Patna High Court
Shouzeb Sharique NeyaziversusThe Union of India
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
A genuine matriculation certificate is a valid proof of date of birth, and the passport authority must correct the DOB in the original passport and renew it.
Summary
The petitioner, Shouzeb Sharique Neyazi, filed a writ petition seeking the acceptance of his matriculation certificate as valid proof of his date of birth and the issuance of a corrected passport. He alleged that a discrepancy between the date of birth in his earlier passport and the one in his matriculation certificate led the Regional Passport Officer to refuse processing his application. The petitioner relied on the Passport Rules, 1980 (as amended 2016), Section 24 of the Passport Act, 1967, and a 2016 Ministry of External Affairs notification that recognize school leaving or matriculation certificates as valid proof of birth. The respondents argued that existing guidelines, including a 2025 notification, govern corrections to date of birth and that the petitioner must comply with those procedures. The Court, citing the precedent Nida Amina Ahmad v. Union of India (2023), held that a genuine matriculation certificate is an acceptable document for proof of birth and directed the passport authority to examine it, correct the date of birth in the original passport if found genuine, and renew the passport without undue delay. The petition was consequently disposed with the said directions.
Issues considered
- Whether a matriculation certificate is a valid document for proof of date of birth under the Passport Act and Rules.
- Whether the Regional Passport Officer must correct the date of birth in the existing passport based on the matriculation certificate and renew it.
Legislation cited
- Passport Act, 1967 — s. 24, 2(ii)
- Passport Rules, 1980 (as amended 2016)
Subjects
- passport
- date of birth
- matriculation certificate
- proof of birth
- Section 24
- Passport Rules
- correction of passport
- writ petition
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10498 of 2025
======================================================
Shouzeb Sharique Neyazi Son of Mohammad Sharique Hussain Nayazi,
Resident of Flat No.A-1105, Expression Exotica, Gola Road, Danapur,
Danapur Cantt P.S.- Rupaspura, District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs,
Government of India, South Block, New Delhi.
2. The Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India, New Delhi.
3. The Secretary Ministry of External Affairs, Govt. of India, New Delhi.
4. The Regional Passport Officer, Passport Seva Kendra, Aaron IT Park, PLot
No. VI/I and 2, Patliputra Industrial Estate Patna, Bihar.
5. The Officer-in-Charge, Passport Verification Cell, Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Maria Nazir, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Alok Kumar, CGC
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 11-05-2026 Heard Ms. Maria Nazir, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Alok Kumar, learned CGC representing the
Union of India.
2. The instant writ petition has been filed for
directing the respondents to accept the petitioner’s matriculation
certificate as valid proof of date of birth and to issue passport to
the petitioner in accordance with law after reopening the
petitioner’s passport application bearing File No.
PA1070118895824.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in
order to obtain a passport certificate while the petitioner was a
Patna High Court CWJC No.10498 of 2025(2) dt.11-05-2026
2/4
minor, there has been some discrepancies in the date of birth
which was mentioned in the application form and owing to such
discrepancies which had occurred in the application form for
seeking issuance of passport, the date of birth which has been
referred in the matriculation certificate has come under cloud.
This petitioner is said to have obtained his matriculation
certificate in his favour after having passed the Matriculation
Examination, which is said to have been conducted in the year
2022 by the Central Board Secondary Examination and on the
strength of such Matriculation Certificate, the petitioner is said
to have applied for issuance of fresh/renewed passport and
owing to there being some discrepancies in the earlier date of
birth, which is mentioned in the earlier passport, the Regional
Passport Officer has refused to process the said application.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that under Passport
Rules, 1980 (as amended, 2016) for the purpose of verifying the
date of birth, the Matriculation certificate has also been declared
to be a valid document for proof of birth and, accordingly, a
Notification to this effect has also been issued by the Ministry of
External Affairs which is notified on 23.12.2016, in terms of the
powers conferred under Section 24 of the Passport Act, 1967,
which goes to show that for proof of birth certificate issued by
Patna High Court CWJC No.10498 of 2025(2) dt.11-05-2026
3/4
the Registrar of Births & Deaths or the Municipal Corporation
or any other authority prescribed under Section 2(ii) Transfer to
school leaving or matriculation certificate issued by the
recognized school last attended or recognized educational board
having the date of birth of the applicant has been recognized to
be a valid document and similar issues having been put to
challenge before this Court and the Co-ordinate Bench in the
case of Nida Amina Ahmad v. The Union of India & Ors.
(CWJC No. 16471 of 2021) vide its judgment dated 21.02.2023
has held that for change of date of birth, the matriculation
certificate shall be considered to be the valid proof of date of
birth and accordingly, the Regional Passport Officer, Passport
Seva Kendra, Aaron IT Park, Plot No. VI/I & 2, Patliputra
Industrial Estate, Patna, Bihar may be directed to make
necessary correction in the original passport, which presently is
said to have expired and upon making necessary correction, the
said passport may be directed to be renewed.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for
Respondents no. 1 to 4 submits that the discrepancies which
have occurred in the original passport for which there is already
a guideline issued and the requisites for making such corrections
in the date of birth had already been notified by the Ministry of
Patna High Court CWJC No.10498 of 2025(2) dt.11-05-2026
4/4
External Affairs through its Notification 24.02.2025 in exercise
of the powers conferred by section 24 of Passport Act, 1967, the
appropriate authority may accordingly be directed to take
necessary decisions and as also taking cue from the judgment
rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench.
6. Considering the submission of the parties, this
Court directs the Regional Passport Officer, Passport Seva
Kendra, Aaron IT Park, Plot No. VI/I & 2, Patliputra Industrial
Estate, Patna, Bihar to examine the matriculation certificate of
this petitioner and once, such documents are found to be
genuine, then in terms of the guidelines issued by the Ministry
of External Affairs through its Notification 24.02.2025,
appropriate decisions shall be taken and necessary correction in
the date of birth in the original passport shall be made and the
same shall be renewed at the earliest, if there is no other legal
impediment.
7. The writ petition stands disposed of with the
aforesaid observation and direction.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
perwez
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.