The right to obtain a passport is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and that the denial of a passport can only be on the grounds specified in Section 6 of the Passport Act, 1967.

1. - This case is instructive of the omissions of the statutory authorities to perform their functions mandated by law. Here, the petitioner's application for issue of a passport filed on 24.05.2012 has not yet been addressed one way or the other, i.e. neither the passport issued nor the application rejected, for last about two and half years.

2. Facts relevant to the petition are that the petitioner, resident of Jammu & Kashmir, married one Dr. Syed Mohammed Ali, resident of Jaipur, on 25.11.1987 and has since been residing at Jaipur. To this end, a certificate of marriage issued by the Chief Qazi, Rajasthan as also copies of PAN card and Aadhar card have been annexed to the petition. The petitioner applied for a passport online on 24.05.2012 and as required visited the Passport Seva Kendra on 11.06.2012 to submit relevant documents in support of her application along with fee of Rs. 1,000/-. The File Number of the petitioner's application was then given out as JP1060374032112. The application not having been dealt with, within a reasonable time, the petitioner made inquires and was informed that her application was put on hold as another passport in her maiden name "Rehana Akhtar" showing the same age and common parents as hers in the application had been earlier issued by the Regional Passport Office, Delhi and thereafter by the Regional Passport Office, Chennai. The one issued by the RPO, Delhi was stated to be Passport No.A4926134, File No.DLHA- 00344298, Date 02.02.1998 showing the said "Rehana Akhtar" wife of Javed Ahmed Shah resident of C-236, ADA, Hoz Khas, New Delhi and a further passport issued in the same terms by the RPO, Chennai was stated bear No.G-6928290, File No.MASV-008000907 Dated 27.12.2007 and current till 26.12.2017.

3. The petitioner surprised and shocked with the reason given out by the RPO, Jaipur for holding back her application for a passport, informed the Passport Office that she had never ever applied for a passport either at Delhi or at Chennai; that she was never resident of two cities and therefore the said passports did not relate to her. The petitioner thereafter received information under the Right to Information Act that the two passports, referred to above, issued in the name of "Rehana Akhtar" wife of Javed Ahmed Shah had been procured on false information by her sister one Nujhat Akhtar utilising the petitioner's documentation and impersonating her. It was pointed out that the said Nujhat Akhtar was married to one Javed Ahmed Shah as indeed reflected in the two passports issued to her while the petitioner herself was married to Dr. Syed Mohammed Ali, resident of Jaipur. The petitioner stated that she had nothing whatsoever to do with the impersonation. Vide letter dated 05.07.2012, the petitioner requested the Regional Passport Officer, Jaipur to take requisite action for cancellation of passport obtained by "Rehana Akhtar" on false information and also for initiation of criminal proceedings against her. Thereafter the petitioner has been waiting for the processing of her application filed on 24.05.2012 for issue of a passport and despite repeated communications including a notice dated 19.09.2012 demanding justice addressed to the respondent No.3 under the hand of her counsel, the passport has not been issued, nor her application rejected by a reasoned order as mandated under Section 6(3) of the Passport Act, 1967 (hereinafter "the Act of 1967"). Hence this petition.

4. Reply to the petition has been filed. The substance of the reply is that earlier passports having been issued in the name of "Rehana Akhtar" wife of Javed Ahmed Shah using documents relating to the petitioner with reference to her age and parentage, another passport could not be issued to the petitioner based on the documents pertaining to her age and parentage. It was submitted that the respondents have no reasonable belief that the petitioner was not complicit or had no clue about her sister Nujhat Akhtar misusin