IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT P R E S E N T THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.S. NARAYANA * * * WRIT PETITION No.27732 of 2007 Between: Shakeer Hussain … Petitioner Versus The Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, New Clock Tower, Secunderabad. … Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Parsa Ananth Nageswar Rao Counsel for the Respondent: None Appeared O R D E R : This Court ordered notice before admission on 26-12- 2007. 2. The writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent in not issuing fresh passport by changing the petitioner’s date of birth and name as 25-12-1981 instead of 25-02- 1978 and also the name of the petitioner as Shakeer Hussain instead of Shakir Hussain and insisting the petitioner to approach the Civil Court as illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and contrary to their own circular issued by the Government of India and consequently to direct the respondent to issue a fresh passport by making necessary corrections in the date of birth as 25- 12-1981 instead of 25-2-1978 and the name of the petitioner as “Shakeer Hussain” instead of “Shakir Hussain” and to pass such other suitable orders as this Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 3. It is stated that the petitioner had completed VII Class during the year 1994 and also completed Board of Secondary Education in March, 1997. It is stated that the petitioner was born on 25-12-1981 and the same was shown in his VII Class and also Board of Secondary Education Certificate as 25-12-1981 and to that effect the petitioner filed copy of SSC certificate issued by the Board of Secondary Education, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, for perusal of this Court. 4. It is further stated that the petitioner obtained passport bearing No. B-3180535 vide file No.A/84274/2K showing his date of birth wrongly as 25-2-1978 instead of his correct date of birth through a passport agent i.e., 25-12-1981. The agent, who secured the passport had produced the passport no. B-3180535 by furnishing wrong date of birth as 25-2-1978 instead of 25-12-1981. The agent secured the passport on the basis of filing affidavit, the affidavit is not a competent authority to issue the date of birth certificate. 5. Further it is stated that the petitioner came to know of entering his wrong date of birth and name in the passport then he immediately approached the respondent for correction of his date of birth as 25- 12-1981 and name as Shakeer Hussain in the passport as per his SSC certificate. But the respondent refused to do so and directed him to approach civil court to obtain declaratory order. It is stated that the petitioner made representation to the respondent authorities to amend his date of birth and also name as mentioned in his SSC certificate. The respondent did not entertain his representation nor done the needful and instead directed him to obtain declaratory order from civil court. As per circular issued by the Government of India, the declaratory order not necessary in these circumstances. Hence, the present writ petition. 6. This Court in Mohd. Nasrullah Khan V. Regional Passport Officer, Hyderabad[1] it was held thus: “In Ali Imran V. Regional Passport Officer, Secunderabad, I have considered the Circular dated 18.4.2001 issued by the Government of India in the Ministry of External Affairs pursuant to the judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Civil Writ Petition No.1072 of 2000. The instructions/clarifications issued in the said Circular read as under. (a) Where an applicant is seeking rectification/correction of a mistake in the entry on date of birth/place of birth in the passport, PIA (passport issuing authority) may after verifying/satisfying himself, affect the correction treating the same as a technical correction. There is no need for a declaratory order in such cases. (b) Where a competent authority issuing a birth certificate or an educational board registering a date of birth along with place of birth as valid were to issue any correction or amendment, PIA may effect the necessary amendment in the passport without insisting on a Court Order. As per the provisions of Section 21 of the General Clauses Act, 1997, a competent authority issuing a certificate could also make necessary amendments to the same. (c) Where the initial entry has been made on the basis of a supportive document issued by one competent authority i.e., school/educational authority and the applicant subsequently requests for a change on the basis of a certificate issued by another competent authority i.e., municipal authorities resulting in conflicting sources of valid proof, the PIA should direct the applicant to obtain a civil order from a competent court of jurisdiction, certifying the valid date of birth/place of birth. In view of the above clarifications, I disposed of the said case observing as under: Be it noted that under the provisions of the Passports Act, 1967, no power is vested in the Regional Passport Officer to correct entries in the passport. However, pursuant to the judgment of the High Court of Bombay referred to hereinabove, it is now permissible for the Regional Passport Officer to accept applications for rectification/correction. Nonetheless, as per clause (c) above, if an entry had been made on the basis of a supportive document issued by one authority i.e., school or educational authority and subsequently the applicant requests for a change of the entry on the basis of the certificate issued by another authority the passport issuing authority is required to direct the applicant to obtain a proper declaration from the civil Court. In this case, the petitioner has produced Secondary School Certificate to prove that his correct date of birth is 1-4-1976. Therefore, the claim of the petitioner is well supported and squarely falls in Clause (a) of the Circular dt. 18.4.2001.” 7. I n Durgempudi Venkata Raghava V. Passport Officer, Ministry of External Affairs, Passport Office, Hyderabad[2] it was held as hereunder. “Placing reliance on the clarification issued on the aforesaid Circular, Writ Petition No.8533 of 2004 was disposed of directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner along with the Secondary School Certificate issued by Secretary, Board of Secondary Education, Andhra Pradesh and pass appropriate orders in the light of the observations made in the said judgment. It is no doubt true that the present Writ Petition was filed in the year 1997 and the Government under Ministry of External Affairs issued the Circular referred to supra on 18.4.2001. As can be seen from the material available on record, the certificates, which had been produced before this Court, it is clear that it is only a bona fide mistake, which had crept in. Apart from this aspect of the matter, no counter-affidavit had been filed denying the specific averment made in the affidavit filed in support of Writ Petition that along with the application form for passport, the Travel Agent also enclosed copies of S.S.C. certificate, Intermediate certificate and also Degree certificate. Therefore, it is evident that without verifying the date of birth, the respondent authority just took the date of birth as filled up in the application form and issued the passport. Hence, it is needless to say that it is only a bona fide mistake. The learned Senior Standing Counsel for Central Government, no doubt submitted that in such a situation, if the passport was issued prior to the said circular it would be proper to give an opportunity to the Writ Petitioner to file fresh application for issuance of passport to the competent authority. In the light of the facts and circumstances, especially in view of Clause (a) of the Circular, dated 18.4.2001 referred to supra and also in view of the fact that all these copies of documents also had been produced at the time of filing of the application form but a bona fide mistake had crept in, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions.” 8. In the light of the circular referred to supra and also the decisions specified supra, the action of the respondent is not justified. In view of the same, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to entertain the application of the petitioner for correction of correct date of birth as “25-12-1981” instead of 25-02-1978 and the name of the petitioner as “Shakeer Hussain” instead of Shakir Hussain, in the light of the facts and circumstances stated supra and also pass appropriate orders and in the light of the circulars referred to supra and also the views expressed by this Court in the decisions referred to supra, within two weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 9. The writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. No costs. JUSTICE P . S . NARAYANA . 17/01/2008 NB: Furnish CC of the order in two days. B/o. IsL [1] 2005(1) ALT 95 [2] 2005 (1) ALT 751