C/SCA/16756/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16756 of 2025 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK Sd/- ========================================================== Approved for Reporting Yes No Yes ========================================================== MOHAMAD AYAN JAKIRHUSEN IPROLIYA S/O JAKIRHUSEN AHMEDHUSEN IPROLIYA Versus REGIONAL PASSPORT OFFICER AHMEDABAD ========================================================== Appearance: MR RINDANI ADVOCATE FOR MR. JAVED S QURESHI(6999) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR PRADIP D BHATE(1523) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK Date : 09/03/2026 JUDGMENT 1. RULE. Mr. Pradip D. Bhate, learned counsel waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent. 2. The petitioner has preferred present petition under Articles 14, 19, 21, 116 and 227 of the Constitution of India r/w the provisions of Passport Act, 1967 seeking below mentioned relief/s:- p. 2 C/SCA/16756/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026 "11 (a) YOUR LORDSHIP may be pleased to admit and allow the present writ petition; (b) YOUR LORDSHIP may kindly be further pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus and / or Certiorari and / or any other appropriate Writ, Order and / or direction upon the respondent to consider application of the petitioner for renewal / issuance for a fresh passport to the petitioner having maximum validity / a period of 10 years from the date of issuance of the same; (c) YOUR LORDSHIP may be pleased to grant such other and further relief(s) as may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case." 3. The facts giving rise to the present petition are that the petitioner is the legal guardian and grandfather of the minor child and seeks urgent and appropriate directions to the concerned passport authority for renewal of the original passport of his grandson, which expired on 07.09.2021. 3.1 The father of the minor child had shifted to Australia long back and is presently residing there along with his wife. The father of the minor child has executed an a.idavit on oath stating that he has no objection to the renewal of the passport of his son. The petitioner, being the grandfather and legal guardian of the minor child, has also given a declaration in this regard for issuance and renewal of the passport of the minor child. 3.2 The petitioner is the legal guardian and grandfather of the minor child and has a.irmed the present petition p. 3 C/SCA/16756/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026 as the parents of the minor child are presently residing in Australia. In view of the absence of the parents in India, the petitioner has been acting as the legal guardian for the purpose of renewal of the passport of the minor child. 3.3 The petitioner states that an application for renewal of the passport of the minor child was submitted before the Passport O.ice in the year 2024 by the legal guardian. An appointment was scheduled by the department on 27.03.2024, and on the said date the petitioner remained present along with the minor child and all relevant documents before the concerned authority. The documents were duly veri1ed by the concerned o.icer at the relevant time. However, after a period of approximately three months from the date of appointment, in the month of June 2024, the Passport O.ice communicated its decision dated 21.06.2024, stating that the passport cannot be issued to a minor whose both parents are foreign citizens. 3.4 The petitioner further states that the parents of the minor child had migrated to Australia long ago and have been residing there for a considerable period. After residing there for some time, both the father and mother of the minor child obtained OCI (Overseas Citizen of India Card Holder) Certi1cates from the competent authority at Sydney and they continue to hold such registration certi1cates. p. 4 C/SCA/16756/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026 The petitioner states that he has not sought any permission for departure from or travel outside India. The petitioner has merely applied for renewal of the passport of the minor child, which has been declined by the Passport O.ice. Despite approaching the Passport O.ice and submitting all necessary documents, the authority has raised the aforesaid objection without properly considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 3.5 In view of aforesaid facts the petitioner approached this Court by way of present petition seeking above mentioned relief. 4. Heard Mr. Rindani, learned counsel for Mr. Javed S. Qureshi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Pradip D. Bhate, learned counsel for the respondent. 5. Mr. Rindani, learned counsel for the petitioner, has referred to and relied upon the decision of the High Court of Bombay at Goa in Writ Petition No. 135 of 2024, in the case of Miss Chrisella Valanka Kushi Raj Naidu vs. The Ministry of External Aairs, Government of India and Others, wherein, in identical facts and circumstances, the High Court of Bombay at Goa, after referring to the decisions of various High Courts, allowed the petition and directed the respondent authorities to renew the passport on the basis of the petitioner’s Indian p. 5 C/SCA/16756/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026 citizenship and further directed that the respondent authority shall issue a fresh passport unless any other grounds exist for refusal of the passport in terms of Section 6 of the Passports Act. 5.1 Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the action of the respondent authority in refusing to renew the passport of the minor child is arbitrary, unjusti1ed and contrary to law. The minor child was earlier issued a valid Indian passport which expired on 07.09.2021 and the present application made by the petitioner is only for renewal of the said passport. 5.2 Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is the grandfather and legal guardian of the minor child. He has further submitted that the parents of the minor are presently residing in Australia and therefore the father of the minor has executed an a.idavit giving his consent for renewal of the passport of his son and authorizing the petitioner, being the grandfather, to act as guardian for the purpose of the passport application. He has submitted that the petitioner has also submitted the necessary declaration along with all relevant documents before the respondent authority. 5.3 Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the application for renewal of the passport was submitted before the passport o.ice in the year 2024 and the p. 6 C/SCA/16756/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026 petitioner along with the minor remained present on 27.03.2024 with all the required documents which were veri1ed by the concerned o.icer at the relevant time. However, thereafter the respondent authority, by communication dated 21.06.2024, rejected the request on the ground that the passport cannot be issued to a minor whose parents are foreign citizens. 5.4 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said ground is misconceived inasmuch as the parents of the minor are OCI card holders and the petitioner has not sought any permission for the minor to travel abroad but has only requested for renewal of the passport which was already issued earlier. It is therefore submitted that the respondent authority has failed to properly consider the documents and circumstances of the case and has rejected the application without justi1cation. Hence, appropriate directions may kindly be issued to the respondent authority to consider the application for renewal of the passport of the minor child in accordance with law. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the respondent authority has acted in accordance with the provisions of the Passports Act and the applicable rules. It is submitted p. 7 C/SCA/16756/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026 that while processing the application for renewal of the passport of the minor child, it was noticed that the parents of the minor are residing in Australia and are holding OCI cards. 6.1 It is therefore submitted that after due veri1cation and considering the applicable guidelines, the respondent authority informed the petitioner by communication dated 21.06.2024 that the passport could not be issued in the present circumstances. It is further submitted that the respondent authority has not acted arbitrarily or illegally, but has only followed the statutory provisions and the applicable guidelines while processing the application. Hence, it is submitted that no illegality or arbitrariness has been committed by the respondent authority and therefore the present petition deserves to be dismissed. 7. I have perused the documents and the relevant material available on record. I have also gone through the pleadings of the present petition and the submissions advanced by the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties. 8. It appears from the record that the minor petitioner was earlier issued a passport which came to be expired, and thereafter an application for renewal of the passport was submitted through the legal guardian i.e., the grandfather of the minor. It further appears that the application was submitted with all the relevant p. 8 C/SCA/16756/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026 documents and the petitioner along with the minor had remained present before the passport authority for veri1cation. 9. From the material placed on record, it emerges that the parents of the minor petitioner are presently residing in Australia and subsequently they have acquired citizenship of Australia in the year 2022. However, the record indicates that the application for renewal of passport of the minor petitioner was made prior to the date on which the parents acquired the citizenship of Australia. Therefore, on the date of the application, the parents had not yet accepted the citizenship of Australia. 10. It also appears that the grandparents of the minor petitioner had also applied for renewal of their passports and the same have already been renewed by the respondent authority. However, so far as the case of the minor petitioner is concerned, the passport has not been renewed mainly on the ground that the parents of the petitioner are not citizens of India. 11. In the opinion of this Court, the said ground does not appear to be justi1ed in the facts of the present case, particularly when on the date of the application the parents of the petitioner had not acquired foreign citizenship. The respondent authority ought to have taken into consideration the relevant factual aspects and the documents produced by the petitioner while considering the request for renewal of passport. Page 8 of 9 C/SCA/16756/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/03/2026 Considering the aforesaid aspects and in view of the decision of the High Court of Bombay at Goa in the case of Miss Chrisella (supra), this Court is of the view that the present petition deserves to be allowed. 12. The respondent authority is therefore directed to consider the application of the petitioner and renew the passport of the petitioner, if otherwise found in order, in accordance with law and within a reasonable period of time. 13. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. No order as to costs. Sd/- (HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J) SURESH SOLANKI