IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 27TH MARCH 2009 / 6TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 8609 of 2009(U) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ FOUZIYA RAHIMAN, AGED 14, W/O. ABDUL RAHIMAN, M.S.K. MANZIL, ANAMALA ROAD, KOODAPPUZHA, CHALAKUDY P.O., PIN 680 307. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.SHAMSUDEEN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LAW DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, PASSPORT OFFICE, PANAMBILLY NAGAR, KOCHI -36. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASG THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 8609 OF 2009 (U) ===================== Dated this the 27th day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T The prayer sought in this writ petition is to direct the respondents to accept Exts.P4 and P4(a) application, along with the documents produced and to issue passport to the petitioner incorporating necessary corrections sought for by her. 2. Petitioner submits that she is the holder of Indian Passport No.F4551952. She was earlier married to one Sri.Abdul Rasheed, Pokkakkillath House, Ariyannur, Trichur District, who divorced her by pronouncing Talaq on 20/1/2007. This averment is sought to be supported by referring to Ext.P7 letter dated 20/1/2007. The passport issued to her incorporated the name of Sri.Abdul Rasheed as her spouse. Subsequently on divorce, the petitioner got remarried as is seen from Exts.P1 and P2 to one Sri.Abdul Rahiman of Chalakkudy. Later on she submitted Exts.P4 and P4(a) applications to the 2nd respondent requesting for making corrections in her passport by incorporating the name of her husband. That was refused to be accepted stating that if the petitioner desires to have change of name, she should produce WPC 8609/09 :2 : divorce order passed by a Court of law. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition is filed. 3. As is seen from Ext.P7 referred to above, on the basis of the personal law that is applicable to the petitioner, she has been divorced and on that basis she got remarried also. These facts are duly supported by the documents produced by the petitioner. If that be so, I see no justification for the 2nd respondent's refusal to accept Exts.P4 and P4(a), by which the petitioner sought corrections to be carried out in her passport. 4. In view of the above, I direct that it will be open to the petitioner to submit the originals of Exts.P4 and P4(a) before the 2nd respondent, in which case, the 2nd respondent shall accept the same and pass orders in the light of the observations herein above contained. It is directed that once the petitioner files an application as above, orders in the matter shall be passed, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 3 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp