IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 32401 of 2010(A)
1. ABIDA.A.P., D/O. LATE ABDUL KHADER,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF
... Respondent
2. THE PASSPORT OFFICER, MALAPPURAM
For Petitioner :SRI.JOSE K.KOCHUPAPPU
For Respondent :SMT.P.A.REZIYA
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :08/11/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
-------------------------
W.P (C) No.32401 of 2010
--------------------------
Dated this the 8th November, 2010
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner made an application to the respondents for
issuance of a passport. Along with the application, in proof
of her date of birth, petitioner produced an extract of her
S.S.L.C Book. However, the second respondent returned
her application, with the endorsement to produce birth
certificate. Thereupon, this writ petition is filed seeking a
direction to the second respondent to accept S.S.L.C.
certificate as proof of the date of birth of the petitioner and
issue passport on the basis of Ext.P3 application.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that
Passports Act do not oblige an applicant to produce birth
certificate as proof of date of birth. It is also his contention
that an application for passport is to be made as per
Section 5 of the Act which can be refused only on the
grounds enumerated under Section 6 of the Act. It is
stated that Section 6 of the Act, does not authorise the
second respondent to reject an application for passport on
the ground that birth certificate issued by the Municipal
W.P (C) No.32401 of 2010
2
Authority is not produced.
3. A statement has been filed on behalf of the
second respondent, producing circular dated 24th October
1991 issued by the Ministry of External Affairs. Paragraph
2 of the circular states that applicants born on or after
26th January 1989 should produce attested copy of the
birth certificate from Municipal Authorities if born within
territorial jurisdiction of a Municipal Authority or
otherwise, from the office of the Registrar of Births and
Deaths. It is also pointed out that along with the passport
application form, respondents supplied Passport
Information Booklet and that, as per Section 4 thereof,
among the documents to be attached tin the application
form, certificate issued by the Municipal Authority or
District Office, Registrar of Births and Deaths is one of the
documents specified. It is therefore stated that the action
of the second respondent in returning the application of the
petitioner cannot be faulted.
4. Passports Act do not specify the nature of the
document to be produced in proof of the date of birth of an
W.P (C) No.32401 of 2010
3
applicant. Therefore, if the respondents have decided to
insist on production of the birth certificate issued by the
Registrar of Births and Deaths, such a decision is well
within their power and is not contrary to any of the
statutory provisions. In that view, I do not find anything
illegal in the stand taken by the 2nd respondent. If that be
so, necessarily, it is has to be held that application made by
the petitioner was a defective one.
5. I do not also find any merit in the contention of
the petitioner that passport can be refused only on the
grounds enumerated under Section 6 of the Act and that
since non-production of a certificate issued by the
Registrar of Births and Deaths is not a ground enumerated,
respondents could not have returned the application.
This, in my view, applies only in case where an application
made is otherwise in satisfaction of all requirements laid
down for the issue of passport. The application made by
the petitioner being defective, Section 6 of the Act does not
come into operation at all.
W.P (C) No.32401 of 2010
4
In that view of the matter. this Court will not be
justified in finding fault with the action of the second
respondent in returning the defective application made by
the petitioner. Needless to say that it will be open to the
petitioner to submit an application afresh enclosing the
certificate issued by the Municipal Authority and in which
case the same will be dealt with in accordance with law.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
ANTONY DOMINIC
JUDGE
ma