Punjab

Faridkot

CC/19/141

Santokh Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Passport Seva Kendra - Opp.Party(s)

Gurpreet Singh Chauhan

28 Jan 2020

ORDER

 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,  FARIDKOT

C. C. No. :                141 of 2019

            Date of Institution:   28.05.2019

           Date of Decision :     28.01.2020

 

Santokh Singh aged about 42 years s/o Jugraj Singh r/o VPO  Wara Daraka, Tehsil Kotkapura, District Faridkot.   

...Complainant

Versus

1.     Passport Seva Kendra Amritsar, 14 Mall Road, Near Custom Chowk, Amritsar through its Passport Officer.

2.     Regional Passport Officer, Amritsar, SCO No.110, 2^nd 4^th Floor, Raj Tower, District Shopping Centre, Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar-143001 through its Passport Officer.

.....Opposite Parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

Quorum: Sh  Ajit Aggarwal, President,

               Smt Param Pal Kaur, Member,

 

Present:  Sh Gurpreet Singh Chauhan, Ld Counsel for complainant,

               OPs Exparte.

 ORDER            

(Ajit Aggarwal, President)

                                              Complainant has filed the present complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the OPs seeking

 

cc no.- 141 of 2019

directions to them to re-issue the passport to complainant and also to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- alongwith litigation expenses of Rs.5,500/.

2                                                Briefly stated facts of the complaint are that complainant had a passport bearing no.G8777546 issued by Chandigarh office having validity for the period from 5.06.2008 to 4.06.2018. In 2002 F.I.R. No.391/02 was registered against complainant and Patiala House Court of New Delhi imposed fine of Rs.50,000/-to him and at that time, he was having valid passport bearing no.A4237256 issued on 15.12.1997. After expiry of that passport, complainant got renewed his passport and passport bearing no.G8777546 valid for the period from 5.06.2008 to 4.06.2018 was issued to him. it is submitted that now, he applied for reissuance of passport with Regional Passport Officer, Amritsar, OP-2 and his application was registered with file no.AS1072427854818 dated 2.06.2018, but OPs have not renewed his passport and have demanded court judgment in F.I.R. No.391/02. It is further submitted that Patiala House, New Delhi has already disposed off the said case and imposed fine to complainant which has duly been paid by him and thereafter, complainant got renewed his passport and now demand raised by OPs for copy of judgment in said case is not relevant and is against the rights of complainant.  At the time of renewal of passport, complainant supplied each  and every document to Passport Authorities, Chandigarh and if any investigation is required to be done by OPs, then, it can be done from the Passport Office, Chandigarh. Complainant has never been convicted by

cc no.- 141 of 2019

any court of law throughout India since last 16 years and he does not have any criminal record and moreover, on 10.04.2016, he travelled to USA and during his visit no objection were imposed by any authority of India, but now, Ops have been unnecessarily harassing him by not renewing his passport. Even legal notice served upon by complainant to OPs through his counsel also served no purpose. The complainant made several visits to the office of the opposite parties for issuance of his passport but all in vain. The act and conduct of the Ops has resulted in great mental tension, agony, inconvenience and harassment to the complainant. He has prayed for accepting the complaint and Ops may be directed to issue passport to the complainant and also for the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.5,500/- as litigation expenses.

3.                            The complainant was heard on the issue of admission and vide order dated 4.06.2019, the present complaint was admitted and notice  was ordered to be sent to the Ops.

4.                                   Notice containing copy of complaint alongwith relevant documents was sent to OPs through registered post and a letter was received from the Passport Office, Amritsar / OPs through post in which they have asserted that Passport Offices do not fall under the purview of service provider and this Forum has no jurisdiction to hear and try the present complaint, but no body appeared in the Forum on date fixed to contest the claim of complainant. There is no doubt that OPs have

cc no.- 141 of 2019

been duly served but despite service, they did not bother to appear before the Forum either in person or through counsel, therefore, OPs were proceeded against exparte vide order dated 31.07.2019.

5                                     Proper opportunities were given to complainant to prove his case. The Counsel for the complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.C-W-1/A, and documents Ex C-1 to C-5 and then, closed the same on behalf of the complainant.

6                                    As there is no rebuttal from OPs side, therefore, we have heard the exparte arguments advanced by learned counsel for complainant and have very carefully gone through the evidence and documents placed on record.

