The petitioner has approached this Court mainly seeking for a direction to the first respondent to change the name of the petitioner as 'Panikaveetil Kochumon Maqsood' instead of 'Panikaveetil Kochumon Manoj'.
2. The case of the petitioner is that his original name as 'Panikaveetil Kochumon Manoj' was caused to be changed as 'Panikaveetil Kochumon Maqsood' way back in 1997, also causing a Gazette notification in this regard, vide Exhibit.P2. It is also stated that the passport issued earlier was got renewed and in view of the mistake in the name, he has sought for causing the same to be changed by filing Exhibit.P3 representation before the first respondent/Passport W.P (C) NO. 24914 of 2013 2 Officer. The prayer is to cause the same to be considered and finalized within a reasonable time.
3. The respondents have filed a statement pointing out the actual facts and figures. It is stated that the passport dated 04.10.2004 issued to the petitioner is valid only till 03.10.2014 and that the same was not issued by the first respondent. The passport bearing No. E 8493817 was issued by the Embassy of India at Riyadh in continuation of the previous passport No. S 493195 issued by the first respondent. In both the passports, the name was correctly shown as 'Manoj Panikaveetil Kochumon'. It is also stated in the statement that, Exhibit.P3 representation has not been received by the first respondent till date and that the petitioner admittedly had changed his name as early as in the year 1997 itself, which fact was knowingly suppressed by while applying for re-issue of the Passport at the Embassy of India in Riyadh, leading to issuance of the concerned passport. This by itself is sufficient to impose penalty on account of Section 12 (1) (b) of the Indian Passport Act. The version of the respondents as given in W.P (C) NO. 24914 of 2013 3 paragraph 5,7 and 8 is relevant, and hence extracted below:
(5) As per the instruction incorporated in Page number 51 of the Passport Manual 2010, in order to have a complete/substantial name change, an applicant should furnish the following :-
(a) Prescribed Deed Poll/Sworn Affidavit (Annexure-E)
(b) Original News paper cuttings announcing the change of name published in two leading daily newspapers (one popular daily news paper in the area of applicant's present address and another at his permanent address).
(7) In the above writ petition, the petitioner has contended that he had changed his name in the year 1997 itself in all his records except in the Passport. However, he had suppressed this information while applying for re-issue of the Passport at Embassy of India Riyadh and Passport No. E 8493817 dated 04.10.2004 was re-issued from Riyadh with the name 'Manoj Panikaveetil Kochumon'. Section 12 (1) (b) of the Indian Passport Act says that :-
Whoever knowingly furnishes any false information or suppresses any material information with a view to obtain a passport or travel document under this act shall be W.P (C) NO. 24914 of 2013 4 punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extent to (two years or fine which may extent to five thousand rupees) or with both.
(8) It is respectfully submitted that the petitioner had suppressed the information regarding his change of name while getting his passport re- issued from Riyadh in the year 2004. In the above circumstances, it is only proper that the petitioner may be directed to file an online application to the nearest Passport Seva Kendra of the petitioner's residence along with Notarised name change Deed Poll/Sworn Affidavit and original News paper cuttings announcing the change of name. Upon receipt of the application, the first respondent can process his application for the re-issuance of the Passport with changed name after examining whether any penalty is to be imposed for suppression of information regarding change of name while issuing Passport No. E 8493817 at Riyadh.
Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court finds that the petitioner is not entitled to have any relief at the hands of this court, invoking the discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Despite the change in name of the petitioner effected as early as in 1997 vide Exhibit.P2, W.P (C) NO. 24914 of 2013 5 which was very much known to the petitioner, the passport was got renewed from the Indian Embassy at Riyadh, in the old name itself. In the said circumstances, interference is declined and the writ petition is dismissed, however making it clear that this will not stand in the way of the petitioner in approaching the first respondent and to proceed with appropriate steps as mentioned in their statement.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE DMR/-