Mohammad Afjal Hussain vs. The Union Of INDIA And Ors.
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Mohammad Afjal Hussain, filed a writ petition seeking a direction for the renewal of his passport. The Regional Passport Office, Kolkata, had initially issued a letter on January 19, 2024, stating that his nationality was doubtful based on a police verification report and directed him to clarify the objection. Subsequently, on June 8, 2026, the Deputy Passport Officer issued a new communication withdrawing the earlier letter and requesting the petitioner to visit the office and furnish documents as per Gazette Notification No. GST 570(E) dated August 25, 1993. The respondents argued that no cause of action had arisen as the passport renewal application was still pending.
Held
The Court disposed of the writ petition by directing respondent no. 3, or any authorized officer, to decide the petitioner's application for renewal of his passport. This decision is to be made within twelve weeks from the date the petitioner submits the required documents as per the notification bearing no. GST 570(E) dated August 25, 1993. The Court found that the earlier objection regarding the petitioner's nationality had been withdrawn, and the matter was now at the stage of document submission for further consideration. The ratio decidendi is that passport authorities must process pending applications within a reasonable time, especially after resolving initial objections, and the court can direct such timely disposal. The issue of whether the petitioner's nationality is indeed confirmed was not explicitly decided, but the direction implies it will be considered during the renewal process.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner's application for renewal of his passport should be decided by the respondent authorities, considering the withdrawal of the earlier objection regarding his nationality. The petitioner contended that the passport authorities should consider his application for renewal. The respondents argued that no cause of action had arisen as the petitioner's passport renewal application was still pending before the appropriate authority and had not been decided. 2. Whether the respondent authorities are obligated to decide the petitioner's passport renewal application within a stipulated timeframe, subject to the submission of required documents. This issue arises from the court's direction to decide the application within a specific period after the petitioner submits the necessary documents.
Sections Cited
GST 570(E)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Court No. 236 24.8.2026
(Item No. 1)
(AB)
In the High Court at Calcutta Constitutional Writ Juri iction Appellate Side
W.P.A. 11083 of 2025
Mohammad Afjal Hussain VS The Union of India & Ors.
Mr. K. M. Hossain
Mr. Kazi Ardan
…. For the petitioner
Mr. Kumar Jyoti Tewari, Sr. Advocate Mr. Pradyat Saha Ms. Shreyosi Chakraborty
…. For Union of India
Affidavit of service filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner is taken on record.
The petitioner by filing this writ petition has sought for a direction upon the respondent no. 3 to consider his application for renewal of passport dated 10th October, 2023. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner referred to a letter dated 19th January, 2024 issued by the Regional Passport Office whereby the Regional Passport Officer observed that his nationality was doubtful as per the police verification report. He was directed to clarify such objection and visit the Regional Passport Office, Kolkata at the earliest.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner today handed over a communication dated 8th June, 2026 issued by the Deputy Passport Officer, Regional Passport Office, Kolkata, which is taken on record. A bare perusal of the letter dated 8th June, 2026 reveals
2 that by such letter the earlier letter dated 19th January, 2024 was withdrawn. The petitioner was requested to visit the Regional Passport Office, Kolkata and furnish the documents mentioned in the Gazette Notification bearing no. GST 570(E) dated 25th August, 1993. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that, no cause of action has arisen till date as the application of the petitioner for renewal of his passport is still pending before the appropriate authority and the same has not yet been decided.
Under such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondent no. 3 or any officer authorized by him to decide the issue with regard to the petitioner’s application for renewal of his passport within twelve weeks from the date of submission of the documents by the petitioner in terms of the notification bearing no. GST 570(E) dated 25th August, 1993. 7. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the learned advocates for the parties on usual undertakings.
(Arjun Ray Mukherjee J.)
Reproduced from the public record of the Calcutta High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.