, the Ministry of External r .ffairs Gazette
Notification vide GSR S70(E) dated herewith for your information. 25.08.1993 is enclosed
4. If you are not satisfled with the above ruling, you may prefer an appeal to the Joint Secretary (psp) & Chief passport Officer, CpV Division, Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi u/ s I 1 of the Passports Act, 1967 withing 30 days from the date of receipt of this letter on remittance of Rs.25/ - towards appeal fee payable at our cash counter(s) on any working day during office hours.
3. From the above order, it is clear that if the petitioner is not satished he may prefer an appeal, but he has approached this court without availing an effective and efficacious arternative statutory remedy available under Section I 1 of the passports Act, 1967.
4. Since the petitioner has an effective and efficacious alternative statutbry remedy, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
5. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, closed. //TRUE COPY// To, One CC to SRI R.A.ACHUTHANAND, Advocate [OP One CC to SRI A.KRANTI KUMAR REDDY, SC F loPUcl Two CD Copies if any, sha-ll stand / sd/ .OSMAN ALI BAIG TANT REGI CTION OFFICER
BSR PMK &" CENTRAL GOW l
l I \ HIGH COURT DATED: 161021202b
ORDER
WP.No.36922 of 2025 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS K< sl"-l* ^ Yo g [r'.: li o -.L Lt5,,t2tl,1E z * i E6 s ( _t