VINOD KUMAR GUPTA, J.

( 1 ) THE Court: The petitioner's case is that he was holding an Indian passport and while he was on a visit to Hong Kong, this passport was lost. On his return to India, the petitioner applied for the issuance of a duplicate passport but the respondent No. 2 by his communication dated 27th April 1998 intimated to the petitioner his inability to issue the said passport to him on the ground that the respondents Nos. 3 and 4 did not clear the name of the petitioner for the grant of such a passport. It is this order of respondent No. 2 which the petitioner has assailed in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

( 2 ) GRANT of passport undoubtedly is a valuable right of every citizen of India. Refusal to grant a passport undoubtedly is an act which has to be preceded by objective considerations and principles of fair play and natural justice. If a citizen of India is being denied the right of the grant of a passport, the cardinal principles of audi alterem partem immediately come into play with the result that a right of hearing immediately accrues to the person who is sought to be denied the grant of a passport. Unless, therefore the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document