AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Murali Purushothaman, J
The petitioner has applied for passport before the second respondent. However, the second respondent, by Ext.P1 letter dated 14.06.2020, sought
for explanation from the petitioner as to the suppression of material information about his employment with the Indian Cost Guard.
The petitioner has produced Ext.P5 communication dated 1.10.2021 issued by the first respondent whereby the petitioner was informed that he has
been dismissed from service of the Indian Cost Guard with effect from 30.12.2020 in accordance with Rule 25A of the Cost Guard (General) Rules,
1986. According to the petitioner, as on the date of submission of application for passport, he was not aware of the order of dismissal and accordingly,
the same was not stated in the application. The petitioner contends that there is no suppression of materials or facts in the application for passport.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Krishna, the learned counsel for the respondents.
The learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner can approach the second respondent by producing Ext.P5 letter and the
application of the petitioner for passport will be processed, in accordance with law.
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to approach the second respondent with Ext.P5 letter within a period of
three weeks from today, in which event, the second respondent will consider the application for passport, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as
possible.