A.N. Ramalingam Naidu, rep. by Power Agent Sathiyabama vs The Union of India (UOI) and Consulate General of India

M. Jaichandren, J.—Heard Mr. M. Subash Babu, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, as well as Mr. Arun Kumar,

the learned Additional Central Government Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents.

The main contention of the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner is that the date of birth of the Petitioner has been wrongly

shown in the passport, as 14.11.1955, instead of 18.02.1961. He had also submitted that the Judicial Magistrate, Vilathikulam, had issued a birth

certificate, on 10.06.2010. It has also been submitted that, based on the certificate issued on 10.06.2010, the Government of Tamil Nadu had

issued the birth certificate, on 02.07.2010, stating that the correct date of birth of the Petitioner is 18.02.1961. Since, the Petitioner is employed in

Dubai, the Petitioner''s correct date of birth is to be entered in his passport, as 18.02.1961.

At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents had submitted that on the

production of all the necessary records, including the birth certificate issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu, on 02.07.2010, showing the

Petitioner''s date of birth as 18.02.1961, the second Respondent would consider the request of the Petitioner to change the date of birth of the

Petitioner in his passport bearing No. H 7105061 and pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as

possible.

In view of the said submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents, since, no further orders are necessary in

the present writ petition, the writ petition stands closed.