The main legal point established in the judgment is that the court's scope in directing the issuance of passports is limited by the legal mandate, and individuals do not have an absolute right to demand a passport.

ORDER :

1. The precise case of the petitioner is that she, on 14th of December, 2020, submitted an application for issuance of passport in her favour before the respondent No.4/Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Boulward Road, Srinagar, against proper receipt under file No.SG1075060973220. It is contended that, as per circular instructions issued, in this behalf, by the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, the passport of an individual is required to be issued within 30 days from the date of receipt of application, but despite lapse of more than three months, no passport was issued in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner, upon enquiry from the official Website pertaining to issuance of Passport maintained by the Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, claims to have come to know about the status of her application for seeking passport in her favour as under :

“Pending for physical police verification at respective Thana under SP Office, District Srinagar.”

Thereafter, the petitioner, faced with the above position, claims to have approached the respondent No.5/ Senior Superintendent of Police, Srinagar, on 13th day of February, 2021 with the request to forward the Police Verification Report (PVR) to the Regional Passport Office, Srinagar, but since no action with respect thereto was taken, the petitioner has knocked at the portals of this Court for the following relief(s) :

“In the premises, it is therefore prayed that taking into consideration the above made submissions, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:

(a) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, in the nature of Mandamus, directing the Respondents to issue Passport in favour of the petitioner expeditiously;

(b) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondents in not allowing the petitioner to travel abroad as illegal and unconstitutional violating petitioner’s fundamental right to travel abroad as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India; and

(c) Any such order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may consider appropriate in the given facts and circumstances of the case.”

2. When this matter was taken up for consideration on the very motion hearing, viz. 8th of March, 2021, Mr. Tahir Majid Shamsi, the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India (ASGI), while entering appearance and on behalf of respondents 1 and 4, submitted that the respondent No.4-Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Srinagar, has already sought information from the Additional Director General of Police (CID), J&K/ respondent No.3, in terms of communication No. POSK/Court/2021 (77&78)/100-02 dated 3rd of March, 2021. Besides, Mr. B.A. Dar, the learned Senior Additional Advocate General, who appeared in the matter on behalf of respondents 2, 3 and 5, was directed to expedite the Police Verification Report. Thereafter, the matter was listed on 23rd of March, 2021, on which date, Mr. Dar, learned Senior Additional Advocate General, while appearing on behalf of respondents 2, 3 and 5, submitted that the Reply filed on behalf of respondent No.3 be treated as Reply on behalf of respondents 2 and 5 as well. This submission of the learned Senior Additional Advocate General was acceded to and the Reply filed by respondent No.3 was treated as reply for and on behalf of Respondents 2 and 5 as well.

From the perusal of the said Reply, it emerged that the report/ PVR in relation to the case of the petitioner, as submitted by the Additional Director General of Police, CID, J&K/ respondent No.3, stands forwarded to the Regional Passport Officer, Srinagar vide communication No. CID/Final/21/017558-017559 dated 18th of March, 2021.

When apprised of the aforesaid situation, Mr. Shamsi, the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India (ASGI), sought some time to come up with their stand, whereafter, the matter was accordingly fixed for further consideration on 29th of March, 2021.

3. Today, when the mat