IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY, TWO THOUSAND TEN PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25553 of 2009 Between: Kondurupaka Jagadishwar … Petitioner And The Regional Passport Officer, Passport Office, Hyderabad. … Respondent Counsel for the petitioner: Sri Shankar Bheemanathi This Court made the following: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25553 of 2009 ORDER:- This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the inaction of the respondent in considering the petitioner’s request to correct the date of birth in his passport, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner obtained a passport bearing No.E 9201901 from the respondent on 26.05.2004. The passport is valid till 25.05.2014. The petitioner’s date of birth has been mentioned in the passport as 14.10.1970. The petitioner applied to the respondent for correction of his date of birth as 02.02.1976. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent has not received the application. At the hearing, there is no representation for the respondent though papers were served on the office of the Assistant Solicitor General and the name of the Advocate Sri Thatasingaiah Goud appeared in the cause list. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. Correction of entries in the passport is governed by circular dated 18.04.2001 issued by the Ministry of External Affairs (PV-I Section). The relevant clauses of 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 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 affect 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 (sic. 1897), 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.” From the facts pleaded by the petitioner, his case falls under clause (a) supra. The need for the petitioner to approach the civil Court would arise only when the initial entry was based on the supportive document issued by one competent authority and request for change was made by the candidate on the basis of a certificate issued by another competent authority. The petitioner filed a copy of his secondary school certificate, wherein his date of birth is mentioned as 02.02.1976. According to him, no certificate issued by any competent authority was produced before the respondent while making his application for issuance of passport earlier. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the direction to the respondent to entertain the petitioner’s application for correction of entry regarding date of birth in his passport. If the respondent is satisfied that the petitioner has not produced any certificate issued by a competent authority when he made his first application for issuance of passport, he shall correct the date of birth in the passport in terms of the secondary school certificate to be produced by the petitioner. If on the other hand, the record of his office contains any certificate issued by the competent authority, produced by the petitioner earlier, which is in conflict with the secondary school certificate proposed to be submitted by the petitioner, then the petitioner may be relegated to the civil Court in terms of clause (c) supra. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WPMP.No.33292 of 2009 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. _____________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Date: 04.03.2010 ES