IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.43520 OF 2018 (GM-PASS) BETWEEN:
MOHAMMED HAFEEZ S/O. ABDUL RAHIMAN AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/AT 2/352, KUKKUDAKATTE SITE BALEPUNI, MUDIPU BANTWAL TALUK D.K. DISTRICT-574 153.
PRESENTLY RESIDING AT GOLDEN DRAGON MART SHOP NO.B-071 POST BOX-77, POSTAL CODE-328 A1-SALLAHA BASKHA SULTHANATE OF OMAN. … PETITIONER (BY SRI DHANANJAY KUMAR, ADV.) AND:
1. MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS CABINET SECRETARIAT RAISINA HILL NEW DELHI-110 011 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. EMBASSY OF INDIA, MUSCAT JAMI’AT AL-DOWAL AL-ARABIYA STREET DIPLOMATIC AREA, ALKHUWAIR P.O.BOX 1727, PC:112 REPRESENTED BY ITS AMBASSADOR.
3. REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICE NO.61, 80 FEET ROAD KORAMANGALA 8TH BLOCK BANGALORE-560 095.
REP. BY ITS PASSPORT OFFICER. …RESPONDENTS (A.S.G. – SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R1 TO DIRECT THE R2 TO RELEASE AND RENEW THE PASSPORT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER VIDE APPLICATION DATED 14.05.2018 VIDE PASSPORT NO.HO814984 VIDE ANNEXURE-G.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Sri Dhananjay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Taking into account the order which this Court proposes to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to respondents No.1 to 3.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and perused the records.
3. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner inter alia seeks a writ of mandamus to direct respondent No.1 to issue direction to respondent No.2 to release and renew the passport submitted by the petitioner vide application dated 14.05.2018.
4. When the matter was taken up for consideration today, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, he has filed a fresh application on 14.05.2018 to release and renew the passport. However, till today, no decision on the aforesaid application has been taken and the writ petition be disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.2 to consider the application submitted by the petitioner.
5. In view of the aforesaid submission and in the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.2 to consider and decide the application submitted by the petitioner for renewal of passport by a speaking order within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order passed today. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion with regard to merits of the claim of the petitioner.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE ST