Vijayan Kunnaruvath v Union of India and Regional Passport Office

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY** **TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017/25TH MAGHA, 1938** **WP(C).No. 35901 of 2016 (K) ----------------------------** ## **PETITIONER:** ## **-----------** **VIJAYAN KUNNARUVATH, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O.T.P.V.KANNAN NAIR, KUNNARUVATH HOUSE, AZHIKODE, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 009, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER K.MOHANAN, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O.T.P.V.KANNAN NAIR, NOW RESIDING AT VILLA NO.8, SAPHIRE PLAZA, VENNALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 028.** ## **BY SMT.SUMATHY DANDAPANI (SENIOR ADVCOATE) ADV.SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI** **RESPONDENT(S):** **--------------** **1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, PATIALA HOUSE ANNEXE, NEW DELHI-110 005.** **2. REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE, ERANHIPALAM, KOZHIKODE-673 006.** **BY SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-02-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **mbr/** ## **WP(C).No. 35901 of 2016 (K)** ## **----------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE PASSPORT RENEWED ON 31.5.2010. EXHIBIT P2: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF SECONDARY SCHOOL LIVING CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P3: COPY OF THE AADHAR CARD. EXHIBIT P4: COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM BEARING NO.VI/401/2/5/2001 DATED 26.11.2015. EXHIBIT P5: COPY OF THE CORRIGENDUM NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT, DATED 13.1.2016. EXHIBIT P6: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 13.12.2016. EXHIBIT P7: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT ISSUED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN WPC.NO.31560 OF 2016 DATED 13.10.2016. EXHIBIT P8: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT ISSUED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WRIT PETITION (C)NO.7274 OF 2016 DATED 9.3.2016. EXHIBIT P9: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT ISSUED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WRIT PETITION (C)NO.599 OF 2016 DATED 9.3.2016.** **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL.** **//TRUE COPY//** **P.S. TO JUDGE** **mbr/** ## **SHAJI P. CHALY, J.** -------------------------------------------------- ## **W.P.(C) No.35901 of 2016 ----------------------------------------------Dated this the 14th day of February, 2017** ## **JUDGMENT** This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking direction to the 2[nd] respondent to correct the date of birth of the petitioner in the Passport as **30.07.1962** instead of 30.07.1958 shown in the Passport, on the basis of Exts.P2 and P3 viz., Secondary School Leaving Certificate, and the Aadhaar Card issued by the Government of India. Basic facts for the disposal of the writ petition are as follows: 2. Petitioner is the holder of Ext.P1 Passport bearing No.J1884512, which is valid till 30.05.2020. In Ext.P1, the date of birth of the petitioner is shown as **30.07.1958** . According to the petitioner, the Passport was originally taken through agents, in the year 1981 from Bombay. Petitioner had studied up to S.S.L.C. In the Secondary School Leaving Certificate issued by the Department of Education, Kerala State, petitioner's date of birth is recorded as 30.07.1962, evident from Ext.P2, which, according to the petitioner, is the correct date of birth. 2 **W.P.(C) No.35901 of 2016** 3. Petitioner got a job as a driver in Saudi Arabia and later he shifted to Oman. Later, he was given promotion as supervisor in one of the firms in Oman. In the year 2003, petitioner was transferred from Oman to Dubai and he is continuously working there ever since. It is also stated, in Ext.P3 Aadhaar card, the date of birth of the petitioner is correctly recorded as 30.07.1962. Seeing the disparity of the date of birth in the Passport and the Aadhaar card, the employer of the petitioner is insisting the petitioner to retire in the year 2017. Whereas, if the date of birth is corrected, petitioner is entitled to continue for a further period of four years. 4. Matters being so, petitioner approached the 2[nd] respondent with a request to make necessary correction in the Passport. However, 2[nd] respondent is taking a stand that petitioner has travelled using the Passport and as per the Office Memorandum dated 26.11.2015 bearing No.VI/401/2/5/2001 and the corrigendum notification dated 13.01.2016 issued by the 1[st] respondent, correction of date of birth cannot be carried out, evident from Exts.P4 and P5. According to the petitioner, the stand adopted by the 3 **W.P.