MANJULAL vs UNION OF INDIA

The petitioner is concerned with the correction of date of

birth in the Passport, applied for as per Exhibit P3.

The petitioner''s date of birth is shown in the Passport

as 25.05.1962. The petitioner submits that in fact his date of birth is

25.05.1968, as evidenced by Exhibit P2 certificate issued by the

Board of Government Examinations. The petitioner also submits

that the birth certificate also shows the date as 25.05.1968;

however, it is not produced before this Court.

The issue is covered by the judgment of this Court,

reported in Jayakumar v. Regional Passport Officer [2015 (3)

KLT 158], against the petitioner.

The learned Counsel for the petitioner relies on the

decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Union of India v.

Sunil Kumar [2015 (3) KLT 501]. The writ petition from which

the appeal arose was filed against a restriction in the earlier

Circular No.VI/401/2/5/2001 dated 29.10.2007, wherein the

Passport Officer was conferred with the authority to reject summarily

any application made for correction of date of birth beyond two

years. The learned Single Judge declared the restrictive clause to be

void and inoperative. In the appeal, the Division Bench reversed the

judgment and left remedy of the writ petitioners to approach the Civil

Court as provided in the Circular existing as on that date.

Subsequently the said Circular has been withdrawn

and a new Office Memorandum [O.M.No.VI/401/2/5/2001 dated

26.11.2015] issued based on the judgment in Jayakumar. In the

said Office Memorandum there is no restriction with reference to the

difference in the date of birth; but, however, there is a restriction in

approaching the Passport Officer beyond five years of the issuance

of the Passport, for correction of date of birth. This was also in

compliance with the findings of this Court in Jayakumar, wherein it

was held that even if the difference sought to be corrected was of 20

years if a person approaches immediately after the issuance of the

Passport, the correction shall be allowed taking it as a bona fide

mistake. It is also submitted by the Central Government Counsel that

as of now there is no provision in the Office Memorandum for a

correction based on a Civil Court''s order.

In the above circumstances, the writ petition fails and it

stands dismissed. No costs.