Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 17 (0.39 seconds)
Documents citing N.A.Nazar vs Union Of India on 29 October, 2008

Michael A.F vs P.M.Ashok Kumar on 13 November, 2014

(iv) Another judgment relied upon is Nazar v. Union of India (2013 (4) KLT 34), in which the learned Single Judge of this Court relied upon another judgment in Swapna Siju v. Union of India (2012 (4) KLT 419) and reiterated the position that in the absence of the extract of register of births and the birth certificate issued by the competent authority in respect of a person born before 26/1/1989, an extract of the school admission register can be relied upon by the Passport Officer for the purpose of making changes in the entries in the passport.
Kerala High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 1 - A Shaffique - Full Document

Jayakumar vs The Regional Passport Officer on 13 March, 2015

insist for a Birth Certificate issued by the Registrar of Births and Deaths, (ii) whether SSLC Book would be sufficient and (iii) whether for non-production of Birth Certificate Section 6 of the Passports Act, 1967 [for brevity "the Act"] could be invoked for rejecting an application for Passport. The Court found that the Act having not specified the document to be produced in proof of date of birth, it was perfectly valid for the PIA to have required production of birth certificate. Section 6 was held to have no effect in the case of defective applications, which defect, in the said case, was the adequate proof of date of birth being not available. Nazar v. Union of India [2013 (4) KLT 34], again a Single Bench judgment, differed slightly from Abida (supra) and found that the birth certificate cannot be the sole basis for correction of date of birth for the persons born before 26.01.1989. It was held that in such cases and also in cases where a person has not completed SSLC, some document to substantiate the date of birth would be sufficient. These decisions do not have any application as far as the cases with respect to correction of date of birth is concerned, except for the WP(C).No.9073 of 2015-H & - 6 - connected cases.
Kerala High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - K V Chandran - Full Document

Jayakumar vs The Regional Passport Officer on 13 March, 2015

insist for a Birth Certificate issued by the Registrar of Births and Deaths, (ii) whether SSLC Book would be sufficient and (iii) whether for non-production of Birth Certificate Section 6 of the Passports Act, 1967 [for brevity "the Act"] could be invoked for rejecting an application for Passport. The Court found that the Act having not specified the document to be produced in proof of date of birth, it was perfectly valid for the PIA to have required production of birth certificate. Section 6 was held to have no effect in the case of defective applications, which defect, in the said case, was the adequate proof of date of birth being not available. Nazar v. Union of India [2013 (4) KLT 34], again a Single Bench judgment, differed slightly from Abida (supra) and found that the birth certificate cannot be the sole basis for correction of date of birth for the persons born before 26.01.1989. It was held that in such cases and also in cases where a person has not completed SSLC, some document to substantiate the date of birth would be sufficient. These decisions do not have any application as far as the cases with respect to correction of date of birth is concerned, except for the WP(C).No.9073 of 2015-H & - 6 - connected cases.
Kerala High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 17 - K V Chandran - Full Document

Nazar vs Union Of India on 27 March, 2014

Similarly, in the case between Nazar v. Union of India reported in 2013 (4) KLT 34, this Court held that the Register of Births and Birth Certificates issued by such authority concerned need not be the sole basis for the correction of the date of birth of persons born before 26.1.1989 and that it is not necessary to produce an extract from Register of Births to prove the date of birth in such cases and that in the case of persons who have not completed SSLC or has left school before that, production of SSLC Book is not necessary by virtue of the instructions in the passport information booklet and that the relevant certificate showing the Date of Birth Certificate issued by the school last attended by such applicant is sufficient and it is for the competent passport officers to consider and ascertain the genuineness and correctness of such certificates by calling for the particulars through their own W.P.(C) No.7748/2014 8 machinery or through the school concerned or get the verification as to the factual details through the police or deploy such other source or machinery.
Kerala High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - A Thomas - Full Document

Dinesh Devgun S/O Shri Surinder Devgan vs Union Of India Through The Secretary To ... on 27 October, 2010

In view of the above proposition of law laid down by the Honble Supreme Court, the U.T. Chandigarh, while adopting the notification dated 12.12.2006 (Annexure A-3) issued by the State of Punjab introducing new CPF Scheme for its employees w.e.f. 1.1.2004 vide order dated 14.2.2007 (Annexure A-2) and also making necessary amendment in the relevant rules w.e.f. 1.1.2004, could not make it effective from any other date as the complete scheme was made effective and the said scheme takes effect w.e.f. 1.1.2004. We do not find any illegality in the order dated 14.2.2007, Annexure A-2 or the Circular dated 12.12.2006 (Annexure A-3) as it does not make any amendment to the basic scheme. The date from which the Scheme is to take effect is mentioned in the Scheme itself. We do not find that any grounds have been made out to interfere with the date from which the new Scheme has been made effective in U.T. Chandigarh i.e. 1.1.2004. In so far as claim of ante-dating of their appointment is concerned, that can also not be accepted in view of the rejection of such claim in an earlier petition. Under some misconception, the applicants contributed towards GPF Scheme and such amount is now being refunded to them and they are to be made members of CPF Scheme, having been substantively appointed after 1.1.2004. This can also not be faulted with.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh Cites 7 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Sasi.A.R vs Regional Passport Officer on 13 December, 2013

2. The petitioner was admittedly born before 26.01.1989. In the case of those born on and after 26.01.1989, the extract from the Register of Births has to be produced before the passport issuing authority. In the case of those born before 26.01.1989, it is enough if either an extract from the Register of Births or the Secondary School Leaving Certificate or a certificate issued by the school authorities is produced. The records disclose that the petitioner's birth was not registered under the provisions contained in the W.P.(C) No.31425/2013 2 Registration of Births and Deaths Act and the rules framed thereunder. The petitioner has also not passed the Secondary School Leaving Certificate Examination. A learned Single Judge of this Court has in Nazar v. Union of India (2013 (4) KLT 34) held that a certificate issued by the school authorities where the petitioner had undergone his studies can be relied on after verification and correction effected on the basis of the school records.
Kerala High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - P N Ravindran - Full Document

K.Ismail vs Union Of India on 15 November, 2013

2. It is evident from the pleadings that the petitioner has not so far moved the Regional Passport Officer with such a request. The petitioner's birth was not registered under the provisions contained in the Registration of Births and Deaths Act and the rules framed thereunder. The petitioner has also not passed the Secondary School Leaving Certificate Examination. A learned Single Judge of this Court has in Nazar v. Union of India (2013 (4) KLT 34) held that a certificate issued by the school authorities where the petitioner had W.P.(C) No. 3230 of 2014 2 undergone his studies can be relied on after verification and correction effected on the basis of the school records.
Kerala High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - P N Ravindran - Full Document

Muhammed Ashraf C.K vs Union Of India on 26 March, 2009

2. It is evident from the pleadings that the petitioner has not so far moved the Regional Passport Officer with such a request. The records disclose that the petitioner's birth was not registered under the provisions contained in the Registration of Births and Deaths Act and the rules framed thereunder. The petitioner has also not passed the Secondary School Leaving Certificate Examination. A learned Single Judge of this Court has in Nazar v. Union of India (2013 (4) KLT 34) W.P.(C) No. 3228 of 2014 2 held that a certificate issued by the school authorities where the petitioner had undergone his studies can be relied on after verification and correction effected on the basis of the school records.
Kerala High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 2 - P N Ravindran - Full Document
1   2 Next