1 Lrs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION No.325/2010 Karnail Singh Virdi ..Petitioner. vs. Union of India and Anr ..Respondents. Mr Subhash Jha i/b Law Global, Advocates for the Petitioner. Mrs Madhavi Tawanandi for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. CORAM: D.K. DESHMUKH AND A.R.JOSHI,JJ DATED: 14TH JANUARY,2010 P.C.:- 1. It is a premature petition. The petitioner applied for a passport. Obviously, in the application he mentioned that his place of birth is Mumbai. It appears that when the petitioner applied for visa for visiting U.S.A., the U.S. Counsulate pointed out to him that there is a discrepancy in relation to his place of birth. In some of the documents the place of birth of the petitioner is mentioned Mumbai , in 2 some of them the place of birth of the petitioner is mentioned at some place in Punjab. The petitioner took eight years to discover that he has mentioned his wrong place of birth in his application for passport. Then in 2009 he applied for change in the place of birth in his passport. The grievance is made by the petitioner against letter dated 21st October, 2009 received by him from the Passport Office,Thane. The endorsement against which grievance is made reads as under: Await court order. 2. The only averment made in the petition in relation to that is in paragraph no.2 (VIII), wherein the petitioner states that when he made inquiries with the office of respondent No.2 he was told to get an order from a competent Court. We asked the learned counsel for the petitioner as to why inquiries were not made with the Passport Office, as to from which competent Court of law order is required to be obtained? It appears from the record that no enquiry was made with the Passport office as to what order they want to be produced by the applicant. In our opinion, instead of rushing to this Court the petitioner should have approached the Passport office to make enquiry as to what is the law 3 which governs an application for change of place of birth in passport and which Court is competent to pass order and what sort of application is to be made and what sort of order is to be obtained. Had such an enquiry would have been made with the passport office, we are sure that information would have been supplied to the petitioner and it is only thereafter that the petitioner could have approached to this Court, if necessary. The petitioner has unnecessarily rushed to this Court without ascertaining the truth. Petition cannot be entertained. It is hereby rejected. (D.K. DESHMUKH,J) (A.R.JOSHI,J)