MOHAMAD AYAN JAKIRHUSEN IPROLIYA S/O JAKIRHUSEN AHMEDHUSEN IPROLIYAversusREGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER AHMEDABAD

     C/SCA/16756/2025                              JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

               R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16756 of 2025


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK Sd/-

==========================================================

             Approved for Reporting               Yes          No
                                                  Yes
==========================================================
         MOHAMAD AYAN JAKIRHUSEN IPROLIYA S/O JAKIRHUSEN
                     AHMEDHUSEN IPROLIYA
                             Versus
             REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER AHMEDABAD
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RINDANI ADVOCATE FOR MR. JAVED S QURESHI(6999) for the
Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR PRADIP D BHATE(1523) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK

                              Date : 09/03/2026

                                JUDGMENT


1.       RULE. Mr. Pradip D. Bhate, learned counsel waives
service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent.

2. The petitioner has preferred present petition under
Articles 14, 19, 21, 116 and 227 of the Constitution of
India r/w the provisions of Passport Act, 1967 seeking
below mentioned relief/s:-




                                  Page 1 of 9
  C/SCA/16756/2025                        JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026




      "11 (a) YOUR LORDSHIP may be pleased to admit and
      allow the present writ petition;

      (b) YOUR LORDSHIP may kindly be further pleased to
      issue a writ of Mandamus and / or Certiorari and / or any
      other appropriate Writ, Order and / or direction upon the
      respondent to consider application of the petitioner for
      renewal / issuance for a fresh passport to the petitioner
      having maximum validity / a period of 10 years from the
      date of issuance of the same;

      (c) YOUR LORDSHIP may be pleased to grant such other
      and further relief(s) as may deem just and proper in the
      facts and circumstances of the case."

3. The facts giving rise to the present petition are that the
petitioner is the legal guardian and grandfather of the
minor child and seeks urgent and appropriate directions
to the concerned passport authority for renewal of the
original passport of his grandson, which expired on
07.09.2021.

3.1 The father of the minor child had shifted to Australia
long back and is presently residing there along with his
wife. The father of the minor child has executed an
a.idavit on oath stating that he has no objection to the
renewal of the passport of his son. The petitioner, being
the grandfather and legal guardian of the minor child, has
also given a declaration in this regard for issuance and
renewal of the passport of the minor child.

3.2 The petitioner is the legal guardian and grandfather
of the minor child and has a.irmed the present petition

                            Page 2 of 9
  C/SCA/16756/2025                             JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026




as the parents of the minor child are presently residing in
Australia. In view of the absence of the parents in India,
the petitioner has been acting as the legal guardian for
the purpose of renewal of the passport of the minor child.

3.3 The petitioner states that an application for renewal
of the passport of the minor child was submitted before
the Passport O.ice in the year 2024 by the legal
guardian.        An   appointment      was    scheduled         by     the
department on 27.03.2024, and on the said date the
petitioner remained present along with the minor child
and    all    relevant   documents         before   the     concerned
authority. The documents were duly veri1ed by the
concerned o.icer at the relevant time. However, after a
period of approximately three months from the date of
appointment, in the month of June 2024, the Passport
O.ice communicated its decision dated 21.06.2024,
stating that the passport cannot be issued to a minor
whose both parents are foreign citizens.

3.4 The petitioner further states that the parents of the
minor child had migrated to Australia long ago and have
been residing there for a considerable period. After
residing there for some time, both the father and mother
of the minor child obtained OCI (Overseas Citizen of India
Card Holder) Certi1cates from the competent authority at
Sydney and they continue to hold such registration
certi1cates.

                             Page 3 of 9
     C/SCA/16756/2025                      JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026




The petitioner states that he has not sought any
permission for departure from or travel outside India. The
petitioner has merely applied for renewal of the passport
of the minor child, which has been declined by the
Passport O.ice. Despite approaching the Passport O.ice
and submitting all necessary documents, the authority
has raised the aforesaid objection without properly
considering the facts and circumstances of the case.

3.5 In view of aforesaid facts the petitioner approached
this Court by way of present petition seeking above
mentioned relief.

4.       Heard Mr. Rindani, learned counsel for Mr. Javed S.
Qureshi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.
Pradip D. Bhate, learned counsel for the respondent.

5.       Mr. Rindani, learned counsel for the petitioner, has
referred to and relied upon the decision of the High Court
of Bombay at Goa in Writ Petition No. 135 of 2024, in the
case of Miss Chrisella Valanka Kushi Raj Naidu vs.
The Ministry of External A airs, Government of
India and Others, wherein, in identical facts and
circumstances, the High Court of Bombay at Goa, after
referring to the decisions of various High Courts, allowed
the petition and directed the respondent authorities to
renew the passport on the basis of the petitioner’s Indian


                             Page 4 of 9
  C/SCA/16756/2025                                 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026




citizenship and further directed that the respondent
authority shall issue a fresh passport unless any other
grounds exist for refusal of the passport in terms of
Section 6 of the Passports Act.

5.1 Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that the action of the respondent authority in refusing to
renew the passport of the minor child is arbitrary,
unjusti1ed and contrary to law. The minor child was
earlier issued a valid Indian passport which expired on
07.09.2021 and the present application made by the
petitioner is only for renewal of the said passport.

5.2 Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
the petitioner is the grandfather and legal guardian of the
minor child. He has further submitted that the parents of
the   minor          are   presently residing      in     Australia        and
therefore the father of the minor has executed an a.idavit
giving his consent for renewal of the passport of his son
and authorizing the petitioner, being the grandfather, to
act   as     guardian       for   the    purpose     of    the     passport
application. He has submitted that the petitioner has also
submitted the necessary declaration along with all
relevant documents before the respondent authority.

5.3 Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
the application for renewal of the passport was submitted
before the passport o.ice in the year 2024 and the


                                  Page 5 of 9
     C/SCA/16756/2025                               JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026




petitioner along with the minor remained present on
27.03.2024 with all the required documents which were
veri1ed by the concerned o.icer at the relevant time.
However,            thereafter    the     respondent       authority,            by
communication dated 21.06.2024, rejected the request on
the ground that the passport cannot be issued to a minor
whose parents are foreign citizens.


5.4 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
said ground is misconceived inasmuch as the parents of
the minor are OCI card holders and the petitioner has not
sought any permission for the minor to travel abroad but
has only requested for renewal of the passport which was
already issued earlier. It is therefore submitted that the
respondent authority has failed to properly consider the
documents and circumstances of the case and has
rejected the application without justi1cation. Hence,
appropriate directions may kindly be issued to the
respondent authority to consider the application for
renewal of the passport of the minor child in accordance
with law.

6.       On      the    other    hand,    learned    counsel         for    the
respondent has opposed the petitioner. Learned counsel
for the respondent submits that the respondent authority
has acted in accordance with the provisions of the
Passports Act and the applicable rules. It is submitted



                                   Page 6 of 9
  C/SCA/16756/2025                                   JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026




that while processing the application for renewal of the
passport of the minor child, it was noticed that the
parents of the minor are residing in Australia and are
holding OCI cards.

6.1 It is therefore submitted that after due veri1cation
and considering the applicable guidelines, the respondent
authority informed the petitioner by communication dated
21.06.2024 that the passport could not be issued in the
present circumstances. It is further submitted that the
respondent authority has not acted arbitrarily or illegally,
but has only followed the statutory provisions and the
applicable guidelines while processing the application.
Hence, it is submitted that no illegality or arbitrariness
has been committed by the respondent authority and
therefore the present petition deserves to be dismissed.


7. I have perused the documents and the relevant
material available on record. I have also gone through the
pleadings of the present petition and the submissions
advanced by the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties.

8. It appears from the record that the minor petitioner
was earlier issued a passport which came to be expired,
and thereafter an application for renewal of the passport
was submitted through the legal guardian i.e., the
grandfather of the minor. It further appears that the
application          was   submitted          with   all     the      relevant


                                Page 7 of 9
     C/SCA/16756/2025                             JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026




documents and the petitioner along with the minor had
remained present before the passport authority for
veri1cation.

9. From the material placed on record, it emerges that
the parents of the minor petitioner are presently residing
in     Australia        and   subsequently      they   have       acquired
citizenship of Australia in the year 2022. However, the
record indicates that the application for renewal of
passport of the minor petitioner was made prior to the
date on which the parents acquired the citizenship of
Australia. Therefore, on the date of the application, the
parents had not yet accepted the citizenship of Australia.

10. It also appears that the grandparents of the minor
petitioner had also applied for renewal of their passports
and the same have already been renewed by the
respondent authority. However, so far as the case of the
minor petitioner is concerned, the passport has not been
renewed mainly on the ground that the parents of the
petitioner are not citizens of India.

11. In the opinion of this Court, the said ground does not
appear to be justi1ed in the facts of the present case,
particularly when on the date of the application the
parents of the petitioner had not acquired foreign
citizenship. The respondent authority ought to have taken
into consideration the relevant factual aspects and the
documents produced by the petitioner while considering
the request for renewal of passport.



                                  Page 8 of 9
    C/SCA/16756/2025                                                                JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026




Considering the aforesaid aspects and in view of the
decision of the High Court of Bombay at Goa in the case
of Miss Chrisella (supra), this Court is of the view that
the present petition deserves to be allowed.

12. The respondent authority is therefore directed to
consider the application of the petitioner and renew the
passport of the petitioner, if otherwise found in order, in
accordance with law and within a reasonable period of
time.

13. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. Rule is
made absolute to the aforesaid extent. No order as to
costs.


                                                                                                                     Sd/-
                                                                        (HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
SURESH SOLANKI
 Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
 Digitally signed by: SURESHKUMAR MOTIBHAI SOLANKI(HC00208), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 12/03/2026 17:47:56




                                                       Page 9 of 9