GUNVANTIBEN DAYARAMBHAI PATEL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Mr.Jitendra Malkan, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India, waives service for the respondent. All these petitions are voicing the same or similar grievance and seeking similar relief of direction to the Regional Passport Officer to, in effect, amend the passport so as to incorporate the correct date of birth. There was a limited consensus that detailed examination and narration of facts of each petition was not required and the legal issue involved in the matter was squarely covered by the judgment dated 24.2.2006 of this Court (Coram: M.R.Shah, J.) in Special Civil Application No.2716 of 2006 and allied matters, wherein important observations, as under, are made:

(2.) The relevant observations of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in JIGAR HARISH SHAH V. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER [AIR 2001 Bombay 60] are quoted in the aforesaid judgment as under:-

(3.) With the above observations, all the petitions were disposed relegating the petitioner to move an appropriate application for necessary correction and/or amendment and/or change in the date of birth and/or place of birth as the case may be and the Passport Authority was directed to consider the same after holding necessary enquiry as stated in the judgment and to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and on merits and in light of the observations made in the judgment. It was further directed that henceforth the passport authority shall not straightaway refuse to entertain the application and/or to accept the application for correction of the date of birth and place of birth without holding any enquiry and shall not straightaway without holding necessary enquiry call upon the applicant to obtain appropriate order from the Court. It was, however, clarified by the learned Assistant Solicitor General that the said order was under consideration for implementation or being carried in appeal.