Karnataka High Court
Gonpo Gyaltsen vs Union Of India on 27 January, 2014
Author: A.S.Bopanna
Bench: A.S.Bopanna
1 WP 48458/2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE A.S.BOPANNA
WRIT PETITION No.48458/2013 (GM-PASS)
BETWEEN:
GONPO GYALTSEN
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
S/O LATE NAMGYAL
R/AT 782, 8TH CROSS,
10TH MAIN, II STAGE,
INDIRANAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 038,
KARNATAKA.
... PETITIONER
(By Sri.V.SRINIVASA RAGHAVAN, Adv.)
AND:
1. UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
ROOM NO.20, 1ST FLOOR,
PATIALA HOUSE ANNEXE,
NEW DELHI - 110 001.
2. UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS
2 WP 48458/2013
NORTH BLOCK,
NEW DELHI - 110 001.
3. REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE,
REPRESENTED BY THE PASSPORT OFFICER,
80 FEET ROAD, EIGHTH BLOCK,
KORAMANGALA,
BANGALORE - 560 095.
... RESPONDENTS
(By Smt.NAGASHREE.B.L., Adv. FOR
Sri.KALYANBASAVARAJ, ASG FOR R1 TO R3)
****
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ORDER DATED 03.04.2013 AT ANNEXURE-A
ISSUED BY THE R-3 IN CONSULTATION WITH THE R-1,
DECLARING THAT THE PETITIONER IS NOT A CITIZEN OF
INDIA AND CONSEQUENTLY REFUSING TO ISSUE HIM
WITH A PASSPORT.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE
COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court assailing the order dated 03.04.2013 impugned at Annexure - 'A' to the petition. By the said communication, the 3rd respondent has informed the petitioner that his 3 WP 48458/2013 application for passport facilities cannot be considered without an Identity Certificate since the petitioner is a Tibetian National and in that regard, the petitioner has been advised to apply to Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi as per the procedure of the Indian Citizenship.
2. The case of the petitioner is that his parents had settled in Kushalnagar, Coorg District and the petitioner was born in India on 19.12.1963. The Certificate of Birth as relied upon is at Annexure - 'B' to the petition. At an earlier point, the petitioner had been issued the passport and presently, when the petitioner had sought for renewal of the same, the impugned endorsement has been issued. Hence the petitioner is aggrieved.
3. The issue relating to the Citizenship of a Tibetian, born in India had already arisen for consideration before this Court in W.P.No.15437/2013 disposed of on 07.08.2013. This Court on taking note 4 WP 48458/2013 of the view taken by the High Court of Delhi in W.P.(C) No.12179/2009 decided on 22.12.2010 wherein all aspects relating to Indian Citizenship had been considered, has taken the view that in respect of a Tibetian born in India between the periods 26.01.1950 and 01.07.1987, such person is to be automatically considered as a Citizen of India by birth. In that view, when the said issue has already been settled, when the petitioner herein claims that his date of birth is 19.12.1963, the only aspect on that issue which requires to be considered by the 3rd respondent is to verify the veracity of the claim of date of birth and the documents that are produced to establish that his date of birth is 19.12.1963. If that is established, the request of the petitioner would have to be considered without directing the petitioner to approach the Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi as directed in the Communication dated 03.04.2013.
5 WP 48458/2013
4. In that view, the order impugned dated 03.04.2013 is quashed. A direction is issued to the 3rd respondent to keep in view the decision rendered by this Court in W.P.No.15437/2013 dated 07.08.2013, verify the veracity of the claim of the date of birth and in that light, consider the request of the petitioner for issue of passport dehors the reason indicated in the impugned communication, which is, in any event been quashed. The request of the petitioner for issue of passport shall be considered as expeditiously as possible but not later than two months from the date of the necessary verifications from the competent authorities are received by the issuing authority.
In terms of the above, the petition stands disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE dh*