High Court · 2025

Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue any appropriate W-it, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of Respondent No.2 in not issuing the passport services to the Petitioner No.2 vide reference letter No. OBJ/3'15616245123 dt. 2610812023, with reference to passport application No. HY3075692071 'l 23 dated. 1B 10812023 on account of seeking consent of the other parent or permission from the court to issue/renew passport to minor child even after submission of application as per the provisions of the act is illegal, arbitrary, and unlawful and against the established principles of Natural Justice and against the Article 14, 19 and 21 of constitution of rndia and consequenfly direct the Respondent No.2 to r,3issue the passport to the petitioner No.2. LA.NO:1 OF 2024 Petition Under lsection 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 set aside the impugned letter No. oBJlg1s61624sl23 dt. 26to}t2o23 pending disposal of the above wdt petition. Counsel for the Petitioners : SRI MUKKERA SAHITHI SRI KAVYA 99yt^","]Ig ttt" Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : SRt GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAI.. OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : -- The Court made the following ORDER j THE HON'BLE JUSTTCE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA WRIT PETITIO N No.35982 of2024 Ms. Sahithi Sri Karya Mukkera, learned counsel for the petitioners Ms. N-V.R.Rajya Lakshmi, Iearned counsel representing Mr' Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 ORDER: The petitioners pray for a writ of mandamus pertaining to the inaction of the respondent No.2/Regional Passport Oflicer in issuing the passport to the petitioner No 2 (minor child)' 2 The petitioncr No. 1 claims to have the custody of the petitioner No.2 (minor child). c The petitioner No. 1 is represented in the Court

4. After hearing iearned counsel appearing for the petitioner No. 1 and the Passport Authorities, it is undisputed that the petitioner No.1 has furnished "specimen Declaration" by way of Annexure 'C', which is part of the writ petition' Annexure 'C' states that there is an ongoing divorce/custody case between the petitioner No. 1 and the respondent No.3' 2 '11

5. II_ is relevant to state at this stage that the notice sent to the respor:rdent No.3 was returned with an endorsement "Door Locked,,. T,he respondent No.3 is not before the Court. 6. Considering the fact that the petitioner and the respondent No.3 are estranged for all practical purposes and a custody/ dit' orce case is pending between them, this court is of the view thrrt the petitioner No.I would fail within the factual conspectlrs as the petitioner in W.p.No.25962 of 2O2.t. In that writ petition, the petitioner had sought for a directi,:rn on the Passport Authorities to consider issuing of passport to the mrnor chiid clespite the pefitioner not being able to pr( )cluce the consent of hr:r estranged husband. The Court had allowed the writ petition ,rn Column 16 in Section III of the Guidelines for filling up of A;:plication Forms under The passports Rules, 19go and held that Column 16 would apply to a single parent who is not in a positron to obtain the consent of the other parent,,for whateuer reasctrt, . The single parent would however be required to complete the necessary formalities for processing the application. Column l6 would equally apply to the present case since the petitioner No.I is unabie to obtain the consenr of the respondent No.3 but has filed Annexure C' in terms of the \ Guidelines/ Coltrmn 16 as provided in the 198O Rules ') )

7. Although the contention of the Passport Authorities that the petitioner cannot be deemed to be in exclusive possession of the minor child (petitioner No.2), Clause (lll) of Annexure 'C' categorically states that the minor child was in the exclusive physical custody of the petitioner No.1 as on the date of frling of the writ petition.

8. The entire purpose of Column 16 which uses the phrase "for whateuer reoson" is to enable a single parent to apply for a passport for the minor child without the consent of the other parent. The only caveat is that the applicant/ single parent must submit a sworn affidavit in the form of Annexure 'C' along with documentary proof. Column 16 also requires an affidavit to be given in terms of Annexure 'G' stating the relevant facts and circumstances of the case aiong with the application' g. In the present case, the information has been furnished in Annexure 'C'and 'D'. Hence, the relief claimed by the petitioner No. 1 would be subject to the requirement of Column 16 and any other formalities which the petitioner No' 1 would have to complete and comply with for issuance of passport to the minor child. It may also be relevant to state that Column 16 uses the phrase "in tLrc nonnal coursd as being cases where the ''.., 4 srgnatures of both parents are required for issue of a passport to the minor child. Annexure C,and .G, constitute ;r departure from that rrormal course by enabling a single parent to apply for a passport for a minor child whcre the other parent is not available, rr:fuses to or is reluctant to give consent. Considering the import of Column 16 and the Guidelines under The passports Rules, 19g0, this Court deems it fit to allow ancl d:ispose of the writ petition subject to the No.1 compl.,ring with all the requirements in Column 16 including frling of any other additional affidavit il requrred as well as ensuring the physical appearance oI Lhe child if requested bl, th. Passport Authorities to show rhat the petitioner No I has actual custody of the minor child at the relevant point of time. petitioner 1 l. W.p.No..lS982 (tf 2O24 is accordingly allowed and disposed of b.r setting aside the letter dated 26.08.2023 and directing the respondent No.2/Regional passport Authority to process the application made by the petitioner No.I for issuing a passport to thrs psllfiener No.2 (minor chitd). The respondent No.2/Regional passport Authority shall issue the passport to the petitioner No.2/minor child, after compietion r.rf the ) formalities by the petitioner No 1 A11 connected applications stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs' //TRUE COPY// SD/-A.V.S.PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAR S TION OFFICER To

1. The Joint Secretary, Union of lndia, PSP and Central passport officer, PSP Division, Ministry of external Affairs.

2. The Regional Passport Officer, Regional passport office, D.N0.8-2'215TO 2'19, Kummargudda, Secunderabad- 500003.

3. One CC to SRI MUKKERA SAHITHI SRI KAVYA, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Advocate [OPUC]

5. Two CD Copies SA BSK qPr t ( tJ o o 1t,e ii T Aie 3 0 J{t'l ?025 t 9esp rtc t HIGH COURT DATED:0710112025 ORDER WP.No.35982 of 2024 ALLOWING THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. ?+ 1 3o 1L4^t\