IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU WRIT PETITION NO : 24947 of 2004 Between: Mohd Abdul Razzak S/o Mohd Abdul Khader, Occ: Pvt. Service (Abroad U.S.A) R/o 87-16, Eliot Ave, Rego Park, New York - 11374, U.S.A. rep. by GPA Holder Mohammed Abdul Raoof S/o Late Mohd. Abdul Gaffar Age 28 years, occ: Business R/o H.No. 19-2-81/B/52, Rangam Colony, Tadban, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Regional Passport Officer, Secunderabad. 2 The Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, Centrala Secretariat, New Delhi. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the order and direction of the respondent No.1 in refusing the application form for the issuance of fresh passport with correct date of birth as arbitrary, illegal and direct the respondents to accept the application form and issue fresh passport with correct date of birth on the basis of orders of the Spl. Executive Magistrate and birth certificate issued by the M.C.H. Hyderabad and pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.SYED AHMED ALI Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.A.RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST SOLICITOR GEN) The Court made the following : O R D E R: This is a writ petition filed by the petitioner seeking to declare the order of the first respondent refusing the application of the petitioner for issuance of fresh passport with correct date of birth as arbitrary and illegal. The petitioner contends that he made an application to the Passport Officer-first respondent by mentioning his date of birth as 01-10-1968 for the purpose of issuing passport. The first respondent accordingly issued the passport. The petitioner now made an application to the Passport Officer mentioning that his correct date of birth is 17-03-1973, but by mistake he mentioned his date of birth as 01-10-1968. Therefore, the petitioner contends that he has sufficient proof to show that the subsequent date mentioned by him is the correct date of birth. Whether the date 01-10-1968 or 17-03-1973 is correct or not is a disputed question of fact, which has to be decided by a civil Court. Since there is a disputed question of fact, no relief can be granted in this writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. The petitioner is given liberty to approach appropriate forum for the purpose of adjudication of his correct date of birth. No order as to costs. _________________ 26th February, 2008 SKM ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Regional Passport Officer, Secunderabad. 2 The Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, Central Secretariat, New Delhi. 3 2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{AVLR}