UMAR ALI Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case of the petitioner is this: That he has passed M. Com. and, being unemployed, is interested in seeking employment outside the country. Petitioner no. 2 is his wife. She is M. Sc. Bio-Chemistry. They had applied for issuance of Passport under File No. SG1060376947112 dated 03.07.2012 and File No. SG1060714294212 dated 14.12.2012. Respondent no. 3 put on hold the process of issue of the Passports as respondent no. 2 had not recommended the same. The petitioners filed writ petition, OWP no. 1087/2013 which was disposed of by order dated 27.09.2013 by directing respondent no. 2 to ensure that material / detailed report sought for by respondent no. 3 is made available to the said authority who shall thereafter consider and take a decision on the claim of the petitioners for grant or otherwise of the Passport in accordance with law. Consequent upon the above Court direction, respondent no. 3 re-sent the case of the petitioners to the CID for detailed report. After the report was received, respondent no. 3 has passed order dated 14.10.2013 refusing to issue Passports to the petitioners on the grounds mentioned in Section 6(2) (b) (c) &(d) of the Passport Act, 1967.

(2.) The petitioners have challenged the aforesaid order in this petition, inter alia, on the ground that there is nothing adverse against them and that the passport is refused to them on irrational, arbitrary, unjust, unfair and unreasonable grounds, which is violative of the rights guaranteed to them under Article 21 of the Constitution.

(3.) On behalf of the State respondents, it was stated by Mr. Khan, learned AAG that there was no need of filing a reply on their behalf. However, respondent no. 3 has filed the counter wherein, among other things, it is stated that having no criminal record does not entitle a person to hold a passport and that grant of Passports in favour of the petitioners attracted Section 6(2) and hence the same were refused.