Susanth Mathew vs The Passport Officer

Antony Dominic, J.—Petitioner is a football player. In order to participate in the Football Matches in connection with the Asian Football Cup, Petitioner has to travel to Thailand, Hongkong and Indonesia. He was issued an Indian passport bearing No. 2541049. The passport expired on 06-10- 2010.But, however, the Petitioner did not make an application within time to get it extended. Therefore, he made an application before the Respondents on 24-01-2011 for a fresh passport, with a request to issue a passport under the Tatkal scheme.

It is stated that along with the application, the old passport was also surrendered by the Petitioner.

According to the Petitioner, subsequently, one copy of the application made by him was returned with an endorsement to resubmit the same with the verification certificate from the concerned police station. It is stated that thereupon he obtained Ext. P3 verification certificate from the Sub Inspector of Police, Ambalavayal. Ext. P3 verification certificate along with Ext. P3 (a), the identity card of the Sub Inspector, was submitted before the Respondent. There upon, the Respondent took objection that Ext. P3 certificate was not in the official letter pad of the Sub Inspector and that the verification certificate has to be in the official letter pad. Petitioner again approached the Sub Inspector, who thereupon, issued Ext. P4 letter stating that he does not have any official letter pad and that there fore it was not possible to issue verification certificate in the letter head.

Petitioner states that he has to obtain and submit the passport before 03-02-2011 and it is in these circumstances, this writ petition has been filed. It is stated in the writ petition that Petitioner was summoned to join in the East Bengal Team at Calcutta, so he has left for Calcutta on 28-01-2010 and it is therefore that his brother has filed this writ petition on his behalf.

In view of the urgency noticed above, the Assistant Solicitor General was directed to obtain instructions in the matter. Instructions have been obtained from the Respondent and from which, it is seen that on receipt of the application and the expired passport, it was noticed that the date of birth indicated in the passport was fabricated and thereupon a fine of `5,000/- was imposed on the Petitioner which has been remitted by him.

As far as the police verification report is concerned, it is submitted on behalf of the Respondent that in terms of the system followed by the Respondent, the police verification report has to be in the official letter pad of the officer who issues the same. It is stated that the Petitioner has to comply with that requirement.

Thus, the only objection that now stands in the way of the Petitioner is that Ext .P3 verification certificate is not in the official letter pad of the Sub Inspector of Police, who issued the same. In my view, this objection is absolutely sustainable. First of all, there is no statutory provision mandating that the official letter pad should be used for issuing the police verification certificate. Secondly, if the officer, who issues the certificate, does not have an official letter pad, that cannot result in a situation where a citizen is deprived of his valuable time to be issued a passport. Therefore, I am not willing to accept the contention raised by the Respondent in this behalf, particularly having regard to the consequences that the Petitioner, a youngster, will be loosing his opportunity to participate in the Asian Football Cup Match, which is a rare opportunity.

Therefore, I direct that, on the production of a copy of this judgment, if the application made by the Petitioner is otherwise in order, the Respondent will accept Ext. P3, ignoring the fact that the same is not in the official letter pad of the Sub Inspector of Police, Ambalavayal, who has issued the same.

On that basis, the application of the Petitioner will be processed under the Tatkal scheme and passport will be issued to him.

Writ petition is disposed of as above.