S/L 10 07.07.2026 Court. No. 25 suvayan WPA 13422 of 2026 Rita Rai Vs. The Union of India & Ors. Mr. Anish Kumar Mukherjee Mr Bidisha Chatterjee …for the petitioner. Mr. Kumar Jyoti Tewari, Sr. Adv. Mr. Arijit Majumdar Ms. Samriddhi Nayak Ms. Shreyashi Sarkar …for U.O.I. 1. The affidavit-of-service filed by the petitioner be kept with the record. 2. The petitioner has filed the present writ application praying for a direction upon the respondent authorities for renewal of the passport of the petitioner being no. N1470033 on the basis of the application filed by the petitioner on May 10, 2025. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has applied for renewal of her passport before the passport authority on May 10, 2025. On receipt of the said application, the authorities have fixed the reporting date of the petitioner on May 26, 2025. Subsequently, on December 5, 2025, the passport authorities have informed the petitioner that further police verification with respect of the renewal of the passport is pending and only after getting the report from the police, the authorities will issue the passport. 2 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on April 15, 2026 the petitioner has received a communication from the passport authorities wherein it is mentioned that an adverse police verification report has been received by the passport authority with the remark “Insufficient Parental Documents” and the petitioner is requested to visit the office with prior online enquiry appointment along with her all documents including her parents documents. 5. On receipt of the said communication dated April 15, 2026 the petitioner has made a request to the Regional Passport Office by requesting for prior online appointment and also informed that if the appointment is made, the petitioner will appear with all original documents of herself as well as her parents for verification at the time of visit of the passport office. 6. In spite of the request made by the petitioner no appointment has been given to the petitioner so that the petitioner can appear before the passport authority and to produce the documents for verification. Thus the petitioner has filed the present writ application. 7. The petitioner has relied upon the judgment in the case of Neha Fatima and Another vs. Union of India, Rep. by the Ministry of External Affairs and Others reported in 2026 SCC OnLine TS 4588 and submits that in the said case the Hon’ble High Court at Telengana has held that as per the guidelines issued by the passport authority an adult applicant’s passport, their own Aadhar card or other proof of identity and 3 address is mandatory, not their parents’ identity. Parents’ documents are only required for the applications of minor (under 18) to serve as proof of address or nationality for the child. For adults, the primary requirement is their own valid proof of date of birth and address, as listed on the Passport Seva Website. 8. By referring the said judgment, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the present case also the petitioner is a married lady having her own identity and has submitted all the documents. Though in spite of the same, the petitioner requested the authorities for giving an appointment to produce the document but the authorities have not given an opportunity and till date passport has not been renewed. 9. Per contra, learned advocate appearing for the respondent authorities submits that the writ petition filed by the petitioner is liable to be dismissed for non- joinder of the parties. He submits that the passport authorities have not renewed the passport on receipt of the police verification report but the petitioner has not made the local police authorities as party to the present writ application wherein the adverse report has been filed against the petitioner. 10. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents further submits that in the communication dated April 15, 2026 the petitioner has been categorically directed to take prior online enquiry appointment along with all documents but the petitioner failed to take appointment 4 and produce the documents and as such it is not possible for the authorities to renew the passport without verification of the documents of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the petitioner has not made any online application for her appointment for verification of the passport in terms of the letter dated April 15, 2026. 11. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties, perused the materials on record. 12. This Court finds that the petitioner has applied for renewal of passport on May 10, 2025 and May 26, 2025 the reporting date and time of the petitioner was fixed before the passport authorities. The passport authorities have not renewed the passport of the petitioner initially that no police verification report was received and subsequently when the police verification report was received, it was found that the adverse report is filed against the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner has submitted that insufficient parental documents. 13. Now the respondent authorities have only raised the issue by a letter dated April 15, 2026 the petitioner is directed to take appointment by way of online application so that the petitioner can appear before the authority and the documents can be verified but the petitioner has not made any online application and as such the appointment is not fixed. On contrary the petitioner has relied upon the representation appearing at page no. 41 Annexure – P7 and submits that the petitioner has submitted the representation to the 5 authorities by an email dated May 12, 2026 but the respondent authorities have not considered the same. 14. In view of the above, the petitioner is directed to appear before the passport authorities on July 16, 2026 at 11.30 a.m. If the petitioner appear before the passport authorities, the passport authorities shall verify the documents of the petitioner and to take appropriate steps for renewal of the passport in favour of the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of two weeks thereafter. 15. WPA 13422 of 2026 is disposed of. 16. Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all the necessary formalities. (Krishna Rao, J.)