AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B. Rajendran, J.—The Petitioner association which according to them isa registered association and recognised by the IATA and they have only 10 members whose names are given in the list to theCourt. In the year 2003, the first Respondent has introduced Passport Seva Project as one of the mission mode projectsunder the National E-Governance Programme. According to theassociation, the total demand for passports is expected togrow much more in the year 2011. The Government has announcedthat there are 77 Passport Seva Kendras to be opened in thecountry. Bangalore and Chandigarh were identified as one ofpilot locations for the project and pilot sites became functional in June 2009 and the first Respondent signed an agreement on the Passport Seva Project with M/S. TataConsultancy Services, the third Respondent herein.
The third Respondent has been exonerated by the petitioner and he has made an endorsement to that effect.According to the Petitioner association, earlier, such projectwas challenged before the Punjab and Haryana High Court andultimately, the project was approved by the Haryana High Court. They would only contend that they are not challengingthe rights given to the Tata Consultancy Services and theironly concern is that under the guise of starting of thePassport Seva Kendra Project, their right of livelihood shouldnot be affected and they should not be prohibited from andsubmitting the passport applications for and on behalf of their clients, since the rights are recognised by theMinistry of External Affairs the right to assist the peoplefor getting the passports should not be affected. Hence, thepresent writ petition.
Mr. K.K.Senthilvelan, learned Additional SolicitorGeneral, on notice, reported that the Punjab and Haryana High Court decision will be binding on the Petitioner associationand therefore, there is No. deviation and as far as TrichyProject is concerned. The Passport Seva Kendra Project atTrichy is to be operational from 29.06.2011 and they aremaking all efforts to do everything including the requirements of fingerprint and digitisation of photograph. In thisconnection, they also issued a circular on 20.06.2011, andclause 5 of the said circular would indicate that the travelagents can continue in submitting the applications forms underthe existing system till such date the Passport Seva Kendrastarts functioning which would be notified shortly. Therefore,according to them, even as per the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, the applicants who have difficulty infilling up/online filling up of passport application andstatus enquiry of application may seek assistance from TravelAgents in the new Passport Seva Project. Therefore, Travelagents may still play role to that extent in the new PassportSeva Project.
Heard the submissions made by the learned Counsel oneither side. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken upfor final disposal.
Originally, the third Respondent was impleaded as aparty. Now, the Petitioner has exonerated the third Respondentand it is also made clear that the Petitioner is notchallenging the grant of contract to the third Respondent andhence, they have stated that there is nothing against thethird Respondent.
The only question they raise is under the guise of the new Passport Seva Kendra Project, the livelihood of the petitioner association should not be affected. The same factswere questioned before the Punjab and Haryana High Courtincluding the contract given to the Tata Consultancy Services.But ultimately, even that was given up and after elaborateargument, a detailed order was passed in the Punjab and Haryana High Court in respect of the very same project whereinit has been held as follows:
Learned Counsel for the Petitioner-Association at the outset does not press theirchallenge to the award of contract to RespondentNo. 4 for submission of the Passport applications.He, however, submits that whateverprivileges/authorization has been given by theGovernment of India to the registered andrecognised Travel Agents, namely, the members of the Petitioner-Association should be allowed to beperformed/exercised by them. In addition, hesubmits and rightly so that the Respondents intheir reply/affidavit have recognized andacknowledged the contribution made by the travelagents and to that extent only they be allowed toperform their role. In this regard, it would beappropriate to reproduce the following "Role ofTravel Agents under the Passport Save Projects"highlighted by the Respondents in their written
xxx
statement:
XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX
An applicant who has difficulty in fillingup/online filling up of passport application andstatus enquiry of application may seek assistancefrom Travel Agents in the new Passport SevaProject. Therefore, Travel agents may still playrole to that extent in the new passport SevaProject. However, such applicant has to come to thePassport Seva Kendra for submission of application,fingerprint and digitization of photographrequirements and the Travel agents will have norole in that process.
