No. 7/06.11.2008.

HON’BLE JUSTICE SRI A. CHAKRABARTI, PRESIDENT.

Appellants through Mrs. Juthi Banerjee, the Ld. Advocate and Respondent through Mr. Barun Prasad, the Ld. Advocate are present.

The Appellants have preferred the present appeal against the judgement dated 08.01.2008 passed by Jalpaiguri District Consumer Forum in CF Case No. 32 of 2007 whereby the O.P. No. 1 was directed to receive the passport from the Complainant and the O.P. No. 2 was directed to regularize the passport.  In the present appeal Mrs. Juthi Banerjee, the Ld. Advocate appearing for the Appellants stated that in respect of issuance of passport with regard to the endorsement “Emigration Check Not Required (ECNR)” is made in view of the Notification dated 24.02.2006 and, therefore, so long the printed endorsements were available in the printed forms, such endorsement continued to be shown in the passport.  In the present case, it is argued by the Appellant, when the passport of the wife was issued the printed form used was bearing the endorsement “Emigration Check Not Required (ECNR)” and, therefore, the same was issued in the same manner.  But when the passport of the husband was issued on 14.09.2006 the printed form was not bearing the same endorsement in view of the Notification dated 24.02.2006 and so the endorsement was no more appearing in the case of the husband.

Mr. Barun Prasad, the Ld. Advocate for the Complainant contended that the passports for the husband and wife were issued within a gap of six days and, therefore, the Notification issued on 24.02.2006 should not have a separate reflection.  The Ld. Advocate states that unless identical endorsements are shown in the passports of the husband and wife, at the time of departure from the country or at the time of their entry, there may be some difficulty to be faced by them at the instance of the authority by reason of different endorsement in respect of ECNR.

Considering the same we are of the opinion that effect of Notification dated 24.02.2006 should be same on both passports to be  issued subsequent to such Notification.  The user of printed forms which were earlier printed, cannot be an explanation for effecting different endorsement in respect of two applicants particularly when they are husband and wife and when the passports were issuing after more than six months of the said Notification.  In any event without making any general observation this Commission direct the O.P. Nos. 1 & 2 to issue identical passports in respect of said Sri Prafulla Kumar Biswas and Smt. Minati Biswas either by appropriate endorsement on the existing passports or by issuance of fresh passports.  Mr. Prasad, the Ld. Advocate for the Complainant informs this Commission that original passports have been already supplied to the present Appellants in compliance of the impugned order and, therefore, such compliance is directed to be effected within a period of one month from the date of this order positively.  The appeal is dismissed on contest without cost with the above observation.