Chennai: The Madras High Court has directed the Regional Passport Authority.Representation of the People Act) Here for issuance of passport with validity of 10 years leaves Chidambaram, Congress MP from Sivaganga and son of the former Federation Minister P Chidambaram,
Justice M Govindaraj recently issued the direction allowing a writ petition by Karti. The petition sought quashing of the RPA’s orders dated April 8, 2021 and August 24, 2021 and consequently directed them to issue passports with additional pages, valid for 10 years.
Basically, when the pages of his passport, valid till March 5, 2024, ran out, Karti applied for an additional booklet. But the RPA rejected it with two orders. Instead, the authority issued a passport valid till March 4, 2022.
In support of its action, the RPA submitted that according to the new rules of the International Civil Aviation Organization, the validity of a passport cannot be extended manually. The validity of the new passport should be determined independently without considering the validity of the old passport.
Relying on section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act, 1967, read with a notification dated August 25, 1993, the RPA held that when a criminal case is pending, the notification shall continue to be in force and under the Act The authorities are empowered to reduce the validity of the passport by one year.
Petitioner’s senior counsel P Wilson argued that the authority cannot reduce the period or validity of the passport without complying with the orders of Section 7 and 10 of the Passport Act. Karti is a Member of Parliament and has not violated any of the conditions imposed on him. The RPA did not produce any material to show that they were compelled to take action against Karti. In that case the exercise of power cannot be continued without recourse to Section 7 or 10 of the Act, Wilson said.
Allowing the petition, the judge observed that the RPA cannot reduce the period or validity of the passport without complying with the orders of Sections 7 and 10 of the Act. No material was put up by the RPA to prove that Karti had violated any of the conditions imposed on him. There was nothing to show that his conduct could affect the sovereignty and integrity or security of India or friendly relations or the public interest.
Therefore, in the considered opinion of the Court, the impugned action of the RPA in reducing the period of validity of the passport to less than two years is violative of section 7, which has been taken without recourse to section 7. 10 of the Act.
No reason has been recorded and this is in violation of the principles of natural justice. Therefore, it is not sustainable in law and accordingly, it is set aside, the judge said and the RPA has to re-issue passports with the period of existing validity or for ten years as per Rule 12 of the Rules and Regulations of International Citizens. instructed. Aviation organization, urgent.
Justice M Govindaraj recently issued the direction allowing a writ petition by Karti. The petition sought quashing of the RPA’s orders dated April 8, 2021 and August 24, 2021 and consequently directed them to issue passports with additional pages, valid for 10 years.
Basically, when the pages of his passport, valid till March 5, 2024, ran out, Karti applied for an additional booklet. But the RPA rejected it with two orders. Instead, the authority issued a passport valid till March 4, 2022.
In support of its action, the RPA submitted that according to the new rules of the International Civil Aviation Organization, the validity of a passport cannot be extended manually. The validity of the new passport should be determined independently without considering the validity of the old passport.
Relying on section 6(2)(f) of the Passport Act, 1967, read with a notification dated August 25, 1993, the RPA held that when a criminal case is pending, the notification shall continue to be in force and under the Act The authorities are empowered to reduce the validity of the passport by one year.
Petitioner’s senior counsel P Wilson argued that the authority cannot reduce the period or validity of the passport without complying with the orders of Section 7 and 10 of the Passport Act. Karti is a Member of Parliament and has not violated any of the conditions imposed on him. The RPA did not produce any material to show that they were compelled to take action against Karti. In that case the exercise of power cannot be continued without recourse to Section 7 or 10 of the Act, Wilson said.
Allowing the petition, the judge observed that the RPA cannot reduce the period or validity of the passport without complying with the orders of Sections 7 and 10 of the Act. No material was put up by the RPA to prove that Karti had violated any of the conditions imposed on him. There was nothing to show that his conduct could affect the sovereignty and integrity or security of India or friendly relations or the public interest.
Therefore, in the considered opinion of the Court, the impugned action of the RPA in reducing the period of validity of the passport to less than two years is violative of section 7, which has been taken without recourse to section 7. 10 of the Act.
No reason has been recorded and this is in violation of the principles of natural justice. Therefore, it is not sustainable in law and accordingly, it is set aside, the judge said and the RPA has to re-issue passports with the period of existing validity or for ten years as per Rule 12 of the Rules and Regulations of International Citizens. instructed. Aviation organization, urgent.