IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF MA' TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 13885 OF 2025 Between: 1. Karnishetty Bukka Rohit Raj, S/o. KamishettyBukka Madhavi, Aged about 17 years, Occ Student R/o.F.No.304, Zero Lane, Kedarasraopeta, Vijayawada Rep., by his Natural Guardian and Mother KamishettyBukka Madhavi. 2. KamishettyBukka Madhavi, D/o.Malampati Anjaneyulu Aged about 42 years, Occ Employee, R/o.F.No.304, Zero Lane, Kedarasraopeta, Vijayawada. ...PETITIONERS AND 1. Union of India, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi. 2. The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravati. 3. The Regional Passport Office, Vijayawada, Office at 4TH floor, Stalin Central, D.No. 27-37-158, Governorpet, M.G. Road, Vijayawada- 520002. 4. The Station House Officer, Satyanarayanapuram Pohce Station, Vijayawada. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased 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.U4790049 issued in favour of the petitioner No.1 stating that my name cannot be altered Legal Guardian instead of husband K.B.Raviraj, without considering the application (file) No.VJ2077530671725, eventhough there is no bar 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.U4790049 issued in petitioner No.Ts favour for a further period of 10 years. as as lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent No.2 to consider the File NO.VJ2077530671725 for renewal of Passport No.U4790049, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI. B.ABHAY SIDDHANTH MOOTHA Counsel for the Respondents No.1 & 3: SRI G ARUN SHOWRI, CENTRAL GOVERNEMNT COUNSEL Counsel for the Respondents No.2 & 4: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following Order: APHC010276912025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3506] THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA GUNARANJAN WRIT PETITION NO: 13885/2025 Between: ...PETITIONER(S) Karnishetty Bukka Rohit Raj and Others AND ...RESPONDENT(S) Union Of India and Others Counsel for the Petitioner(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.U4790049 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.VJ2077530671725 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 I to 3 to renew the Passport No.U4790049 issued in petitioner No.l’s favour for a further period of 10 years and pass such other order or orders....” Heard Sri B.Abhay Siddanth Mootha, learned counsel for petitioners 2. Sri G.Arun Showri, learned Central Government Counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 3 and learned Government Pleader for Home for respondent Nos.2 & 4. 3. 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 Rohit Raj and K.Bukka Rohan Raj, who is petitioner No.1 in W.P.No.13884 of 2025, which is also disposed along with this writ petition. Petitioner No.1 was initially granted passport vide passport No.U4790049 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 father of petitioner No.1 deserted them, a declaration has been filed in the 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 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. and are 4. 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, 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 12.03.2025, respondents are not justified in withholding the renewal of passport of petitioner No.1. on 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 any useful purpose on mere adding him as party respondent. 6. serve Petitioners assert that father of minors deserted since four years and 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: 7. “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 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. annexure 5 9. This Court is of the opinion that the application of petitioner No. be kept pending for renewal as petitioner No.1 i 01.06.2025, therefore, keeping the application purpose. 1 cannot is to report back to school by pending would not serve any 10. In view of the same, respondent Nos.1 & 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 3 are directed to process the a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 11. Accordingiy, 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// S EbnOfToi^lC E R To, 1. The Secretary, Union Of India, Ministry of External 2. The Principal Secretary, Home Department Velagapudi, Amaravati. Sntral^D No 4TH floor, Stalin 520002. 27-37-158, Govemorpet, M.G. Road, Vijayawada- 4. The Station House Officer, Satyanarayanapuram Vijayawada. 5. OneCCto SRI. B.ABHAY SIDDHANTH MOOTHA Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to SRI. ARUN SHOWRI, Central Government Counsel [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP for HOME, High Court of Andhra Pradesh.[OUT] 8. Three CD Copies Affairs, New Delhi. Secretariat Buildings, Police Station, sree HIGH COURT DATED:29/05/2025 ^^OFANOS^ I 3 0 MAY 2025 tunera 3«ciioii , ORDER WP.No.13885 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS