IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.16638 of 2010 Date of Decision : September 16, 2010. Baltej Singh and others .....Petitioners versus Union of India and another .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Ashu Kaushik, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Darshan Bishnoi, Advocate, for the respondents. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) Notice of motion. Mr.Darshan Bishnoi, Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. In view of the nature of order which I propose to pass there is no need to seek any counter reply from the respondents at this stage. The petitioners seek a mandamus to direct respondent No.2 to renew their passports. It is averred that the petitioners submitted their applications for renewal of the passports on 14.11.2007 and 15.11.2007 but no decision has been taken thereupon so far. It is further averred that while petitioner Nos.1 & 2 are the husband and wife, petitioner Nos.3 & 4 C.W.P.No .16638 of 2010 2 are their daughter and son, respectively. According to the petitioners, the passports were got issued in San Francisco (U.S.A.) but they applied for their renewal before respondent No.2, however no decision has been taken on their applications so far. In the light of the above noticed plea taken by the petitioners and considering the nature of relief sought in this writ petition, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to respondent No.2 to consider and dispose of the petitioners' applications, if any, moved for renewal of their passports, as early as possible but not later than three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. Ordered accordingly. Dasti. September 16, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE