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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 13540

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., J
SUNILKUMAR – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 43874 OF 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.B.PREMNATH (E), SRI.MANI GOVINDA MARAR, SHRI.SARATH M.S.
For the Respondents: SHRI.T.C.KRISHNA

The court upholds the necessity for adherence to procedural requirements for passport issuance while allowing the petitioner a chance to comply with the mandated submission format.

Headnote:The petitioner requests a fresh passport reflecting the correct date of birth, challenging the prior rejection on procedural grounds. The court finds the application invalid due to lack of required documentation. The petitioner is permitted to apply afresh, with all past objections remaining unresolved. The respondents must act on a new application within specified time limitations.

Table of Content
1. petitioner seeks correction in passport date of birth. (Para 1 , 2)
2. respondents assert lack of valid application due to non-compliance. (Para 3 , 4)

JUDGMENT

nd The petitioner seeks a direction to the 2 respondent to issue a fresh passport with the date of birth shown as 23.05.1978 instead of

23.05.1981, as shown in Ext.P1.

2. A statement has been filed on behalf of the respondents, which reads as follows:

“The petitioner herein has not submitted his duly signed passport application form in the prescribed format along with prescribed documents at any Passport Seva Kendra under this office. On submission of his application, the 2nd respondent office shall process the same on its merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with extant guidelines and statutory guidelines and statutory rules governing the matter.”

3. Thereafter, a counter affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent, which reads as follows:

“4. It is submitted that as admitted by the petitioner in his reply affidavit filed in this case, Ext.P9 produced by the petitioner is merely a summary of the online form filled by him and does not constitute a validly submitted (duly signed) passport application form in the prescribed format. Since the petitioner did not complete the submission process at the Passport Seva Kendra (PSK), no File Number was generated and no passport re-issue application in respect ofthe petitioner is currently pending with this office.

5. It is also submitted that the Application Reference Number (ARN) 24- 1008469679 generated by the petitioner was valid for one year from the date offee payment (04/07/2024). As this period has expired, the petitioner must submit a new online passport application, pay the prescribed fees, and schedule a new appointment date and submit his duly signed passport reissue application form along with other documents at Passport Seva Kendra. The petitioner has not submitted his duly signed passport application form in the prescribed format along with the prescribed documents at any Passport Seva Kendra under this office, till date. On submission of an application, this office shall process the same on its merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with extant guidelines and statutory rules governing the matter.”

4. Taking note of the contentions raised on behalf of the respondents that there is no validly submitted passport application form and that the application reference number generated as per Ext.P9 was valid only for one year from the date of payment of a fee, the writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to make a fresh online passport application, pay the prescribed fees, schedule a new appointment date and submit his duly signed passport reissue application form along with other documents before the Passport Authority. If the petitioner submits an application within two weeks from today, the respondents shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a month thereafter. All the contentions of the petitioner are left open.

Sd/-MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.

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