UNION OF INDIA Vs. ESKAY TOURS AND TRAVELS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Union of India, Passport Officer and Assistant Passport Officer, bangalore, have has filed these appeals against the order dated 5-7-2001 passed by the learned single Judge in W. P. No. 37152/ 2000 C/w 7351/2001 setting aside the impugned orders Annexures-H and K dated 7-7-2000 and the letter dated 13-10-2000, annexure-F dated 18-7-2000 and Annexureg the letter dated 28-11 -2000 issued by the 2nd respondent, and directing the respondents to apply the earlier policy which had been existing prior to 24-7-1992.

(2.) THE above writ petitions were filed by the respondent-M/s Eskay Tours and Travels, which is a travelling agent dealing in passport matters, being aggrieved by the formulation of policy decision and the issuance of Annexure-F dated 18-7-2000 by the 1st appellant. The respondent challenged the act of the authority restricting the acceptance of the applications for issuance of passports from the recognised travelling agent, as illegal and arbitrary. It is stated that earlier the travelling agents were permitted to file any number of applications for passports and receive the passports accordingly, but without assigning any reasons, annexure-F with regard to the guidelines in respect of filing the applications for passports and Annexure-G reducing the number of applications to be filed from 20 Nos. to 2 nos. per day per travelling agent, have been issued and are liable to be quashed. The learned single Judge, on consideration, allowed the writ petitions vide order dated 5-7-2001. Against that order, this writ appeal has been filed.

(3.) SRI N. Devadas, learned Central Government Standing Counsel for the appellant submits that the learned single Judge has erred in interfering with the withdrawal of facilities without taking note of Annexure-F dated 18-7-2000 issued by the Ministry of external Affairs, which clearly gives the reasons for withdrawal of the facilities given to a travelling agent. He further submits that the respondent is one of the travelling agents and there are about 163 travelling agents in karnataka alone; that only those travel agents who are recognised by IATA and are members of the Travel Agents Association of India would be eligible for recognition by the concerned passport offices for submission of application forms for passports and that in the circumstances, if all the travelling agents are permitted to file applications, there would be fraud or mischief in getting the passports and hence the revised guidelines restricting the number of applications to be filed have been Issued. The learned single Judge has erred In taking the concept that the travelling agents have right to file any number of applications before the concerned authority for getting the passports ready. He further submits that in similar matter the Andhra Pradesh High Court by its order dated 30-10-2000 passed in W. P. 3594/2000 has not interfered in the matter and so also the Division Bench of the kerala High Court in W. A. No. 1434/1992 dated 28-6-2000 (reported in AIR 2001 kerala 112) upholding the revised policy as well as the decision taken by the Government of India through the Ministry of External Affairs. He also submits that after taking into consideration all the relevant pros and cons and the interest of national security, the communications dated 17-10-2000 and 20-10-2000 have been sent to all the concerned officers of passport in India and so also to the Bangalore Branch office stating that the above policy decision has been implemented. He submits that the learned single Judge has erred in not taking note of the same. It is argued that the Government is competent to take a policy decision from time to time keeping in view the national security, which should not be interfered with, and the order of the learned single judge is liable to be set aside.