S.PAUL JEYASTAN Vs. THE PASSPORT OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved against the proceedings dated 01.04.2011, issued by the first respondent and consequently, seeking for a direction to the first respondent to return the original passport of the petitioner bearing No.J. 5659868 dated 14.02.2011.

(2.) It is seen that the petitioner applied for issuance of passport before the first respondent and based on such application, the first respondent issued a passport bearing No.J. 5659868, dated 14.02.2011. After nearly two months of issuance of such passport, the first respondent issued the present impugned communication to the petitioner calling upon him to give an explanation within ten days as to why action should not be initiated against the petitioner by alleging that the petitioner has obtained the passport by furnishing a false document, namely, birth certificate. According to the first respondent, the birth certificate submitted by the petitioner along with the application was not issued by the Commissioner, Registrar of Births and Deaths III Division, Thoothukudi Municipality. On 12.04.2011, the petitioner's father sent an explanation to the impugned notice and however, the petitioner filed the present writ petition before this Court seeking the relief as stated supra.

(3.) This Court, by an order dated 24.07.2011, restraining the first respondent from cancelling the passport till 09.06.2011. Even though the interim order was not extended thereafter, the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India appearing for the first respondent submitted that the passport of the petitioner has not been cancelled, in view of the pendency of the present writ petition.