IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 10536 of 2004 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.S.JHAVERI ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the concerned : NO Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribunal/Tribunals? -------------------------------------------------------------- ANITABEN AXAYKUMAR SHAH Versus REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR VIRENDRA BAHETI for Petitioner No. 1 MR JITENDRA MALKAN for Respondent No. 1 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.S.JHAVERI Date of decision: 10/09/2004 ORAL JUDGEMENT 1. Mr. Jitendra Malkan, learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel service of rule. At the request of learned counsel for the parties the petition is finally heard today. 2. The petitioner states that through inadvertence her date of birth is wrongly mentioned in the Passport and the respondent authority has refused to entertain her request to correct the said mistake. According to the petitioner the correct date of birth is 3.11.1960 instead of 3.10.1960. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent states that only on the basis of material given by the petitioner the date of birth was recorded in the passport. He further stated that no change in the passport is effected, but for making any correction in the passport, a new passport is normally issued by the authority with correct details if the authority is satisfied with the genuineness of the data to be corrected. 4. Having heard the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances and also the material placed on record, the respondent is directed to look into the case of the petitioner on the basis of the evidence already adduced or which may be adduced by the petitioner in support of his case to correct the date of birth as mentioned above. The respondent shall take appropriate decision in accordance with law after considering the relevant evidence adduced before him and shall pass an appropriate order as expeditiously as possible. 5. As the respondent authority will have to undertake the exercise of scrutinizing the case of the petitioner afresh because of the default committed by the petitioner in not placing correct facts at an earlier point of time, a sum of Rs. 5,000/- is ordered to be paid by the petitioner to the respondent authority by way of costs. 6. Accordingly the petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule is made absolute. D.S. permitted. [K.S. JHAVERI J.] *ar*