✦ High Court of India · 30 Dec 2025

MS.TAYYABA YOUSUF HUSSAIN v. The Union of lndia, throu

Case Details High Court of India · 30 Dec 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
30 Dec 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,206 words

Judgment

2. The Joint Secretary (PSP) And Chief Passport Officer, CPV Division, Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi - 110001.

3. The Regional Passport Office, Hyderabad, Office at 73, Red Cross Road Shivaji Nagar, Secunderabad, Telangana.500003. I ...RESPONDENTS

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 a Writ, more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents herein more particularly respondent No.2 herein in keeping petitioners appeal U/s '1 '1 The Passport Act, '1967 in abeyance for more than (3) months despite acknowledging the same, neither numbering nor accepting or rejecting the said appeal despite urgency of petitioner to travel abroad for pursuing further education, as illegal and arbitrary, in clear violation of legal and fundamental rights of Petitioner, in violation of principles of natural justice AND lN CONSEQUENCE direct Respondents more particularly Respondent No.2 and 3 to renew petitioner's passport by correcting the date of birth in the passport as per the authentic documents available with the petitioner i including but not limited to S.S.C certificate, Aadhar Card, )AN Card, Voter lD Card, Birth certificate and other official records. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 1 51 CPC praying that in the ci { umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court me 1 be pleased to direct Respondents more particularly Respondent No.2 to consic t r Petitioners appeal preferred against impugned order dated 2110712025 in fite ll, .HY1074986913325 daled 2110712025, as expeditiously as possible, pending adir dication of the main Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI MIRZA NISAR AHMED BAI(} Counsel for the Respondents No : SMT NVR RAJYALAKSII l,ll REP SRI N . BHUJANGA RAO Deputy Solicitot General of lndia The Court made the following: ORDER a / IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT ITYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAI(A IVRIT PETITION No.38958 of 2025

30.L2.2025 Between: Ms. Tayyaba Yousuf Hussain AND The Union of India & trvo others ORDER: ...Petitioner ...Respondents The petitioner challenges the action of respondent No.2 in rejecting her request for correction of her date of birth in her Passport from 21.O7.1983 to 21.05.1986 uide impugned letter dated

21.O7.2025, on the ground that such request cannot be entertained after five years from the date of issuance of the initial passport. The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to consider her request without reference to the delay and in the light of earlier orders passed by this Court

2. Heard Sri Mirza Nisar Ahmed Baig, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. NVR. Rajyalakshmi, learned counsel representing Sri N. Bhujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India, for the respondqnts. EI- \- 2

3. l,e arntd counsel for the petitioner submits t I at the petition.-r's correct date of birth is 2 1 .O5. 1986, as reflected i r her SSC Marks Memo and other educational records, and tl at the entry of 2l .O7 .1983 in her initia-l passport ivas incorrecl . He submits that while applying for re-issuance of passport in April 2 )25, the petitioner sought for correction of her date of birth. but thc iame was rejected solely on the ground of delay. He relies upon the o fice Memorandum dated 22.O9.20i6, u'hich permits consideration oi genuine cases for change of date of birth even beyond five vears, anc also reiies on the orders of this Court in W.P.No.i3636 of 2022 ar r W.P.No.11323 of

2023. w'herein similar requests for correction ol rl Lte of birth, based on educational records, u.ere dilected lo be consir I :red despite delay.' He further submits that the petitioner's case : identical and is entitled to similar treatment.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents subm i ," that as per the extant Passport Ruies and the guidelines, a requl ;t for correction of date of birth cannot be accepted if made after five . ears from the date c,f issuance of the initia-1 passport. She relies on tl-I ) order of this Court in Vi.P.Nc.2005 of 2025, wherein the writ petitio r '"vas dismissed on I , 3 the ground that the request for correction of date of birth was made several decades after issuance of the initial passport. She, therefore, support tire rejection order dated 2I.O7.2025.

5. The Office Memorandum dated 22.O9.2016 specifically protrides that the Passport Issuing Authority (PIA) shall consider the explanation of each applicant seeking change of date of birth to assess the genuineness of the claim, even rvhere more thal five years have elapsed from issuance of the passport. It further directs the PIA not to reject such requests routinely, and to consider the same if a genuine explanation and authentic supporting documents are furnished.

6. In the present case, the petitioner has produced her SSC Marks Memo reflecting her date of birth as 21.05. 1986, and seeks only a direction for consideration of her request in the form of appeal, in accordance with the said guidelines. This Court flrnds that the petitioner's case falls within the ambit of the additional guidelines issued by the Office Memorandum dated 22.09.2016 and requires reconsideration by respondent No'2. i,\- 4 7 . In vie i-.,. of the above, the Writ Petition is < isposed of with-a direction to responCerrt No.2 to consider the pet Lioner's request in the form of appeal for correctior, of her date of bir h in her Passport, striclly in accordance rvith the additional guici: ines contajned in Oflrce Memorandum dated 22.C9.2016, and pass appropriate speaking orciers within a period of four (4) u'ee:: ; from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, ard communica t : the sarrre to the petitioner. No costs. Pending rnisceliareous applications, if r ly, sha1l stand ciosed. SD/- C.DEEPIKA ASI; STANT REGISTRAR /_----- t_ //TRUE COPY// STCTION OFFICER To,

1. The Union of lndia, through Secretary, Ministry of Exterr rl Affairs, South Block, New Delhi-1 1 0 001 . I

2. The Joint secretary (PSP) And chief Passport officer, I PV Division, Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi - 1 1000 1 .

3. The Regional Passport Office, Hyderabad,-Office- at 73 ied Cross Road Shivaji Nagar, Secunderabad, Telangana.500003

4. One CC to SRl. MIRZA NISAR AHIvIED BAIG, Advoc;r : [OPUC] 5. One CC to SRl. N BHUJANGA RAO Deputy Solicitor C t neral of lndia toPUCI

6. Two CD Copies @ DAN PSK HIGH COURT DATED:3011212025 CC TODAY ORDER WP.No.38958 of 2025 ELA,V .1' .\ r1- i * ( ( (;' tYo (a s Ufr c., ..p .l:, DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS I 1 b [,

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments