Patna High Court
Asfar Mahin AnsariversusThe Union of India
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The order refusing the passport was set aside, and the Regional Passport Officer was directed to issue a fresh passport based on the valid corrected birth certificate.
Summary
The petitioner, Asfar Mahin Ansari, challenged a letter dated 20‑12‑2024 issued by the Deputy Passport Officer, Patna, which refused his passport application on the basis of a cancelled 1998 birth certificate despite having a corrected birth certificate issued in 2013 showing a different date of birth. He contended that the refusal violated Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution and ignored the Passport Act, 1967, its rules, and a 2015 Ministry of External Affairs memorandum permitting correction of date of birth after attaining majority. The respondents argued that the application for correction was closed and the petitioner should file a fresh application. The High Court examined whether the passport authority had jurisdiction to reject the corrected certificate and whether the refusal was arbitrary and unconstitutional. Finding that the impugned order ignored the statutory guidelines and constitutional safeguards, the Court set aside the order and directed the Regional Passport Officer to process a fresh passport within two weeks. The writ petition was consequently disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the refusal to issue a passport on the basis of a cancelled birth certificate violates Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution.
- Whether the passport authority is bound to accept a corrected birth certificate under the Passport Act, 1967 and the 2015 Ministry of External Affairs memorandum.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus/ certiorari directing issuance of the passport.
- Whether the passport authority had jurisdiction to reject the application for correction of date of birth.
Legislation cited
- Constitution of India — s. Article 14, Article 19, Article 21
- Passport Act, 1967
Subjects
- passport issuance
- birth certificate correction
- date of birth amendment
- constitutional rights
- mandamus
- certiorari
- administrative law
- Passport Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5514 of 2025
======================================================
Asfar Mahin Ansari Son of Md. Zeya Equbal, Resident of Bahadurganj, P.O.
and P.S- Laheriasarai, VTC- Dumduma, District- Darbhanga.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt.
of India, 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, Patna, Maurya Lok Complex, D-Block, P.S.-
Kotwali, District- Patna.
5. The Deputy Passport Officer, Patna, Maurya Lok Complex, D-Block, P.S.-
Kotwali, District- Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajat Kumar Tiwary
Mrs.Deepika Sharma
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Subodh Kumar Jha, Sr. CGC
Mr.Ram Tujabh Singh, CGC
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 16-03-2026
In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for the
following relief(s):-
“(i) For issuance of appropriate
writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions
in the nature of certiorari for quashing and
setting aside the letter dated 20.12.2024
issued by the Deputy Passport Officer,
Regional Passport Office, Patna, whereby
the application of the Petitioner for issuance
of passport has been arbitrarily refused.
(Annexure- 14)
(ii) For issuance of appropriate
writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions
in the nature of mandamus commanding the
Respondent authorities, particularly the
Respondent No. 4 (Regional Passport
Patna High Court CWJC No.5514 of 2025 dt.16-03-2026
2/10
Officer, Patna), to process and issue the
passport to the Petitioner based on the valid
Birth Certificate issued by the competent
authority, i.e., the Registrar (Births &
Deaths), Darbhanga Municipal
Corporation, Darbhanga recording the date
of birth of the Petitioner as 18.03.2001,
without placing reliance on the cancelled
Birth Certificate dated 23.08.1998.
(iii) To hold and declare that the
Respondent authorities are bound to act
upon the corrected and valid Birth
Certificate issued by the statutory authority,
and have no jurisdiction to question on the
correctness of the said document.
(iv) To hold and declare that the
arbitrary refusal to issue passport to the
Petitioner is violative of Articles 14, 19 and
21 of the Constitution of India, including the
Right to Travel Abroad, Right to Livelihood,
and Right to Personal Liberty as interpreted
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Maneka
Gandhi vs. Union of India and Satwant
Singh Sawhney vs. D. Ramarathnam.
(v) To hold and declare that the
refusal to consider the corrected Birth
Certificate and reliance on the earlier
cancelled Birth Certificate is wholly
arbitrary, illegal, and without jurisdiction.
(vi) For any other relief/reliefs to
which the Petitioner may be found entitled
to by this Hon'ble Court.”
2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the mother of
the petitioner, namely, Rukhsana Parween had applied for the
issuance of birth certificate in respect of this petitioner in the year
1998 before Darbhanga Municipal Corporation pursuant thereto a
birth certificate was duly issued by the Darbhanga Municipal
Patna High Court CWJC No.5514 of 2025 dt.16-03-2026
3/10
Corporation bearing Registration No. 1254 dated 28.08.1998,
recording the date of birth of the petitioner as 18.03.1998.
3. It is next submitted that in the year 1999, the mother
of the petitioner had applied for the issuance of a Passport on the
basis of such issuance of birth certificate. However, no document
including Passport was ever received by the petitioner or his
family member from the passport office. It is stated that petitioner
subsequently applied for the issuance of birth certificate before the
Darbhanga Municipal Corporation, against which certificate vide
Registration No. 13976(D) dated 22.08.2013, was issued by the
Registrar (Birth & Death), Darbhanga Municipal Corporation,
recording the date of birth of the petitioner as 18.03.2001.
4. It is next submitted that this date of birth is also
recorded in the matriculation certificate issued by the Central
Board of Secondary Education for the session 2013-2015 and this
petitioner had appeared in the Secondary School Examination and
a Grade Sheet-cum-Certificate of Performance was issued by the
CBSE Board on 28.05.2015, recording the date of birth of the
petitioner as 18.03.2001. It is the case of the petitioner that despite
the date of birth is 18.03.2001 having been recorded in the
matriculation certificate and the compendium of instructions of
guidelines relating to the issue of passport in India issued by the
Patna High Court CWJC No.5514 of 2025 dt.16-03-2026
4/10
competent authority under Passport Act, 1967, and the rules made
therein, which specifically provides that the change of date of birth
can be made based on proof of birth by placing reliance on the
transfer/school leaving/matriculation certificate issued by the
school last attended/recognised educational board and despite such
documents having been placed before the authorities for
consideration, the impugned order has been passed contrary to the
guidelines and as also the office memorandum as contained in
Letter No. VI/401/2/5/2001 dated 26.11.2015 issued by Ministry
of External Affairs, CPV Division, PV-I Section, which is
specifically provided under Rule 4(iii) that reads as under:-
“The cases where the applicant
comes to PIA for change/correction with
regard to date of birth in the Passport after
a period of five years from the date of issue
of passport with alleged wrong date of birth,
no such request shall be
entertained/accepted by the PIA and be
rejected out rightly.
However, an exemption in this
regard may be given to an applicant who
was minor at the time when passport with
alleged wrong date of birth was issued to
him. As and when such an applicant after
attaining the age of majority applies for the
passport with the request to change the date
of birth in the passport issued to him when
he was minor, the PIA irrespective of the
duration of the issuance of passport may
accept his case for consideration and if is
satisfied with the claim and document(s)
submitted by the applicant, may accept his
Patna High Court CWJC No.5514 of 2025 dt.16-03-2026
5/10
request for change of date of birth in the
passport without imposition of any penalty.”
5. It is next submitted that, on attaining of majority, the
request of change of date of birth can be made in the passport and
accordingly, in view of the instructions issued vide letter dated
26.11.2015, the petitioner is said to have made such request within
the stipulated period as indicated in the letter issued by the
Ministry of External Affairs, Govt. of India, which has not been
considered as would be evident from the impugned order.
6. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that the
issues which had already been made by the Co-ordinate Bench in
the case of Nida Amina Ahmad vs. Union of India & Ors. passed
in CWJC No. 16471 of 2021 and as also judgment passed by
Hon’ble Justice A.M. Khanwilkar similar issues in the case of
Jigya Yadav (Minor) (Through Guardian/Father Hari Singh)
vs. Central Board of Secondary Education & Ors. reported in
(2021) 7 SCC 535, the relevant paragraph of the aforesaid
judgment is re-produced hereunder:-
“193. The first is where the
incumbent wants “correction” in the
certificate issued by the CBSE to be made
consistent with the particulars mentioned in
the school records.
193.1. As we have held, there is no
reason for the CBSE to turn down such request
or attach any precondition except reasonable
period of limitation and keeping in mind the
Patna High Court CWJC No.5514 of 2025 dt.16-03-2026
6/10
period for which the CBSE has to maintain its
record under the extant regulations. While
doing so, it can certainly insist for compliance
of other conditions by the incumbent, such as,
to file sworn affidavit making necessary
declaration and to indemnify the CBSE from
any claim against it by third party because of
such correction. The CBSE would be justified
in insisting for surrender/return of the original
certificate (or duplicate original certificate, as
the case may be) issued by it for replacing it
with the fresh certificate to be issued after
carrying out necessary corrections with
caption/annotation against the changes
carried out and the date of such correction. It
may retain the original entries as it is except in
respect of correction of name effected in
exercise of right to be forgotten. The fresh
certificate may also contain disclaimer that the
CBSE cannot be held responsible for the
genuineness of the school records produced by
the incumbent in support of the request to
record correction in the original CBSE
certificate. The CBSE can also insist for
reasonable prescribed fees to be paid by the
incumbent in lieu of administrative expenses
for issuing fresh certificate.
