Passport Renewal Cannot Be Denied Due to Address Dispute, Rules Bombay HC

Passport News: The Bombay High Court has ruled that the renewal of a passport cannot be refused due to a disputed property being listed as the address on the application, citing travel abroad as a fundamental right. On December 15, a woman and her two sons filed a petition asking the court to overturn the Mumbai passport office's decision to refuse to renew their passports due to an ongoing property dispute. The petition was heard by a bench of justices AS Chandurkar and Firdosh P Ponniwalla.

Specified Address Confirmation

Noting that the petitioners live at the specified address, the court ordered the passport officers to renew the petitioners' passports within four weeks. It held that the officials behaved arbitrarily and without authority and stated that the Passport Act does not permit the denial of renewal applications due to property disputes.

Passport Rejection Orders

Due to the fact that the family's provided address was for a room in the Sion-Koliwada neighbourhood of the city that belonged to another family member who voiced objections, the passport office rejected the renewal applications in December 2020 through two orders. According to the court order, the application was rejected because “the address given by the Petitioners in their Applications for renewal of passports was of a room standing in the name of Respondent No.3 (relative), and as there was a property dispute in respect of the said room, Respondent No.3 has raised an objection to the Petitioners getting a passport showing the said address.”

Previous Passport Issuance

The petitioners contended that their request for renewal was arbitrarily denied by the office. They claimed that since their previous passports were issued at the same address, the reasons listed above could not be used to deny their renewal. The passport office argued that the petitioners should first go to the appellate authority and request that the petition be dismissed rather than going to court.

Fundamental Right to Travel

The High Court dismissed the passport office's argument, stating that Article 226 of the Constitution, which gives high courts the authority to impose writs or orders on any person or body within their purview, does not absolve the court of its jurisdiction in and of itself. “It is a settled law that the right to travel abroad is a fundamental right guaranteed by Article 21 [protection of life and liberty] of the Constitution of India. Therefore, it is obvious that no person can be deprived of this right, except according to the procedure established by the law,” the court said.

Keep watching our YouTube Channel ‘DNP INDIA’. Also, please subscribe and follow us on FACEBOOK, INSTAGRAM, and TWITTER