(C) No.35901 of 2016** respondents cannot be sustained under law. 5. Respondents 1 and 2 have filed a statement and among other contentions, it is submitted that, if Ext.P2 is an authentic document, it proves that the writ petitioner had obtained his first passport by submitting false details and documents thereto to secure un-entitled and illegitimate benefits. It could be inferred that the petitioner willfully suppressed his actual date of birth while securing his first passport from Bombay in the year 1981. He has also not mentioned the documents which he had submitted along with his first passport application in the year 1981. Obtaining passport with false information and fabrication of documents thereto is an offence punishable under Sec.12(1)(b) of Passports Act, 1967. Moreover, the passport obtained with false information and bogus documents is liable to be revoked as provided under Sec.10(3)(b) of the Act. 6. It was in compliance of the judgment of this Court in W.P.(C) No.9073 of 2015 dated 23.06.2015, the Ministry of External Affairs, revised the procedure regarding change of date of birth as per Circular of 2001 dated 26.11.2015, which clearly lays down that where the applicant comes before 4 **W.P.(C) No.35901 of 2016** Passport Issuing Authority for change/correction with regard to date of birth of the Passport after a period of five years from the date of issue of the passport with alleged wrong date of birth, no such request shall be entertained or accepted by the Passport Issuing Authority and be rejected outrightly. 7. Subsequently, in the light of the judgment in W.P. (C) No.4387 of 2016 passed by this Court, the Ministry of External Affairs has again issued revised order on the subject. As per the revised procedure dated 22.09.2016, the Authority shall consider the explanation of each applicant seeking change in the date of birth to find the genuineness of the claim, even though more than five years have elapsed after the issue of the Passport. According to the respondents, as the petitioner's case does not fall under any of the provisions of the above circular, he is not entitled to get any relief. 8. Petitioner has produced Exts.P7 to P9 judgments rendered by this Court so as to canvass the proposition that subsequent to the law laid down by this Court in _**'Jayakumar v. Regional Passport Officer'**_ [2015 (3) KLT 158], directions were issued by this Court and accordingly a corrigendum notification is issued by the Union Government, revising the **W.P.(C) No.35901 of 2016** 5 procedure on 22.09.2016, by which, each applications will have to be considered in respect of the correction of the date of birth on its own merit. Therefore, it is the case of the petitioner that petitioner is also entitled to get similar treatment in accordance with the law laid down by this Court in Exts.P7 to P9. 9. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondents, and perused the documents on record and the pleadings put forth by the respective parties. 10. The subject matter of the issue raised by the petitioner centers around the law laid down by this Court in the judgment in ' _**Jayakumar**_ ' _supra_ , wherein this Court had declined to issue direction to correct the date of birth in view of the inordinate delay occurred in seeking correction and also due to the fact that the same will affect the relationship among the comity of nations and the bilateral relationships. 11. However, from the statement filed by the respondents, it is clear, based on the judgment rendered by this Court in W.P.(C) No.4387 of 2016 and connected writ petitions dated 09.03.2016, the procedure was revamped by 6 **W.P.(C) No.35901 of 2016** the Union Government and therefore, in accordance with the directives contained thereunder, the explanation offered by each applicant will have to be taken into account. The said judgment was followed in other writ petitions also. Therefore, if the petitioner makes any application, explaining the delay satisfactorily, for correction of date of birth, the same will have to be considered by the 2[nd] respondent in accordance with the procedure laid down by the Government of India, as well as the law laid down by this Court in the afore-quoted judgments. 12. Therefore, if the petitioner makes any application within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the same shall be considered by the 2[nd] respondent on its own merits, within a further period of three weeks thereafter. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- **SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE** //true copy// P.S. to Judge St/14.02.2017