Madras High Court: In a writ petition praying to issue a writ of declaration, to declare the cancellation of the petitioner’s passport as illegal and consequently direct the Passport Officer to issue passport for the petitioner within the time frame stipulated by this Court, G.R. Swaminathan, J. has said that as, the petitioner has challenged the basic premises on which the impugned action is resting. Therefore, the question of granting declaration does not arise. However, as the petitioner has suffered disproportionately, it permitted him to submit a fresh application before the Passport officer.
In the case at hand, the petitioner applied to the Regional Passport Officer in the year 1994 and obtained passport. He was working as Mason in Singapore. The passport was subsequently renewed. The petitioner’s passport expired in the year 2014. He once again applied for renewal through an agent. The agent had given false particulars. Therefore, the petitioner was asked to appear for enquiry before the police authority. The petitioner appeared before the police authority and surrendered his passport. The petitioner’s passport has been impounded. That led to the filing of this writ petition.
The petitioner contended that the impounding was done without notice to the petitioner. The petitioner has sought a declaration that the cancellation of his passport is illegal.
The Court noted that the petitioner was employed as labourer in foreign countries. He was working in Singapore and later in Middle East. The action taken by the passport officer cannot be faulted. If false particulars and false documents are given, the Passport Authority has no option but to impound the passport. As, the petitioner has challenged the basic premises on which the impugned action is resting. Therefore, the question of granting declaration does not arise.
The Court noted that it is a fact that the citizens take the services of middlemen and agents to transact with the authorities. In this case, the agent employed by the petitioner had indulged in fraud. To speed up the process of obtaining a passport, he has given false particulars and during verification, the same came to light. However, the Court noted that for almost nine years, the petitioner has been without any passport, and his life and career has been affected. Even if the petitioner had committed a mistake, he cannot be condemned for ever.
Thus, as the petitioner has suffered disproportionately, the Court has permitted him to submit a fresh application before the Passport officer.
[S. Chandran v. Regional Passport Officer, 2023 SCC OnLine Mad 5034, Order dated 11-07-2023]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For Petitioner: Advocate S. Rajasekar;
For Respondent: Advocate S. Jeyasingh.