The Respondents have further averred that:
xxx
XXX XXX XXX XXX
The Ministry of External Affairs has notrecognised the Association of travel agents, notravel agents for passport services. The Ministryin fact on 23rd July, 1992 had abolished the systemof recognition of travel agents. However, thetravel agents were free to deposit passportapplication forms in the passport offices like anyother individual, but with authorization letterfrom the applicant. A travel agent''s role was thuslimited to mere deposit of a limited number of application forms in the passport offices on behalfof applicants, insofar as fresh and reissue of passports were concerned.
xxx
XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX
Keeping in view the above-reproducedstand taken by the Respondents in their counter-reply, the writ petition is disposed of with adirection to Respondents No. 1 and 3 to adhere to their above-reproduced stand and also follow theNotification/Rules, if any, framed/notified by theGovernment of India from time to time granting anytype of privileges/assignment to the recognisedTravel Agents".
The project which is now sought to be started inTrichy is an All India phenomenon by the Government of India.They have identified more then 77 centres and out of whichTrichy is also one of the centres. Since the pilot projectwhich is started in Bangalore and Chandigarh, it wasquestioned and decided by the Punjab and Haryana High Courtwhich is similar to the facts and points raised here, hencethe decision squarely applies here. In fact, that judgmentcategorically brings out the difficulty which the presentPetitioner have pointed out in this case, that is referred toin paragraph 4 of the judgment which is also equallyapplicable to the facts of the present case.
Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner wouldbring to the notice of this Court that in the External AffairsMinistry website, on 27.06.2011, it is stated that there were four channels for submission of passport applications areextracted hereunder:
Channel 1. Physical submission of passportapplications at Passport Seva Kendra (PSK)Channel 2. Submission of passportapplications onlineChannel 3. Physical submission of passportapplications at District Passport Cell (DPC)/SpeedPost Centre (SPC)/ Citizen Service Centre (CSC) Channel
Submission of passport applications at Regional Passport Office (RPO)/Passport Office (PO)
Therefore, learned Senior Counsel would contend thaton 27.06.2011 they have stated in the website that there is afourth channel for submission of passport applications atRegional Passport Office and Passport Office is stillfunctioning, definitely the members of the association cansubmit their applications to the Regional Passport Office andPassport office even after the opening of the Passport SevaKendra.
Further, in paragraphs 4 and 5 of the circularissued by the Ministry of External Affairs, dated 20.06.2011,it is stated as follows:
In view of this the Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi has issued a circular regardingthe role of travel agents under the Passport SevaProject.
As per the circular, ''An applicant who hasdifficulty in filling up/online filling up ofpassport application form or wants to enquire aboutthe status of his application may seek assistancefrom Travel Agents in the new Passport Seva Project.Therefore, Travel agents may still play a role tothat extent in the new Passport Seva Project.However, such applicant has to come to the PassportSeva Kendra for submission of application,fingerprint and digitization of photographrequirements and the Travel agents will have No. rolein that process.'' 5. The TAs can continue submitting theapplication forms under the existing system tillsuch date the PSKs starts functioning, which wouldbe notified shortly
Learned Counsel for Respondents would categorically state that this will apply all over India and as far as Trichycentre is concerned, it is going to start from 29.06.2011 andafter completing the requirements of fingerprint anddigitisation, they have to close down the Regional PassportOffice. When Passport Seva Kendra is fully commissioned andthen naturally, they have got right to close down the RegionalPassport Offices. Therefore, suffice to state that since the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court is equallyapplicable to the facts of the present case, I fully agreewith the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
In the result, recording the circular of theMinistry of External Affairs, dated 20.06.2011 especially inParagraphs 4 and 5 which clearly spell out the role of theTravel Agents in the new Passport Seva Kendra and also theright of the Respondents to close down the Regional Passportoffices whenever the Passport Seva Kendra is fully operationalafter notification, the members of the Petitioner associationcan only play the role as per the circular dated 20.06.2011. With this observation, the writ petition is disposed of. No. costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.