k IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE AMARAVATI PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 13884 OF 2Q2fi Between: 1. Karnishetty Bukkarohan Raj, S/o. KamishettyBukka about 12 Madhavi, Aged Zero Lane, and Mother OCC Student, years R/o.F.No.304, Kedarasraopeta. Vijayawada Rep., by his Naturai Guardian KamishettyBukka Madhavi. 2. , KamishettyBukka Madhavi, D/o.Malampati Anjaneyulu Aged years, Occ Employee, R/o.F.No.304 Vijayawada. about 42 Zero Lane, Kedarasraopeta, ...Petitioner AND 1. Union of India Delhi. rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs New 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh rep., by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravati. 3. The Regional Passport Office, Vijayawada Central, D.No 27-37-158 520002. Office at 4TH floor, Stalin Governorpet, M.G. Road, Vijayawada- 4. The Station House Officer Vijayawada. Satyanarayanapuram Police Station, ...Respondents Petition under Articie 226 of the Constitution of india praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus the respondent Nos.1 to 3 i may or direction more declaring the inaction of in renewing the Passport No.U4669879 issued in favour of the petitioner No.1 stating that Legal Guardian instead of husband my name cannot be altered as K.B.Raviraj, without considering the application (file) No.VJ2077533016325 such in the Passport Rules, 1980 eventhough there is no bar as as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of the Passport Act, 1967 and Passport Rules, well established legal principles laid down by this the Hon'ble Apex Court from time to time apart from being violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to 1980 and the Hon’ble Court as well as me under Articles 14,19 and 21 of the consequently the respondents No.1 to 3 to Constitution of India and the Passport No.U4669879issued in petitioner No.1s favour for a further period of 10 years. renew lA NO: 1 OF 7n9ti Petition under Section 151 CPC stated in the affidavit filed i pleased to direct the VJ2077533016325 for disposal of the above Writ Petition. praying that in the circumstances in support of the petition, the High Court may be respondent No.2 to consider the File No. pending renewal of Passport No.U4669879 Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI B.ABHAY SIDDHANTH MOOTHA Counsel for the Respondent No.1 & 3: SRI JOSYULA BHASKARA RAO, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT COUNSEL Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 4: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following; * APHC010276892025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 13884/2025 [3506] B Between; Karnishetty Bukkarohan Raj and Others AND ...PETITIONER(S) ...RESPONDENT(S) Union Of India and Others Counsel for the Petltioner(S): 1.B.ABHAY SIDDHANTH MOOTHA Counsel for the Respondent(S); 1.GP FOR HOME 2. 2 The Court made the following: ORDER: The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief/s:- “...to issue an appropriate Writ Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 in renewing the Passport NO.U4669879 issued in favour of the petitioner No. 1 stating that my name cannot be altered as Legal Guardian instead of husband K B Raviraj without considering the application file No.VJ2077533016325 even though there is no bar as such in the Passport Rules 1980 as illegal arbitrary contrary to the provisions of the Passport Act 1967 and Passport Rules 1980 and the well established legal principles laid down by this Hon’ble Court as well as the Hon’ble Apex Court from time to time apart from being violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to me under Articles 14 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently the respondents No. 1 to 3 to renew the Passport No U4669879issued in petitioner No.l’s favour for a further period of 10 years and pass such other order or orders....” Heard Sri S.Srinivas Rao, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Services-I for respondents. 2. Heard Sri B.Abhay Siddanth Mootha, learned counsel for petitioners, Sri Josyula Bhaskara Rao, learned Central Government Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 3 and learned Government Pleader for Home for respondent NOS.2&4. 2. Petitioner No.1 is minor son of petitioner No.2. Out of wedlock between Petitioner No.2 and Sri K.B.Ravi Raj, they had two children, namely K.Bukka Rohan Raj and K.Bukka Rohit Raj, who is petitioner No.1 in W.P.No.13885 of 3. 3 2025, which is also disposed along with this writ petition. Petitioner No.1 initially granted passport vide passport No.U4669879 which is subsisting till 09.08.2025. Petitioner No.1 has submitted an application on 03.04.2025 for renewal which is stated to be pending. As husband of petitioner No.2 and father of petitioner No.1 deserted them, a declaration has been filed in the was required form (Annexure C) intimating that father of petitioner No.1 deserted them for the purpose of considering renewal of passport. The same is still pending and so far respondents have not taken any decision on renewal of passport. Petitioner No.1 is studying VII class at Abu Dhabi and schools are going to reopen on 01.06.2025, unless the application for renewal of passport is considered and passport is issued, he will not be in a position to go back to school. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that as per FAQs issued by passport office, it is very much clear that in case a married parent has terminated the relationship with other parent without a formal divorce. 4. declaration in the format of annexure C may be accepted from the parent having custody of the child. Since the same has already been submitted on 12.03.2025, respondents are not justified in withholding the renewal of passport of petitioner No.1. 5. Learned counsel for respondents on other hand submits that petitioners have not clearly spelt out whether the father of petitioner No.1 was separated or deserted and as inconsistent stands were taken, respondents cannot process the application. He further submits that as father of petitioner No.1 4 was not made a party to writ petition, it cannot be said that the father has deserted or separated. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that petitioner No.2 is living in Abu Dhabi on her employment and her husband has deserted them for more than four years now and whereabouts of him are not known as he is not in touch either by email or telephone communication. Therefore, it would not 6. serve any useful purpose on mere adding him as party respondent. Petitioners assert that father of minors deserted since four years and 7. whereabouts of him are not known. In order to meet such exigencies, while considering the application for renewal of passport, the respondents have come up with FAQs. The relevant FAQ reads as under: “In case one married parent has terminated the relationship with the other parent without a formal divorce, declaration in the format of Annexure C may be accepted from the parent having the custody of the child. ” In terms of aforesaid FAQ, the only requirement is to furnish Annexure C by concerned parent having custody of child, which admittedly in the present case petitioner No.2 being the custodian complied with by submitting annexure dated 12.03.2025. When once it is categorically asserted that petitioner Nos.2’s husband deserted the family and furnished declaration taking upon any subsequent consequences, the respondents cannot have any objection for processing the application for renewal. 8. 5 9. This Court is of the opinion that the application of petitioner No.1 cannot be kept pending for renewal as petitioner No.1 is to report back to school by 01.06.2025, therefore, keeping the application pending would not purpose. serve any 10. In view of the same, respondent Nos.1 & 3 are directed to process the application dated 03.04.2025 and issue passport to petitioner No.1 having regard to Annexure C, if the application is otherwise in order within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 11. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be order as to costs. no As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- M SRINIVAS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER 1. The Secretary, Union of India, Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi. 2. The Principal Secretary, State of Andhra Pradesh, Home Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravati. 3. The Regional Passport Office, Vijayawada, Office at 4TH floor, Stalin Central, D.No 27-37-158, Govemorpet, M.G. Road, Vijayawada- 520002. 4. The Station House Officer, Satyanarayanapuram Police Station, Vijayawada. 5. One CC to Sri B.Abhay Siddhanth Mootha, Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to Sri Josyula Bhaskara Rao, Central Government Counsel, [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to the GP for HOME, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 8. Three CD Copies To, sreee HIGH COURT DATED:29/05/2025 ORDER WP.No.13884 of 2025 * 3 O MAY 2025 CuiTe/iivjeciion Ava DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS