High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeWrit petition dismissed.

M.Kunhimoideen Kutty v. Regional Passport Office, Passport Officer Regional Passport Office, Assistant Passport Officer Malappuram Passport Seva Kendra, Union of India

Case / Petition Number:WP(C) No.5717/21

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • Bechu Kurian Thomas
Judgment Date
2021-11-30
Court Decision / Holding
Writ petition dismissed; no order to correct the date of birth in the passport.
Final Disposition
Writ petition dismissed.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • M. Kunhimoideenkutty

Respondents

  • Regional Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Bypass Road, Eranhipalam, Kozhikode; Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Bypass Road, Eranhipalam, Kozhikode; Assistant Passport Officer, Malappuram Passport Seva Kendra, Sajidha Tower, Jubilee Road, Moonamapadi, Malappuram; Union of India represented by the Secretary to Government, Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Adv. R. Ramadas

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Shri. S. Manu, ASG of India

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a Kerala High Court writ petition challenging the correction of the petitioner’s date of birth in his passport. The petitioner asserts that his true date of birth is 28 May 1965, supported by his SSLC book, driving license, and Aadhar card, while his passport bears the date 2 October 1961. He explains that his initial passport was issued when he was about 15 years old and that he later travelled abroad for work, including to the United Arab Emirates. On 01 October 2020 he sought correction, and subsequently registered a birth date with the Local Self Government, producing Ext.P9 (birth certificate) issued after a SDM order dated 03 December 2020 directing registration under the Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969. The respondents counter that the petitioner’s initial passport was issued decades ago based on documents available at that time and that there are alleged offences under the Passports Act, 1967 for providing false information. They also contend that correcting the date of birth after four decades would be inappropriate and contrary to MEA instructions. The court emphasizes that a passport is a solemn document; corrections require exceptional circumstances, which are not shown here. Citing Union of India v. Sunil Kumar Sarkar and Vasu Sasi v. Union of India, the court dismisses the petition, holding no exceptional basis to compel correction.

Provisions of Law Cited

Passports Act, 1967Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1969Constitution of India, Article 226

