Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
PURNENDU SINGH, J.
Nida Amina Ahmad, daughter of Imtiaz Ahmad @ Farzana Ahmad – Appellant
Versus
The Union of India – Respondent
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16471 of 2021
Decided on : 21-02-2023
Indian Passport Act, 1967-Section 17-Para 6.4.2 of Chapter 8 of Passport Manual, 2020-Circular No. VI/401/2/5/2001 dated 26.11.2015 and Circular No. VI/401/2/5/2001 dated 22.09.2016-Change of date of birth in Passport-Passport Officer has failed to consider case of petitioner by rejecting merely on the ground that Trial Court and Appellate Court have held that petitioner is not entitled to change date of birth in passport-Passport Officer was required to consider their own circular in which special concession has been made in case of minors-In view of Circulars, exemption should be given to petitioner who was minor at the time when passport with alleged incorrect date of birth was issued to her-It two views are possible, Court should lean in favour of a beneficial approach-Matriculation certificate granted by CBSE and date of birth mentioned therein must be accorded highest preference-Trial court has not relied upon impeccable piece of evidence, certificate issued by Central Board of Secondary Education which is a public document-Regional Passport Officer directed to consider application of petitioner for issuance of fresh passport and correct her date of birth on the basis of birth certificate issued by Central Board of Secondary Education expeditiously within a period of four weeks-Municipal Authority also directed to record correct date of birth of petitioner in their records-Writ Petition allowed. (Paras 47, 48, 50, 51 and 53)
Constitution of India-Articles 226 and 227-Jurisdiction of 226 and 227 is vast and has to be exercised sparingly-It can be exercised to correct errors of jurisdiction, but not to upset pure findings of fact which is within domain of an appellate court only. This is where power of revision comes into picture-Purpose of revision is to enable revision court to satisfy itself as to correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order recorded or passed and as to regularity of any proceedings of inferior criminal court-Jurisdiction of Article 226 cannot be used as a Revision or Appeal court as rejection of order by subordinate court does not arise question of violation of fundamental right when alternate remedy of appeal is available to aggrieved-High Court must not intervene to correct a simple factual error or to reverse a subordinate court decision within its jurisdiction-High Court can intervene under Article 227 of Constitution if finding is perverse. (Paras 40 and 42)
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. Amit Shrivastava, learned counsel along with Mr. Arif Daula Siddiqui, learned counsel for the petitioner and Dr. Krishna Nandan Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General assisted by Mr. Ram Tujabh Singh, learned counsel for the Union of India.
2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for the following reliefs:
[B] For issuance of an appropriate writ order or direction commanding the respondents to take final decision by issuing a fresh Passport to the petitioner in view of the aforesaid case as well as seven judges judgment in Smt. Maneka Gandhi versus Union of India & others reported in AIR 1978 SC 597.
[C] For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other writ be issued to the petitioner holding that if due to any inadvertance on the part of the petitioner's father, an excusable error was committed in her date of birth when she was minor and now when she has attained the age of majority and is in a position to apprise the authority with respect to her correct date of birth which is recorded in her school, college certificates and obstinate instance taken by the Passport authority that such correction cannot be done amounts to denial of her Fundamental rights not only to go abroad but to achieve and improve her educational qualifications. The Hon'ble Court should appreciate and hold that the mistake is such an "ipsi diksit" that her father has given the date of birth inadvertently at the time of first grant of Passport as 05-08-1993 and not 05-08-1994.
[D] For issuance of an appropriate writ order or direction commanding the respondents for taking final decision on the application/petition of petitioner dated 20-01-2017 & 12-03-2021 and finally dispose off said application/petition by reasoned and speaking order that too after hearing the petitioner.
3. The main issue involved in the present case is as to whether the date of birth recorded in matriculation certificate as 05.08.1994 will be held to be the correct date of birth of the petitioner or the date of birth recorded as 05.08.1993 in the Passport No. A5496057 which was issued on 29.05.1998.
4. The case of the petitioner is that earlier Passport No. A5496057 which was issued on 29.05.1998 in the name of the petitioner was expired on 28.05.2008. The petitioner was minor at that time and the said passport was applied by her father. The petitioner after expiry of the said passport had applied for issuance of fresh passport in the office of Regional Passport Officer, Patna on 30.10.2013. In the said application, according to the petitioner, she has given her correct name and correct date of birth as recorded in her matriculation certificate duly granted to her by the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), New Delhi. The Regional Passport Officer, Patna after scrutinizing the application of the petitioner had made a communication dated 17.02.2014 by which the petitioner was asked to furnish an order of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Patn
The court held that the denial of a citizen's right to correct their date of birth in their passport constitutes a violation of fundamental rights, mandating adherence to circulars governing such cor....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Passport Authority cannot make a roving enquiry on its own and is not competent to decide the veracity of Date of Birth. It emphasized tha....
Exemption for minors in passport date of birth corrections is mandatory, overriding previous limitations or judgments.
Writ petitions may be withdrawn at request of petitioner without decision on merits.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
