ASHOK SANDHU Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking direction to respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to look into complaint/representation of the petitioner and take appropriate action against respondent No.4.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that petitioner with respect to the application seeking passport of Rohit Sandhu (minor) has not prepared the documents. He has not signed any document with respect to aforesaid application, however, at the behest of respondent No.4 he has been implicated. The petitioner has moved a representation to passport authority which is having complete documents relating to passport issued to Rohit Sandhu. The petitioner has filed complaint with respondent authorities to look into his grievance and ascertain who had applied for the passport issued to Rohit Sandhu.

(3.) Mr. Arvind Seth, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 submits that passport authority has not received any representation from the petitioner and if petitioner files representation, it would be looked into and an appropriate order would be passed within 6 weeks.