High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri Naveen Sriram S/O Sri … vs The Passport Officer on 28 October, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Sri Naveen Sriram S/O Sri … vs The Passport Officer on 28 October, 2010
Author: Mohan Shantanagoudar
IN THE HIGH coum OF KARNATAKA AT EANEALOEEE.

DATED THIS THE 28*" may or ocroaaz, E2'Q':'¢~«}vr'ErEj f  _

BEFORE

THE HON'8LE MRJUSTICE MOHANEAsmr.irAr.zAEbu&r>AR.ff

wan PETITION NO.334Q§"~OF 201i)  
BETWEEN :  L' V5

Naveen Sriram  'E
5/0 Sathyanarayan Badrr
Age 37 years V 
Occ : Chairman;   2: 
Future Metals<.Pvt. §';t_d:_., ~  
Residing at No.2_1"7V5"  . " 
Near Corporat~:.on-«Ba'nk » -- --
'D' Block,v'S'ahakjar N'agar"-.' 
Bangalorfe~56OO92...VV_  v "

Also at  _ '_ 4
No.913,._i.eveI~"9._  -
__ Ba rto,n.{Cerrtre, M Road
 'Bang'a.iOre;~.56'O., 001. " """ " ..Petitioner

S§'.ri'Ar$'i.r1d44vK&jrr:ath for M/s. ALMT Legal, Adv.,)

--  AND  VA

  The Passport Officer

V V' '*8vG..feet" road, 8"' Block
 _ Kpramangala
3Bar1galore~56O 095.



2. The Joint Secretary (CPV)
And (CPO), Ministry of
Externat Affairs, Patiala House

New Dethé. ..Respo if  " 

(By Sri Kalyan Basavaraj, ASG.,)

This writ petition is fiied urideriziixrtieiesv 2.26:  

the Constitution of India, prayinigy xxdirectyh the "

respondent to hear and disfiose ofivthei 

28.1.2010 (Anr1eXure-F} Within a _V

This writ petition e’ott1ing~_or%i_b’fof’i~.pre1irninary heating,

this day the Court made iv ._

SE;Kaiyar1″7f3ajsayai.:§j..,_ ie-arned Assistant Soiicitor

General taiitesi nofirgefoflfiespondents.

. …..

The’j__g5etitioner has sought for a direction to

vii’-..«._hsrespondve’r:t No.2 to decide the appeal filed by the

V’ ‘fietitiogner, on merits at an early date.

V’

3. The document at Annexure~F reveals thatfthse

petitioner has filed appeal questioning the

of petitioner’s passport before theflseconda~–reSponclent”

on 28.1.2010. According to the :§34etitiio.n;eur,..not’-even__Ha;;V.AA

notice is issued to the petiti’o_ne.Vr relating to’V:’heiaricnVg..3of%

the appeal. Petitionet. wants_…the_ appeal * tobeiheard
on merits at an ealrlyfl-da_te..Aiv of certain

urgency.

4. ____ have heard the
appeal {at an A’éa«+!i.x°datnelf’«Such matters should not be

delayed. the”‘a_ppVeal::””‘i.s4’not heard at an early date

…..’_hards:hivpi’~wi|| V”be.:vc_a_osed to the petitioner. Hence,

–.t’_ileci«..A.Vl:5’y.__the petitioner on 28.1.2010 needs to

béihleardielvarifivl Hence, the following order made:–

‘. W’r’it petition is disposed of with a direction to

r”espo’ndent No.2 to decide the appeal of the petitioner

V’

“4”

as eariy as possibie, but not iater than the outer iimit

of two months from the date of receipt of this

sa,/~.&

Iuc1Ag<;».efe '

*ck/uk-