The High Court · 2025

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 2 to fix an early date for the hearing of the Appeal against the proceedings No. HY1075360084525 dated 11-08-2025 passed by the Respondent No.3, pending the disposal of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Appellant : SRl. PRABHAKAR SRIPADA, SENIOR COUNSEL REP. SRI SETTY RAVI TEJA Counsel for the Respondents : SRI N.BHUJANGA RAO, DY.SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA The Court made the following: JUDGMENT 7 THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHA']-'ACHARYA AND THE HON'BLE JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEII KUMAR WRIT APPEAL No.l 243 0F 202:, \'1r. Prabhakar Srrpada, lcarncd Senror Counscl rcprcsentlng Mr. i( tv liirvl Tcj2r, I(:ar ned .ounscl appcarlng Ior rhc appcllant. \1r N. BhLriargl llao, tl-re lcarned Deputy Solicrror (jcncral oI I r r r :qrpcar.ing lbr rhe rcspondents. JUDGMENT: (Per Ilon'ble Justlcc Moushumi Bhartachirryir)

1. Thc Appeal arises out o[ an ordcr darcd 25.l ) 2O2S ptrssccl br. a learned Singlc.Judge of this Court in a Writ [)etiti,r L (W.p.No.32235 ol 2025) hled by the appellant for a writ of mand:rr r .r s clirecting the respondcr-rt No.2/thc Joint Secrctary (pSp) and Chief passporr Officer, CPV (Consular passport and Visa Di,,.is r n), Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi, to register the Appr_ rl filcd b1, the appellant,lwrit petitioner against the ordcr- of lrc rt_-sponclent No 3/Lhe Rcgional Perssport Officer, Hyderabad, ri, r -cl I 1.Ug.2U25, urrdcr scction I 1 of Thc passports Act, 1967 (,thc ACI )

2. The contention of thc writ pe titioner/ appella r r \\,a s that the Appcal hled b1, the u,rit petitioner had been .r ceivcd by thc respondcnt No.2 on lO.O9.2O2S but that no cornr Lunication had thcreafter been sent to Lhc appellant with rcgard to tlr hearing ol.the Appcal or aly other- relatcd information. Thc appc Irr-rt hcnce filed \ \t'.. -F.Qa ,-1 2 - the Writ Petition for appropriate relief against the respondent No.2. By the impugned order datcd 25.10.2025, the learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition on the ground that the Writ Petition suffered from non-joinder of necessary parties since iearned Senior Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner had declined to implead the complainants. The learned Judge was of the view that the complainalts were necessary and proper parties to the proceedings and that arty decision rendered in the matter would dircctly aflect their interests.

3. We have heard Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant/writ petitioner artd the lcarned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondents.

4. Section i I of The Passports Act, 1967 deals ',vith Appeals. Section 11(1) provides that any person aggrieved by an order of the passport authority under clause (b) or clause (c) of sub-section (2) of section 5 or clause (b) of the proviso to section 7 or sub section (1), or sub-section (3) of section 10 or by an order under sub-section (6) of section 10 of the authority to whom the passport authority is subordinate, may preler an appeal against [hat ordcr to thc appellate authority within the prescribed period. Ruie 14 of The Passports Rules, 198O, specilies thaL every appeal shalt be hled within thirty i i I I i i i i t i : l 3 days from the date on which the order is comrr lnicated to the appellant

5. Thc order passed by the respondent N,;3/the Regional Passport Officer on I I .O8.2025 also specifies that th e Appeal mu st be hlcd belore the respondent No.2 within 30 days I om the date of receipt of the order. Hence, the time period in the prr sent case woulcl bc until 10.09.2025. The Appeal was filed beforc the respondent No.2 on 10.09.2025. [t is undisputed that the Appeal n,as fi]ecl within the prescribed time period.

6. Section 1 I (4) and (5) of the Act lays down r l- : procedure for filing an Appeal and that the Appellate Authority ;hall follow the prescribcd procedure in disposing of an Appeal. The proviso to sectjon 11(5) makes it clear that no appeal shall be disposed of unless thc appcllalt has been given a reasonabl,: opportunity of reprcsenting his case.

7. A perusal of section 1 I of the Act makes it clea. ,hat there is no requ ircmerrt to implead ar-ry cther party to the I 1 peat including entities u'ho ma1'have hled complaints against the apl ellant.

8. Rules 14 to 16 of the Rules, 19g0, as a r ended by the (Amendment) Rules, 2023, deal with Appellate \ lthorities, Fee I '.j 4 payable in respect of Appeal and the procedure to be followed by Appellate Authority. Rule 16 of the Rules provides that the Appellate Authority may call for the records of the case from the authority which passed the order appealed against and shall pass a linal ordcr after giving the appellant a reasonable opportunity of representing his CA SE.

9. Hence, neither section 11 of the Act nor the relevant Ru les provides lor any requirement the appellant to imptead complainalts in the Appeal. The requirement to implead other parties in a Writ Petition would thus also not arise

10. In the light of above, we hnd that the reason for dismissing the Writ Petition, namely, that Senior Counsel appearing for the writ petitioncr declineC to implead the complainants, is without any statutory basis. We are also of the view that the respondent No.2 is entitied Lo reach an independent decision with regard to the fate o[ the Appeal. We, hence, find merlt in the contentions of Senior appellant/writ petitioner for in terfering Counsel appearing for the with the impugned order. 1 1. We may add the submissiorr of the learned Deputy Solicitor General that the Deputy Solicitor General did not pray tbr addition ol thc complainants to the Writ pctition. I \ 5 l -

12. W.A.No. 1283 of 2025 is accordingly a,llowed anc disposed of by setting asicle the inpugned order dated 25.1O.2025- ' 'he respondent No.2 shall issuc nolice to the appellant for the heari.l 1 of the Appeal and shall follow the procedure prescribed under the ( 67 Act and the Rules. We are informed that the appellant's passpo' is expiring on

28.02.2026. Hencc, the respondent No.2 shail pe ss appropriate orclers \\,rthin a rcasonable time and preferably by 31 .

2.2025.

13. All connectcd applications shall stand closecl. Therc shall bc no ordcr as to costs //TRUE COPY// t \ I D/.B.SATYAVATHI \ ,OINT REGISTRAR . ;ECTION OFFICER 'l The Principal Secretary, Union of lndia, Ministry o\Edenr rl Affairs, patiala House, Tilak [Vlarg, New Delhi - 110 001 . The Joint Secretary (PSP) and Chief Passport Officer,, CF V (Consular, Passport and Visa Division), Ministry of External Affairs, r :w Delhi. The Regional Passport Officer, Hyderabad. D.No.B-2-21 {i o 219, Near Prashant Theatre, Kummarguda, Secunderabad, Telang,t ra State - 500 003. \.2' ]. I One CC to SRI SETTY RAVI TEJA, Advocate. IOPUCI Oiie CC to SRI N.BHUJANGA RAO, Deputy Solicitor Ge I )ral of lndia, High ,'Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. IOPUCI Two CD Copies. To, 2 3 4 o BSK LS , / l HIGH COURT DATED:1911112025 JUDGMENT ,/,t".';.''' ' 'ir.\. . .... I 6,t trj ?t6 WA.No.1283 of 2025 / ALLOWING THE WRIT APPEAL WITHOUT COSTS d