Kerala High Court
Sureshkumar vs The Union Of India on 24 September, 2019
Author: S.V.Bhatti
Bench: S.V.Bhatti
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI
TUESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 / 2ND ASWINA, 1941
WP(C).No.24733 OF 2019(N)
PETITIONER:
SURESHKUMAR
AGED 51 YEARS
S/O. VIJAYAN, THANDASSERY HOUSE, KIZHUTHANI DESOM,
KARALAM VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK,
THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.N.L.BITTO
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE UNION OF INDIA
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS MINISTRY, NEW DELHI - 110 001.
2 THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE,
PANAMPILLY NAGAR, COCHIN.
SMT. KRISHNA FOR ASGI P. VIJAYAKUMAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.09.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.24733 OF 2019(N) -2-
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 24th day of September 2019 The petitioner prays for the following reliefs;
"i) Issue a writ of certiorari or an appropriate writ, quashing Ext.P5 show cause notice SCN/309095951/19 dated by the respondents dated 2/7/2019 in the interest of justice.
ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to issue renewed passport to the petitioner within stipulated time limits in the interest of justice.
ii) To pass any such or further orders as the petitioner may seek and this Hon'ble Court deem fit to grant."
2. Heard Sri.Bitto N.L, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Krishna, holding for Sri.P.Vijayakumar, the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India. Ext.P5 communication dated 02.09.2019 is sent by the second respondent to the petitioner. Ext.P5 adverts to the Police Verification Report and non-disclosure of cases pending in O.P No.1068/2017 and O.P No.607/2018. The second respondent through Ext.P5 called upon the petitioner to stay petitioner's case on the adverse notings in the Police Report received in WP(C).No.24733 OF 2019(N) -3- this behalf.
3. Petitioner through Ext.P6, has explained that the OPs referred to in Ext.P5 are matrimonial disputes and that there is no order prohibiting the petitioner from any way going out of the country.
4. Therefore, firstly its is stated by referring pending OPs non-consideration of petitioner's request for grant of passport is illegal and amounts to refusing to exercise the jurisdiction conferred on second respondent by the Passport Act, 1967. It is alternatively prayed that, the second respondent considers Ext.P6 reply expeditiously and passes orders as are necessary in the circumstances of the case. Sri.Bitto N.L, does not oppose to disposing of the writ petition by directing the second respondent to consider Exts.P5 and P6 expeditiously and pass orders. Hence the following order:
a) Petitioner, is given liberty to re-submit Ext.P6 reply accompanied by a copy of this judgment within one week from today.WP(C).No.24733 OF 2019(N) -4-
b) Second respondent considers and passes orders in accordance with law and by duly taking note of the explanation given by the petitioner through Ext.P6 within two weeks thereafter.
Sd/-
S.V.BHATTI JUDGE JS WP(C).No.24733 OF 2019(N) -5- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE PASSPORT NO. H 6681577 ISSUED ON 06/10/2009 OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE OP.1068 OF 2017 OF THE FAMILY COURT IRINJALAKUDA DATED 20/11/2017.
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE OP.706 OF 2018 OF THE FAMILY COURT IRINJALAKUDA DATED 09/07/2018.
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ONLINE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 20/08/2019 BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS.
EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENTS AS SCN/309095951/19 DATED 02/07/2019.
EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER DATED 05/09/2019.