193.2. At the same time, the CBSE
cannot impose precondition of applying for
correction consistent with the school records
only before publication of results. Such a
condition, as we have held, would be
unreasonable and excessive. We repeat that if
the application for recording correction is
based on the school records as it obtained at
the time of publication of results and issue of
certificate by the CBSE, it will be open to
CBSE to provide for reasonable limitation
period within which the application for
recording correction in certificate issued by it
may be entertained by it. However, if the
request for recording change is based on
changed school records post the publication of
results and issue of certificate by the CBSE,
Patna High Court CWJC No.5514 of 2025 dt.16-03-2026
7/10
the candidate would be entitled to apply for
recording such a change within the reasonable
limitation period prescribed by the CBSE. In
this situation, the candidate cannot claim that
she had no knowledge about the change
recorded in the school records because such a
change would occur obviously at her instance.
If she makes such application for correction of
the school records, she is expected to apply to
the CBSE immediately after the school records
are modified and which ought to be done
within a reasonable time.
193.3. Indeed, it would be open to
the CBSE to reject the application in the event
the period for preservation of official records
under the extant regulations had expired and
no record of the candidate concerned is
traceable or can be reconstructed. In the case
of subsequent amendment of school records,
that may occur due to different reasons
including because of choice exercised by the
candidate regarding change of name. To put it
differently, request for recording of correction
in the certificate issued by the CBSE to bring it
in line with the school records of the
incumbent need not be limited to application
made prior to publication of examination
results of the CBSE.
194. As regards request for
“change” of particulars in the certificate
issued by the CBSE, it presupposes that the
particulars intended to be recorded in the
CBSE certificate are not consistent with the
school records. Such a request could be made
in two different situations. The first is on the
basis of public documents like birth certificate,
Aadhaar card, election card, etc. and to
incorporate change in the CBSE certificate
consistent therewith. The second possibility is
when the request for change is due to the
acquired name by choice at a later point of
time. That change need not be backed by
public documents pertaining to the candidate.
Patna High Court CWJC No.5514 of 2025 dt.16-03-2026
8/10
194.1. Reverting to the first
category, as noted earlier, there is a legal
presumption in relation to the public
documents as envisaged in the 1872 Act. Such
public documents, therefore, cannot be ignored
by the CBSE. Taking note of those documents,
the CBSE may entertain the request for
recording change in the certificate issued by it.
This, however, need not be unconditional, but
subject to certain reasonable conditions to be
fulfilled by the applicant as may be prescribed
by the CBSE, such as, of furnishing sworn
affidavit containing declaration and to
indemnify the CBSE and upon payment of
prescribed fees in lieu of administrative
expenses. The CBSE may also insist for issuing
public notice and publication in the Official
Gazette before recording the change in the
fresh certificate to be issued by it upon
surrender/return of the original certificate (or
duplicate original certificate, as the case may
be) by the applicant. The fresh certificate may
contain disclaimer and caption/annotation
against the original entry (except in respect of
change of name effected in exercise of right to
be forgotten) indicating the date on which
change has been recorded and the basis
thereof. In other words, the fresh certificate
may retain original particulars while
recording the change along with
caption/annotation referred to above (except in
respect of change of name effected in exercise
of right to be forgotten).
194.2. However, in the latter
situation where the change is to be effected on
the basis of new acquired name without any
supporting school record or public document,
that request may be entertained upon insisting
for prior permission/declaration by a court of
law in that regard and publication in the
Official Gazette including surrender/return of
original certificate (or duplicate original
certificate, as the case may be) issued by
CBSE and upon payment of prescribed fees.
Patna High Court CWJC No.5514 of 2025 dt.16-03-2026
9/10
The fresh certificate as in other situations
referred to above, retain the original entry
(except in respect of change of name effected
in exercise of right to be forgotten) and to
insert caption/annotation indicating the date
on which it has been recorded and other
details including disclaimer of CBSE. This is
so because the CBSE is not required to
adjudicate nor has the mechanism to verify the
correctness of the claim of the applicant.”
7. On the other hand, Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 submits
that since the application for change of date of birth has already
been closed, after passing the impugned order, which evidently
shows that there is non-consideration of the instructions and
guidelines issued under the Passport Act, 1967 and as also the
office memorandum issued by the Ministry of External Affairs, the
petitioner may be directed to file fresh application with all
supported materials for consideration,which shall be considered
within the time so framed by this Court, in view of law laid down
by the Hon’ble Apex Court.
8. Considering the fact that issues have already been
considered and the impugned order does not show any
consideration of office memorandum dated 26.11.2015 as
contained in Annexure-P/4, and the guidelines to issue a passport
in India or abroad said to have been issued under Passport Act,
1967 and the rules made therein, in the impugned order dated
20.12.2024 is set aside.
Patna High Court CWJC No.5514 of 2025 dt.16-03-2026
10/10
9. Consequently, Regional Passport Officer, Maurya Lok
Complex, Patna is directed to consider the case of this petitioner
for issuance of fresh passport in reference to Annexure-P/4 and P/5
and as also by looking to the issues adjudicated by the Hon’ble
Apex Court within a period of two weeks from today.
10. With the above observations, the instant writ petition
stands disposed of.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
abhishekkr/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 24.03.2026
Transmission Date NA
Checking your session…