AROCKIA JEYABALAN Vs. REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who holds an Indian passport, but who works in Singapore for the past about ten years, has come up with the first writ petition, seeking the issue of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the third respondent to return his passport bearing No.J3497386 seized from him by the Inspector of Police. He has come up with the second writ petition, challenging a Look Out Notice issued by the Police to the Chief Immigration Officer of the Bureau of Immigration.

(2.) I have heard Mr.J.Pothiraj, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Haja Mohideen Gisthi, learned Central Government Standing Counsel for the Passport Officer, Mrs.R.Maheswari, learned Senior Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the Department of Immigration, Mr.R. Vijayakumar, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the State and Mrs.C.Shyamala, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner's wife, who is the fourth respondent in the first writ petition.

(3.) The petitioner married the fourth respondent at Paramakkudi on 9.7.2009. Thereafter, both of them left for Singapore where the petitioner is employed. The petitioner's wife returned to India, for the delivery of her baby in August 2010. It appears that differences and disputes arose between the petitioner and his wife leading to the petitioner filing of a petition in I.D.O.P. No.8 of 2012 on the file of the Family Court at Ramanathapuram, seeking divorce on the ground of desertion and cruelty.