Kerala High Court
Fathima Beevi vs Union Of India on 4 March, 2025
2025:KER:18348
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
TUESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 13TH PHALGUNA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 22324 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
FATHIMA BEEVI,
AGED 50 YEARS,
D/O. SAIDU PANAPARAMBIL, PANAPPARAMBIL HOUSE,
VELUTHAKADAVU, PANANGAD P.O., THRISSUR RURAL, KERALA,
PIN - 680665.
BY ADVS.
HASEENA KUNJOONJU
P.R.MADHUSUDANAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 UNION OF INDIA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL
AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001.
2 THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER,
GROUND FLOOR PASSPORT OFFICER, HERA ROYAL,
SEAPORT - AIRPORT ROAD, KARINGACHIRA, THRIPUNITHURA,
KOCHI - 682301,REPRESENTED BY ASSISTANT SOLICITOR
GENERAL OF INDIA.
BY ADV.T.C.KRISHNA, SCGC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
04.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 22324 OF 2023
2
2025:KER:18348
JUDGMENT
This writ petition has been filed inter alia seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent to take steps to correct the petitioner's date of birth in her passport and to re-issue the passport with the correct date of birth.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to a correction of the date of birth in the passport issued to her. It is submitted that the correct date of birth of the petitioner is 16.08.1973 while the date of birth shown in Ext. P1 passport is 09.04.1968.
3. The learned Central Government Counsel submits that the petitioner first obtained a passport in the year 1992 and has come forward with an application for correction of date of birth only on 24.11.2022, i.e nearly 30 years after the petitioner first obtained her passport. It is submitted that the issue stands covered against the petitioner by the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Vasu Sasi v.
Union of India; 2020 SCC OnLine Ker 2947 which was followed by this Court in the judgment in W.P(C)No.7188 of 2024.
4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the WP(C) NO. 22324 OF 2023 3 2025:KER:18348 learned Central Government Counsel, I am of the view that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief. In Vasu Sasi (supra) this court held as follows:-
"10. In fact, the Government of India has issued the office memorandums subsequent to the judgment of the learned single Judge in Jayakumar (supra) and it was taken note of in the office memorandum that unless and until the delay is properly explained and that too within the period prescribed, applications cannot be considered by the Passport Issuing Authority.
11. Anyhow, the learned counsel for the appellant has invited our attention to the compendium of instructions/guidelines said to be issued during the year 2018, especially clause 6.2 dealing with the correction of date of birth or place of birth in the passport to contend that irrespective of any time line, the authority has to consider an application for correction of date of birth, which reads thus:
"6.2 Where an applicant claims clerical/technical mistake in the entry relating to birth/place of birth in the passport and seeks rectification In all such cases, the documents produced earlier as proof of date of birth/place of birth at the time of issue of passport may be perused (if not already destroyed) by the issuing PIA. In case, it is a mistake either by the applicant or a clerical mistake by the issuing PIA, date/place of birth correction may be allowed by issue of fresh booklet without any limitation of time. In case of mistake by the applicant, fee for fresh passport to be charged and in case of mistake by the PIA staff, fresh passport to be issued on 'gratis' basis [as mentioned in Ministry's circular No. VI/401/2/5/2001 dated 29/10/2007].
