SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(Ker) 285

Judges : S.SIRI JAGAN
Biju Jacob - Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala - Respondent
Case No : W.P.(C). No.10611 of 2007
Decided On : 06/08/2007
Advocates Appeared :
For the Petitioner: Paul K. Varghese, Advocate. For the Respondent: V.T.K. Mohanan, Government Pleader, P. Parameswaran Nair Asst. Solicitor General.

Headnote:

Constitution of India, Article.226 -Petitioner applied for a passport proof of his date of birth petitioner has two records one is his birth certificate, copy of which is Ext.P1 as per which his date of birth is 28-9-1971. However in his SSLC book the date of birth shown is 14-4-1972 discrepancy the second respondent Passport Officer refused to entertain the petitioner's application for passport n -Held, Court have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader and the Assistant Solicitor General. It cannot be disputed that the extract from the register of births and death is an authentic document with regard to the date of birth of a person -Court direct the second respondent to consider the application of the petitioner for passport based on Ext.P1 birth certificate and the date of birth mentioned application shall be processed and orders passed within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment -Writ Petition is disposed.

Judgment :-

S. Siri Jagan, J.

The petitioner applied for a passport. As proof of his date of birth petitioner has two records. One is his birth certificate, copy of which is Ext.') 1 as per which his date of birth is 28-9-1971. However in his SSLC book the date of birth shown is I4-4-1972. In view of the discrepancy the second respondent Passport Officer refused to entertain the petitioner's application for passport. The petitioner's submission is that the date of birth was wrongly entered in the school records which happened to be carried over to the SSLC hook. In the above circumstances, the petitioner has sought the following reliefs:-

(i) issue a writ of mandamus compelling the 2nd respondent to issue passport by relying on the date of birth shown in Exts.P1 and P2 certificates without any delay.

(ii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 2nd respondent to permit the petitioner to apply for passport by showing the date of birth mentioned in Exts.P1 and P2 certificates.

(iii) issue such other writ, order or direction as may he necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader and the Assistant Solicitor General. It cannot he disputed that the extract from the register of births and death is an authentic document with regard to the date of birth of a person. It is also one of the records which need be produced along with the application for passport as proof of date of birth. In the above circumstances, despite discrepancy on the date of birth in the school records the respondent cannot object to consideration of his application for passport based on the birth certificate viz. Ext.P1. Therefore, I direct the second respondent to consider the application of the petitioner for passport based on Ext.P1 birth certificate and the date of birth mentioned therein. The application shall be processed and orders passed within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top