High Court Kerala High Court

Abdul Rasheed.A. vs The Passport Officer on 27 March, 2009

Kerala High Court
Abdul Rasheed.A. vs The Passport Officer on 27 March, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 7995 of 2009(T)


1. ABDUL RASHEED.A., ALIYAKKADA,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE PASSPORT OFFICER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,

3. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF

                For Petitioner  :SRI.A.MOHAMED MUSTAQUE

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :27/03/2009

 O R D E R
                        ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                     ================
                  W.P.(C) NO. 7995 OF 2009 (T)
                 =====================

            Dated this the 27th day of March, 2009

                           J U D G M E N T

The prayer sought in this writ petition is to quash Ext.P5 and

to direct the 2nd respondent to conduct an enquiry into Ext.P4 and

issue a certificate of loss of passport.

2. Petitioner was holding an Indian Passport bearing

No.2531345 issued from the 1st respondent’s office. It is stated

that he lost the passport while travelling from Burnassery to

Kannur within the jurisdiction of the 2nd respondent.

3. However, he made an application for a fresh passport

without disclosing the loss of the earlier passport. However, that

application was closed as per Ext.P1, leaving it open to the

petitioner to make an application afresh after completing the

procedural formalities. Thereafter, it is stated that he reported

the loss of passport to the 2nd respondent and finally, the 2nd

respondent made Ext.P5 report to the 3rd respondent expressing

his inability to issue the certificate of loss of passport. A reading

of Ext.P5 shows that it was mainly because the petitioner had

suppressed the fact of loss of passport when he made application

WPC 7995/09
:2 :

for a fresh passport that the second respondent expressed his

inability to issue the certificate.

4. In my view, the said fact though is correct, is irrelevant

in so far as the request of the petitioner for certificate of loss of

passport is concerned.

5. When an application for certificate of loss of passport is

made, what is required to be done by the 2nd respondent is to

enquire into the correctness of the assertion, and if the passport

is found to be irretrievably lost, to issue a certificate to that effect.

In this case, such an endeavour is not seen made and the reason

stated in Ext.P5 being irrelevant, I set aside Ext.P5 and direct the

2nd respondent to enquire into Ext.P4, and if satisfied, issue the

certificate of loss of passport to the petitioner. This shall be done,

as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 6 weeks of

production of a copy of this judgment.

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp