Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

MOHAMMED WASIM SAMIULLAH KHANversusTHE UNION OF INDIA THR. REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER,

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The Court held that the petitioner must first file an application with the competent authority as per the Office Memorandum, and therefore the petition was disposed without a direct corrective order.

Summary

Mohammed Wasim Samiullah Khan filed a writ petition seeking a direction that the Union of India and other respondents record his correct date of birth (20‑10‑1984) and place of birth (Mumbai). The Union of India relied on an Office Memorandum dated 22 September 2016, which outlines a procedure for correcting such particulars. The Court observed that the petitioner must follow that procedure by filing an application with the competent authority. It directed the petitioner to move the application within two weeks, after which the authority should process the request in accordance with law. No direct order was made to the respondents to amend the records, and the petition was disposed.

Issues considered

  • Whether the High Court can directly order the respondents to correct the petitioner’s date and place of birth without the petitioner first filing an application under the prescribed procedure.

Subjects

  • Writ petition
  • Correction of personal particulars
  • Date of birth
  • Place of birth
  • Administrative procedure
  • Competent authority

Judgment

                                                                           (907)-WP-327-26.doc

      PANCHAL

                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
          Digitally
          signed by
          BALAJI
BALAJI    GOVINDRAO
GOVINDRAO PANCHAL
PANCHAL   Date:
          2026.10.03
          13:58:57
                                    WRIT PETITION NO. 327 OF 2026
          +0530




                       Mohammed Wasim Samiullah Khan                  ...Petitioner
                            Versus
                       The Union of India & Ors.                      ...Respondents
                                                     ...
                       Mr. Mohammed Juned Chaudhari, for the Petitioner.

                       Mr. Amogh Singh a/w Mr. Pavan Patil, Mr. Parth Malusare &
                       Mr. Shubham Sharaf, for the Respondent No.1-UoI.

                       Ms. K. H. Mastakar, for the Respondent No.2-BMC.

                       Mr. Rakesh H. Pathak, AGP for the Respondent No.3-State.
                                                     ...

                                    CORAM : MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, CJ. &
                                            ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.

                                      DATE : 1st OCTOBER, 2026.


                       P.C.:
                       1.        Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner, Mr.

                       Chaudhari and Mr. Singh, for Respondent No.1-Union of India.

                       2.        The instant Writ Petition is preferred for a direction

                       to the Respondents to accept and record the Petitioner’s

                       correct particulars of date of birth as 20.10.1984 and place of

                       birth as Mumbai.




                                                      1
                                                  (907)-WP-327-26.doc


3.        At the outset, learned Counsel for the contesting

Respondent i.e. Union of India has placed on record the Office

Memorandum dated 22nd September, 2016. He submits that

there is a detailed procedure provided therein. In case

appropriate remedial steps are taken by the Petitioner, the

Competent Authority shall certainly process the claim of the

Petitioner in accordance with law.

4.        We leave it open to the Petitioner to move an

appropriate Application addressed to the Competent Authority

of the Respondents in the light of the Office Memorandum

dated 22nd September, 2026. In case, any such Application is

moved within two weeks by the Petitioner, we expect that the

Competent Authority shall process the same and decide the

same including taking the remedial action, in accordance with

law.

5.        With the aforesaid directions, Writ Petition is

Disposed Of.




[ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.]                     [CHIEF JUSTICE]




                               2


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.