WP(C) NO. 22324 OF 2023 4 2025:KER:18348 6.3 If an applicant applies for correction of date of birth in the passport on the basis of a fresh or corrected birth certificate (the original BC was submitted earlier for issue of the first passport), the following procedure be followed:
a) In case of furnishing of a new amended BC with the same date of issue and registration number of the old BC by the same authority, application for change in DOB be processed subject to physical verification of the new BC;
b) In case of furnishing of a new BC by a different authority in replacement of old BC by another authority, the PIA shall insist on cancellation of the old BC and after physical verification of the cancellation certificate and the fresh BC from issuing authorities, application for change in DOB be processed;
c) In case of furnishing of a new BC where the first passport was obtained using other documents like educational school certificates etc., application for change in DOB be processed subject to physical verification of the new BC and other supplementary documents (if required);
6.4 The PIA shall however reject cases where the old birth certificate or other DOB documents used to obtain the first passport, were issued even before the new date of birth claimed by the applicant. (Obviously, the old certificates were in existence before the new DOB of the applicant) 6.5 In case of DOB change applications based on fraudulent documents or/and suppression of material information or/and furnishing of wrong information, the Passport Authorities shall take appropriate steps for imposition of monetary penalty OR filing of criminal case against the offender applicant, as the case may be, in terms of the statutory provision of Section 12 of the Passports Act, 1967.
WP(C) NO. 22324 OF 2023 5 2025:KER:18348 6.6 In no way, the PIA shall relegate the applicants to obtain a declaratory court order to carry out change in date of birth, as per earlier procedure."
12. On an appreciation of the said provisions also, we are of the view that the procedure as above is prescribed on specific instances and going by the case projected by the appellant, we do not think that the appellant is entitled to get any benefit out of the same, since the appellant is not having a case that the application was submitted by the appellant based on any new or corrected birth certificate issued by the Authority under the Births and Deaths Act. On the other hand, clause 6.4 above makes it clear that the Passport Issuing Authority shall reject the case where the old birth certificate or the other date of birth documents which were used to obtain the first passport, were issued even before the new date of birth claimed by the applicant. As discussed above, the original entry in the birth certificate issued by the statutory authority shows the date of birth of the appellant as 20.12.1965 and therefore, even going by the procedure so prescribed, the appellant is not entitled to get any relief out of the same, since there is no correction of date of birth. Moreover the birth certificate issued by the statutory authority is the conclusive proof of the age and no manner of prejudice is caused to the appellant in that regard especially when the appellant had the advantage of securing any employment from an anterior date abroad by virtue of the date of birth in the passport.
13. So much so, as we have pointed out earlier, there is no challenge to the office memorandums extracted above, wherein peremptory stipulations are prescribed in the matter of entertainment of the application for correction of date of birth. Therefore, in our view, the stand taken by the Passport Issuing Authority, Kollam returning the application to the appellant cannot be said to be illegal or arbitrary, WP(C) NO. 22324 OF 2023 6 2025:KER:18348 justifying interference by the writ court. A writ court need only endeavour to identify whether there was any gross illegality or arbitrariness on the part of the statutory authority in discharging his function by exercising his power and authority. Taking into account the points raised by the appellant/writ petitioner in the appeal, the office memorandums, and the judgments rendered by this Court discussed above, we are of the opinion that the appellant has not made out any case justifying interference in the judgment of the learned single Judge."
This Court followed the law laid down in Vasu Sasi (supra) in the judgment in W.P(C)No.7188 of 2024 and held that if an application for correction of date of birth in the passport is made with inordinate delay without any plausible explanation, the application cannot be considered. In the facts of this case also the petitioner has no explanation for the delay of nearly 30 years in filing the application for correction of date of birth.
The writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P. JUDGE DK WP(C) NO. 22324 OF 2023 7 2025:KER:18348 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22324/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit- P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S PASSPORT NO.V2388001 DATED 20/8/2021 Exhibit- P2 TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE SREE NARAYANAPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH TO PETITIONER ON 8/11/2022 AS REGISTRATION NO.6/2022.
Exhibit- P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE MIGRATION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE SWAMI VIVEKANANDA BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION DATED 14/6/2001 Exhibit- P4 TRUE COPY OF THE AADHAR CARD OF THE PETITIONER Exhibit- P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DRIVING LICENSE OF THE PETITIONER, DATED 28.11.2005.
Exhibit- P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PAN CARD ISSUED BY THE INCOME TAX AUTHORITIES STATED PETITIONER'S DATE OF BIRTH AS 16.8.1973 Exhibit- P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 24/11/2022