IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 9TH JULY 2009 / 18TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 18534 of 2009(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MOHAMMED JABIR, S/O.EDAMANALUNKAL MUHAMMED, THANNIKKAL HOUSE, CHEMPU, VAIKOM, KERALA. BY ADV. SRI.T.H.ABDUL AZEEZ SRI.K.P.MAJEED SRI.P.ANOOP (MULAVANA) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, ERNAKULAM. BY SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR - ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J. ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.18534 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of July, 2009. JUDGMENT The issue raised in this writ petition is covered by the judgment W.P.(C) No.34730/08. The issue relates to the correction of name at the instance of the passport holder, who belongs to Muslim Community. 2. The petitioner originally married one Leena, D/o.Abdul Rasheed, Ponnambattu House, AKG Lane, Palluruthy. The matrimonial relationship ended in dissolution of the marriage on the petitioner pronouncing 'Talak'. The petitioner had remarried one Shamnad. The petitioner, the holder of passport, wants the name of the second wife to be entered in the passport. The procedure in Clause 7 of the Passport Information Booklet has to be followed and this procedure W.P.(C).No.18534 of 2009 :: 2 :: has been affirmed in W.P.(C)No.34730/08. Paragraphs 5 and 6 of the said judgment read as follows: “5. Authentication of divorce by competent court is one of the methods of proving a divorce or even the existence of a re-marriage. But it is not the only method. Divorce resultant upon a 'talak' pronounced by her husband is a mode of divorce that is accepted in the Muslim Community. An affirmation of the state of affairs by a sworn affidavit in the form 'Annexure A' would suffice going by Clause 7 of Ext.R1(a). It is affirmed that State Government does not propose to make any addition to what is already mentioned as due procedure under Ext.R1(a). 6. Having heard Learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader and the learned Assistant Solicitor General, I am of the view that, in these circumstances, the concerned passport officer may proceed to issue a passport, as sought for by the petitioners with the corrections as sought for by W.P.(C).No.18534 of 2009 :: 3 :: them, provided they comply with the procedural formalities stipulated in Ext.R1(a). This shall be done within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.” 3. Having heard counsel on both sides, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to proceed to consider the petitioner's request for correction, in accordance with Clause 7 of the Passport Information Booklet and as per the directions in W.P.(C)No.34730/08. Writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge