Adoption made under the authority of the adoptive parents is valid.

ASHOK BHAN, J.

1. Prayer made in this petition is for issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 7-2-1996, Annexure P-I, vide which the Passport Officer, Jalandhar, has declined to issue the passport to the petitioner on the ground that her "adoption made by proxy is not valid in Indian law" and for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to issue passport to the petitioner.

2. Petitioner, who is a minor, was taken in adoption on 2-3-1990 by Mohinder Kaur Parhar d/o Harbans Singh, resident of 2947, Turner Street in the City of vancouver in the Province of British Columbia, Canada, through her attorney and brother-in-law Surjit Singh Jaswal s/o Gurbachan Singh Jaswal, Mohinder Kaur Parhar had executed a Special Power of Attorney duly embossed by the office of the Financial Commissioner, Punjab, on 12-2-1990 in favour of Surjit Singh Jaswal, authorising him to adopt Narinderjit Kaur on her behalf. It is not disputed that the natural parents of Narinderjit Kaur had the capacity to give the adoptive child in adoption and the adoptive mother had the legal capacity to take the adoptive child in adoption. Adoptive child had the legal capacity of being given and taken in adoption. The adoptive mother did not have any Hindu daughter or sons daughter, either by legitimate blood relationship or by adoption, living at the time of adoption. Adoption took place at a Gurudwara in Village Narur, District Kapurthala, in the presence of Holy Sikh Scripture Sri Guru Granth Sahib, relatives and brotherhood, natural father, with full and free consent of the adoptive childs natural mother, did actually and physically transfer the adoptive child to the adoptive mother by actually giving the said child in the lap of the adoptive mothers Attorney Surjit Singh Jaswal. The said act was done with the intention of giving the adoptive child in adoption to the adoptive mother. Adoptive mother, through her attorney, did actually take the adoptive child in her lap from the adoptive childs natural father. The said act was done with the intention of taking the said child to be her own daughter. The giving and taking in adoption ceremony of the adoptive child -was performed by observing and performing all due religious and social ceremonies befitting the occasion. A registered deed was executed, a copy of which has been attached as Annexure P-2 with the writ petition.

3. Petitioner was having a passport (No. F-447097) issued on 7-4-1989. In this passport, name of the natural father Prabhjot Singh was mentioned. As the petitioner was being sponsored by her adoptive mother to immigrate to Canada, necessity arose for having a new passport mentioning the name of the adoptive mother. Petitioner applied for the fresh passport mentioning the adoptive mothers name vide application No. 425125/95-PDL/ADOPT with the Passport Officer, Jalandhar. The said application of the petitioner was rejected by the Passport Officer vide order, Annexure P-1, by observing that the matter has been considered in consultation with the Government of India who have advised that adoption was made by proxy is not valid in Indian Law" and "It is regretted that passport facility as applied for could not be granted.

4. In the written statement, respondent have taken a stand contrary to what has been- stated in the impugned order, Annexure P- I. Respondent No. 2 has admitted that the matter pertaining to adoption of a child by proxy was examined further in consultation with the Ministry of Law Which has clarified that the child to be adopted can be given/taken in adoption by the parents or guardian "under their authority. It is further stated that the petitioner cannot be granted the passport as Mohinder Kaur Parhar, adoptive mother, who was a divorcee earlier had remarried on 16-11-1994 and, therefore, she had no authority to take the petitioner in adoption.

5. Validity of adoption has to be examined in the light of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act; 1