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Passport entries are based on documents submitted for the issuance of the passport and are solemn entries; corrections require exceptional circumstances.
  • A writ court will not direct correction of a passport date of birth without exceptional circumstances; reliance on existing statutory authority and MEA instructions is decisive.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner contends that the date of birth, as evidenced by the SSLC and other documents (and Ext.P9 birth certificate), is 28.05.1965 and that the correction of the passport date is necessary to reflect his true date of birth for legitimate purposes including employment abroad; he argues that the birth certificate issued after a SDM order shows recognition of a corrected date and that withholding correction would cause unjust hardship given his long history of travel and employment.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents argue that the petitioner obtained multiple passports decades ago based on misrepresented information and that correcting the date of birth after forty years would be inconsistent with law and policy; they point to the Passports Act, 1967 and MEA instructions, and suggest that the veracity of new documents cannot be tested by the passport authority; they also note possible offences for misrepresentation.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Union of India v. Sunil Kumar Sarkar2015 (3) KLT 501PositiveCited to support the proposition that passport entries are based on documents submitted at the time of issuance and that corrections in the absence of exceptional circumstances should be approached cautiously.
Vasu Sasi v. Union of India and Others2020 (4) KHC 405PositiveCited to reinforce the principle that post-issuance corrections require appropriate statutory justification and that reliance on new documents for corrections is limited.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against M.Kunhimoideen Kutty v. Regional Passport Office, Passport Officer Regional Passport Office, Assistant Passport Officer Malappuram Passport Seva Kendra, Union of India and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS** **TUESDAY, THE 30[TH] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021/9TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943** ## **WP(C) NO. 5717 OF 2021** ## **PETITIONER:** **M.KUNHIMOIDEENKUTTY AGED 55 YEARS, S/O BAVA MANKADAVATH, MANKADAVATH HOUSE, NEAR NMH SCHOOL, POST TIRUNAVAYA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676301.** **BY ADV R.RAMADAS** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE, BYPASS ROAD, NEAR CO-OPERATIVE HOSPITAL, ERANHIPALAM, KOZHIKODE, PIN-673006. 2 THE PASSPORT OFFICER REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE, BYPASS ROAD, NEAR CO-OPERATIVE HOSPITAL, ERANHIPALAM, KOZHIKODE, PIN-673006. 3 THE ASSISTANT PASSPORT OFFICER, MALAPPURAM PASSPORT SEVA KENDRA, SAJIDHA TOWER, JUBILEE ROAD, MOONAMPADI, MALAPPURAM, PIN-676509. 4 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFIARS, NEW DELHI-110011. BY ADV. SHRI.S.MANU, ASG OF INDIA** W.P.(C) No.5717/21 ## **-:2:-** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **-:3:-** W.P.(C) No.5717/21 ## **BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.** ## **-------------------------------------W.P.(C) No.5717 of 2021** **--------------------------------------** Dated this the 30[th] day of November, 2021 ## **JUDGMENT** Petitioner seeks for correction of his date of birth in the passport. The present passport of the petitioner contains his date of birth as 02.10.1961. It is claimed that as per the SSLC book, driving licence and Aadhar card, the actual date of birth of the petitioner is 28.05.1965. 2. Petitioner alleges that the initial passport of the petitioner was issued when he was only 15 years of age and after obtaining the said passport, he went to the United Arab Emirates where he worked for several years. Subsequently, when the petitioner noticed a mistake in the date of birth entered in his passport, he applied for correction on 01.10.2020. However, it was informed that petitioner has to produce his birth certificate to enable the passport authorities to correct the mistake. It is thereafter that petitioner registered his date of birth with the Local Self Government and obtained Ext.P9 birth certificate. Petitioner has a further case that Ext.P9 birth certificate was issued after the Sub Divisional Magistrate considered the claim of the petitioner regarding his date of birth and by virtue of proceedings dated 03.12.2020, the date of birth of the petitioner was directed to be registered under the Registration of Births **-:4:-** W.P.(C) No.5717/21 and Deaths Act, 1969. It is in such circumstances that, petitioner sought for correction of the date of birth in all the records available. 3. A statement has been filed on behalf of respondents wherein it is mentioned that, when petitioner applied for correcting his date of birth in the passport, a screening was done, which revealed that petitioner's initial passport was issued on 27.02.1981 with the date of birth 02.10.1961. The said passport was reissued several times with the same date of birth. Since it was obvious that petitioner had obtained his initial passport and the subsequent ones, by furnishing false information based upon some documents with a different date of birth, petitioner has committed offences under the Passports Act, 1967. Respondents have also stated that, it fails all logic to accept the pleadings of the petitioner that he had not noticed the mistake in his date of birth for 39 years. On the other hand, now the attempt of the petitioner to correct his date of birth is only to suit his present requirement, especially to facilitate his employment abroad. Relying upon the instructions of the Ministry of External Affairs, the respondents stated that petitioner's date of birth cannot be corrected, that too, after almost four decades. 4. I have considered the arguments of Sri.R.Ramadas, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri.S.Manu, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India on behalf of the respondents. 5. Admittedly, petitioner's passport was issued several decades **-:5:-** W.P.(C) No.5717/21 ago. Every passport is issued and its particulars are entered by referring to the documents submitted by the applicants for such passports. The documents required to be submitted obviously include certificates to prove the date of birth and other documents of identification. The dates entered in those certificates were obviously acted upon by the passport issuing authority. Petitioner utilized the said passport for his travel and employment abroad creating rights and obligations not only upon the petitioner, but even upon others. The date of superannuation and benefits that accrues on account of employment abroad would all be based on the date of birth in the passport. Since the passport is a solemn document, the entries once made, remains on record for a long period of time. It is not open for this Court to direct correction of date of birth, unless there are exceptional circumstances. 6. No exceptional circumstances have been pointed out by the petitioner in the present case. This fact warrants this Court not to issue a direction to correct the petitioner's date of birth in his passport. It fails all logic and comprehension as to why the petitioner had not noticed the alleged mistaken entry in his date of birth in the passport all these years. This is all the more so, since, petitioner had utilised the passport for his travel, several times. 7. The certificates and documents produced as Ext.P1 to Ext.P4 and even Ext.P8 cannot advance the case of the petitioner, since, those **-:6:-** W.P.(C) No.5717/21 documents only indicate that a different date of birth of the petitioner is available in official records. Those records do not justify the entry of a different date of birth in the passport of the petitioner. In fact, it is an intimation that some other documents would have been utilised by the petitioner to obtain his earlier passports. 8. Reliance can be made to the decisions in **Union of India v. Sunil Kumar Sarkar** (2015 (3) KLT 501) **Vasu Sasi v. Union of India and Others** (2020 (4) KHC 405). Every passport is issued and the particulars entered into, by referring to the documents submitted by the applicants for such passports. The documents required to be submitted obviously include certificates to prove the date of birth and other documents of identification. Thus, when petitioner obtained his initial passport 39 years back, some documents would have been submitted by the petitioner to prove his date and place of birth. There is no mention in the writ petition as to which were those documents submitted by the petitioner for obtaining the present entries in his passport. In the absence of any reference to such documents, it is not proper for this Court, in exercise of its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to direct the passport issuing authority to rely upon the documents now submitted by the petitioner for carrying out corrections. 9. It would be apposite to notice that the documents of identity like the birth certificate, Aadhar card and PAN card submitted by the petitioner **-:7:-** W.P.(C) No.5717/21 for the correction now sought for, are all documents of recent origin. The passport issuing authority cannot determine the veracity of date of birth now seen in the certificates produced, since such a power of determination on the veracity of the contents of documents is not vested with the said statutory authority. 10. In view of the above, there is no reason to direct the passport issuing authority to correct the date of birth of the petitioner. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. ## **Sd/-** **BECHU KURIAN THOMAS** **JUDGE** vps W.P.(C) No.5717/21 ## **-:8:-** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5717/2021** ## **PETITIONER'S/S' EXHIBITS** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE 1ST PAGE OF THE PETITIONER'S SSLC BOOK SHOWING THE DATE OF BIRTH AS 28.05.1965.** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE TRANSFER CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE NAVA MUKUNDA HIGH SCHOOL, TIRUNAVAYA TO THE PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P3** **TRUE COPY OF THE DRIVING LICENCE NO.602/92/MT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE MOTOR VEHICLES DEPARTMENT WITH TYPED COPY OF THE SAME.** **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE AADHAR CARD OF THE PETITIONER NUMBER 346865530782.** - **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE FIRST PASSPORT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER ON 27/02/1981, PASSPORT NO. Q.285539.** - **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE PRESENT PASSPORT WHICH WAS RENEWED ON 29/03/2011, PASSPORT NO. J.6257620.** - **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ON-LINE APPOINTMENT RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, DATED 01.10.2020 (APPOINTMENT ON 6.10.2020)** - **EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, TIRUR WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION.** - **EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE DATED 24.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE TIRUVANAYA GRAMA PANCHAYATH TO THE PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P10** **TRUE COPY OF THE ONLINE APPOINTMENT RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA (APPOINTMENT ON 29/12/2020)**