IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 22ND DECEMBER 2011 / 1ST POUSHA 1933 WP(C).No. 34517 of 2011(L) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S) : --------------------- MUSTHAFA K.M., AGED 44 YEARS, S/O.MARAKKAR K.Y., KUTHUKALLINGAL HOUSE, VELLARAKAD P.O., PIN - 680 584., THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.K.SHAJAHAN RESPONDENT(S) : ------------------------ 1. THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, SOUTH BLOCK, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI - 110 001. 2. THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, COCHIN PASSPORT OFFICE, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM - 682 036. ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASG OF INDIA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: AMV WPC NO.34517 OF 2011 (L) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS : P1. : COPY OF THE PASSPORT OF THE PETITIONER BEARING NO: F 3914819 DTD: 24.03.1996. P2. : COPY OF THE 1ST PAGE OF THE S.S.L.C BOOK OF THE PETITIONER DTD: 28.01.2011. P3. : COPY OF THE RATION CARD OF THE PETITIONER SHOWING THE AGE CORRESPONDING TO THE DATE OF BIRTH OF PETITIONER. P4. : COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR PASSPORT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD: 05.09.2011. P5. : COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DTD: 29.10.2007 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE AMV ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................................................... W.P.(C).34517/2011 .............................................. Dated this the 22nd day of December, 2011 JUDGMENT Petitioner claims that he has been issued a passport bearing No.F 391 4819 from the Office of the second respondent. His grievance is that in the passport, his date of birth has been shown as 20.5.1961 instead of 20.5.1967. Therefore, he attempted to make Ext.P4 application to the second respondent, which was declined to be accepted. Hence the writ petition has been filed seeking appropriate orders. 2. Irrespective of the sustainability of the request made by the petitioner, when an application is made for correction, that is bound to be accepted and considered in accordance with the Rules governing correction of date of birth. 3. In view of the allegations raised by the petitioner that the second respondent has refused to accept and consider the application, I direct that it will be open to the petitioner to submit original of Ext.P4 afresh along with a copy of this judgment and a copy of the writ petition. If the application is so submitted, the W.P.(C).34517/11 2 second respondent will accept it and consider the same in accordance with law and orders thereon shall be passed, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within four weeks thereafter. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs