PRATHAM SANJAYKUMAR PATELversusTHE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER

     C/SCA/26937/2022                               JUDGMENT DATED: 20/03/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

               R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 26937 of 2022


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
================================================================

             Approved for Reporting                Yes          No

================================================================
                         PRATHAM SANJAYKUMAR PATEL
                                    Versus
                        THE REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER
================================================================
Appearance:
MR PRANJAL M BUCH WITH MR AG JOSHI(365) 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 : 20/03/2026

                                 JUDGMENT


1.       RULE returnable forthwith. Mr. Pradip Bhate, learned
counsel for the respondent waives service of notice of rule on
behalf of the respondent. With the consent of the learned
counsels for the respective parties, the present petition is taken
up for nal hearing today.


2.       Present petition is     led by the petitioner under Articles
14,19(1)(d),21 and 226 of the Constitution of India read with the
provisions of Passports Act, 1967 and Passport Rules, 1980
seeking following reliefs:



                                   Page 1 of 4
     C/SCA/26937/2022                             JUDGMENT DATED: 20/03/2026




         “(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue writ of
         Mandamus or writ in the nature of Mandamus or any
         appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondent-
         authority, their o'cers, agents etc to accept and entertain the
         petitioner's application for fresh / renewal of passport and to
         issue the fresh /renewed Passport with petitioner's correct
         Name i.e. Patel PrathamSanjaykumar instead of Patel
         PrathamUday as mentioned in the passport.


         (B) Pending, hearing and /nal disposal of this petition YOUR
         LORDSHIPS may be pleased to direct the respondent-authority,
         their o'cers, agents etc to process the petitioner's application
         for fresh / renewal of passport and to issue the fresh / renewed
         Passport with petitioner's correct Name i.e. Patel Pratham
         Sanjaykumar in place of Patel PrathamUday;


         (C) Be pleased to pass such other and further relief's, as the
         nature and circumstances of the present case may require;”



3.       Brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that, the
petitioner was born on 1st December, 2002 at Vadodara and as
per the birth certi cate the name of the petitioner is mentioned
as Pratham Sanjay Kantilal Patel. That, Mr. Uday Lalitchandra
Patel, a friend and relative of the petitioner’s father had adopted
the petitioner with the consent of the petitioner’s father as the
petitioner’s father was incapable of providing care to the
petitioner. That, the adoption deed was entered on 07.11.2006
and it was registered on 09.11.2006. Thereafter, in the year
2017, father of the petitioner and Mr. Uday Lalitchandra Patel
had again made a deed for cancellation of the aforesaid adoption
on 01.04.2017 wherein it has been stated that the father of the
petitioner wants the petitioner back and therefore both the



                                  Page 2 of 4
     C/SCA/26937/2022                         JUDGMENT DATED: 20/03/2026




parties have willingly entered into the cancellation of adoption
deed. That, the petitioner had applied for passport and the father
of the petitioner had written letter to the respondent stating that,
the adoption deed of the petitioner which has been executed on
07.11.2006 has been cancelled vide cancellation adoption deed
dated 01.04.2017. That, all the necessary documents like PAN
Card, Adhar Card, School certi cates etc carry the correct name
of petitioner as Pratham Sanjaykumar Patel. That, request was
made to respondent authority to issue new passport of the
petitioner with necessary correction in existing passport with
petitioner's correct name i.e. Patel Pratham Sanjaykumar instead
of Patel PrathamUday. However, the application was not
entertained by the respondent authority and hence, the
petitioner has preferred the present petition.


4.       Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.
Perused the materials available on record.


5.       I have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties
and have considered the facts of the petition. It appears that the
petitioner was adopted by the relative and friend of the
petitioner’s father but consequently in the year 2017, the
adoption deed was willingly cancelled and the petitioner’s
biological father took him back. The petitioner had made an
application to respondent authority for fresh / renewal of
passport of the petitioner with his corrected name but the same
was not entertained by the respondent authority.




                                Page 3 of 4
     C/SCA/26937/2022                                                   JUDGMENT DATED: 20/03/2026




6.        Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and
the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respective
parties and averments made in the petition, the matter deserves
to be allowed.


7.        In the result, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner
shall prefer a fresh application before the respondent – authority
along with the relevant documentary evidences disclosing the
fact that earlier adoption deed which he had led along with the
application was cancelled and consequently, the application for
fresh / renewal of his passport is being made using the name of
the petitioner’s biological father i.e. Patel Pratham Sanjaykumar
instead of Patel Pratham Uday as mentioned in the passport. The
petitioner is permitted to                           le the application before the
respondent-authority within a period of two weeks from the date
of receipt of the writ of this order and the respondent – authority
shall decide the same in accordance with law, after giving proper
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as expeditiously as
possible preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of
receipt of the application. If the application is found to be in
order, the respondent - authority shall issue the passport in the
name of the petitioner, reBecting the name of his biological
father. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct
service is permitted.


                                                              (HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
ANUSRI

Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: ANUSRI VASU(HC02352), ENGLISH STENO GRADE-II\, at High Court of Gujarat on 25/03/2026 18:03:49




                                                Page 4 of 4