1. The petitioner is a divorcee. The marriage between her and Sri.Fazil Koorikkadan, S/o. Sulaiman, was solemnised on 13.7.2008. In that marriage, two children, Master Zayan Koorikkadan and Master Faizan Koorikkadan were born. A divorce by pronouncement of Talaq was effected on 14.5.2013 and an agreement regarding custody of children was entered into between the petitioner and Sri.Faisal. As per the said agreement, custody of the children was given to the petitioner and the father was given only visitorial rights and permission to have the company of the elder child during the summer vacation.

2. With a view to undertake a pilgrimage to Mecca along with her children, the petitioner, who already holds a passport bearing No.L4216238 issued by the Regional Passport Officer, Malappuram on 14.10.2013, submitted separate applications for passports for her minor children. On the date on which an appointment was given to the eldest child, i.e, 16.11.2013, the petitioner produced along with other documents the original of Ext.P3 affidavit dated 12.11.2013 sworn to by her and attested by the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Parappanangadi. A similar affidavit was produced on 19.11.2013 on the date on which appointment was given to the younger son. In both the affidavits, the petitioner had affirmed that she is the holder of Indian passport bearing No.L4216238 issued on 14.10.2013 at Malappuram, that consent of Mr.Fazil Koorikkadan, who is the father of the child, has not been obtained for the reason that his whereabouts are not known, that they are divorced, that she is taking care of the minor children and they are in her exclusive custody. She had also affirmed that in the event of a court case arising due to the issue of a passport to the minor children she would be solely responsible for defending the case and not the Passport Issuing Authority. These affidavits were not acceptable to the Passport Issuing Authority, who sent Ext.P4 letter dated 2.1.2014 to the petitioner informing her that she should either obtain the consent of the father of the children to apply for and obtain passports for the children or obtain a declaratory order from the court granting her custody of the children and permitting her to apply for passports for them without the consent of the father. She was also informed that on production of either of the aforesaid documents, the passport applications will be processed for issue of the passports. Ext.P4 letter is under challenge in this writ petition wherein the petitioner prays for the following reliefs:-

(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing Ext.P4 order issued by the respondent, after calling for the records leading to issuance of Exhibit P4.

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondent to process the passport applications applied as per ExhibitsP2 & P2(a) applications and issue the passport forthwith on the basis of Exhibits P3 and P3 (a) affidavits.

3. The principal contention raised in the instant writ petition is that the stand taken in Ext.P4 letter runs counter to the stipulations in schedule III of the Passport Rules, 1980. It is contended that in section III of schedule III of the Passport Rules, 1980 it is stipulated that if the applicant parent is not in a position to get the consent of the other parent “For Whatever Reason”, the parent applying for the passport of the minor may sign the form and submit a sworn affidavit as per Annexure “G” stating the facts and circumstances of the case along with the application, that the affidavit should also state that in the event of a court case he/she would be responsible and not the Passport Officer and that where only one parent is applying, the physical appearance of the child may be requested to ensure the applicant parent has the actual custody of the child, that the petitioner had along with the applications for passport, produc