R. K. ABICHANDANI, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 30th august, 1989 at Annexure b to the petition, passed by the respondent No. 2-Regional Passport Officer, Ahmedabad, holding that adoption by Hindus not domiciled in India is invalid under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 and that an order should have been obtained from the Court under the guardians and Wards Act, 1890, and has prayed for a writ of mandamus on the respondents to issue passport in the name of minor Gaurangkumar Suryakant Patel, who is said to have been adopted by Suryakant Ambalal Patel.

( 2 ) AS per the Deed of Adoption dated 12/07/1988, at Annexure a, it was declared that minor Gaurangkumar was given in adoption by performing dutt Hom ceremony on 5-7-1988 by his widowed mother, sharmishtaben to Patel Suryakant Ambalal, resident of Main Street, Los Angeles, united States of America and his wife Sushilaben who are described as the adoptive parents of the child. As the adoptive parents wanted to take the child with them to the United States, an application was made in the office of the respondent No. 2, Regional Passport Officer for a passport in the name of Gaurangkumar Suryakant Patel. The adoptive father, Suryakant Ambalal patel, who is the brother-in-law of the petitioner, was a national and citizen of Fizi, but later on he resided in the United States as a Green Card holder. At the time of the hearing of the petition, it was stated on behalf of the petitioner that Suryakant Ambalal Patel was now a national and citizen of the U. S. A. Thus, admittedly, Suryakant Ambalal Patel was a foreigner. It appears that the communication dated 14/03/1989 was received by the petitioner from the office of the respondent No. 2, inter alia, stating that as the adoptive parents of the said minor child were foreign nationals and not domiciled in India the adoption was not valid and therefore in absence of Courts order indicating the factum of a valid adoption the passport as prayed for could not be granted in the name of the minor child as son of the adoptive father, Suryakant Ambalal Patel. It appears that, thereafter, a suit was instituted being Regular Civil Suit No. 32 of 1989 in the Court of Civil Judge (J. D.) at Mehmedabad. A declaration was granted on 1 8/07/1989 that Gaurangkumar was duly given in adoption by his widowed mother, Sharmishtaben to the adoptive parents. Suryakant Ambalal Patel and his wife Sushilaben and that the child Gaurangkumar Arvindbhai Patel would after the adoption be known as Gaurangkumar Suryakant Patel. The Court declared that the Deed of Adoption executed on 12/07/1988 was a valid deed. A copy of the judgment was placed on record by consent of both the sides. The Regional Passport Officer, Ahmedabad, was, however, not satisfied with the said judgment and decree and wrote the letter dated 30/08/1989 at Annexure b to the petitioner stating that since the adoptive parents were foreign nationals there was no valid adoption of the minor child and necessary orders should be obtained from the Court under the provisions of Guardians and Wards Act, 1890.

( 3 ) IT was contended by the learned Counsel, Mr. D. C. Dave, appearing for the petitioner that the Regional Passport Officer was not justified in refusing the grant of passport to minor Gaurangkumar on the ground that the adoptive parents were foreign nationals. He submitted that, a Hindu foreigner, if he comes to India, can validly adopt a child under the provisions of Hindu adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. He submitted that the applicability of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, was not restricted to persons domiciled in India and as provided under Sec. 2 (1), the said Act would apply to any person who was a Hindu by religion as indicated in that provision. He submitted that, admittedly, the adoptive parents were Hindus and therefore irrespective of the fact whether they were foreign nationals or domiciled elsewhere they could validly adopt

Click Here to Read the rest of this document