7                                       Ld Counsel for the complainant argued that the complainant applied for reissuance of passport before OPs and paid prescribed fees, but OPs have denied to issue him passport on false grounds. It is pleaded that earlier complainant had a passport issued by Chandigarh office valid from 5.06.2008 to 4.06.2018. In 2002 F.I.R. No.391/02 was registered against complainant and Patiala House Court of New Delhi imposed fine of Rs.50,000/-to him. At that time he had valid passport bearing no.A4237256 issued on 15.12.1997. After expiry of that passport, complainant got renewed his passport and passport bearing no.G8777546 valid for the period from 5.06.2008 to 4.06.2018 was issued to him. it is submitted that now, he applied for reissuance of passport with

cc no.- 141 of 2019

Regional Passport Officer, Amritsar, OP-2, but OPs have not renewed his passport and have demanded court judgment in F.I.R. No.391/02. Contention of the complainant is that Patiala House, New Delhi has already disposed off the said case no.391/02 and fine imposed has duly been paid by him and thereafter, complainant got renewed his passport and now demand raised by OPs for copy of judgment in said case is not relevant and is against the rights of complainant.  Grievance of the complainant is that despite several visits, repeated requests and issuance of legal notice to OPs, they have not issued him passport, which amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice. All this act of the Ops has caused great harassment and mental agony to him. He has prayed for accepting the complaint alongwith compensation and litigation expenses. On the other hand, OPs are exparte and there is no rebuttal from Ops side.

8                                    To prove his pleadings, he has placed on record copy of document Ex C-1 which is copy of Passport No. no.G8777546 valid for the period from 5.06.2008 to 4.06.2018 issued by Chandigarh office. Ex C-2 is copy of application of complainant registered with Ops for issuance of passport . Ex C-3 is copy of receipt dated 31.05.2018 that shows the fact that complainant paid the requisite fees to Ops for issuance of passport. Ex C-4 is copy of legal notice issued by complainant to Ops that further proves the grievance of complainant. Through this legal notice, complainant made requests to Ops to re-issue him passport.

 

cc no.- 141 of 2019

9                                     It is observed that grievance of the complainant is that he applied for re-issuance of passport, but OPs denied the same on false grounds. Documents placed on record prove the fact that earlier complainant was having passport issued on 15.12.1997 and then, after expiry of said passport he got renewed the same and new passport was issued to him by Passport Authority, Chandigarh    valid for the period from 5.06.2008 to 4.06.2018. He completed all formalities and furnished all requisite documents regarding issuance of passport to Chandigarh Passport Authority and they duly issued the same without any objection and complainant also visited abroad on same passport and no restrictions were imposed upon him by any authority of India. After expiry of passport issued Passport Authority, Chandigarh to complainant valid for the period from 5.06.2008 to 4.06.2018, complainant applied for re-issuance of same to Passport Office, Amritsar, which was denied by OPs seeking copy of judgment in FIR No.391/02.    Demand of judgment in said case raised by Ops is totally irrelevant and Passport Authority, Chandigarh also issued passport to complainant in year 2008 after due verification by Chandigarh Authority and at the time of issuance of passport, complainant also furnished all documents in this regard to them and now, if any enquiry or verification, or documents OPs want to have, they are required to get their demand for said judgement be fulfilled from Passport Authority, Chandigarh and their action in not releasing the

cc no.- 141 of 2019

passport to complainant amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on their part. By not releasing passport to complainant, OPs have caused harassment and mental agony to him. The Counsel for the complainant put reliance on the order passed by our Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana in CWP no.13863 of 2014 ( O & M) titled as Kulwant Rai Kataria Vs Verification officer, Regional Passport office, Amritsar and others in it our Hon’ble Lordship observed that Right to travel is important ingredient of freedom of movement and the restriction has to be by law for appropriate reasons. The Passport Act contains the provisions that regulates a person, who is guilty of a criminal offence, from obtaining a passport and the issue will stand therefore regulated by the means mentioned under the Passport Act. While no person can claim that he has absolute right of freedom to travel, the fetter has to be made on sufficient reasons recognised by law. In this case, the criminal offence admittedly attributed relating to the incident of the year 2010 and even the investigation is not complete. It is not as if the case is pending trial and is coming anywhere close to its conclusion. Incidents of the year 2010 and 2011 are lingering. When there have been initially reports for cancellation of the complaint, that itself be a justification to secure the passport without any objection. The issuance of a passport will still be subject to the control of Court about the document could be put to use and the Magistrate will be within his competence to issue appropriate direction about the conditions that could be imposed for travel outside

cc no.- 141 of 2019

India. The State is therefore directed to give appropriate recommendations in the light of the directions issued by this Court that make liable the Passport office to issue the passport.     

10                                           We are fully convinced with the evidence, arguments and case law produced by the Counsel for the complainant. The complainant succeeds in proving this case, so the present complaint in hand is allowed. The Ops are ordered to issue passport to complainant subject to submission of copy of judgment in FIR No.391/02 registered with I.G.I Airport Police Station, New Delhi to Passport Authorities within one month from the date of receipt of copy of judgment. Ops are directed to comply with the order within prescribed period failing which complainant shall be entitled to initiate proceedings under Section 25 and 27 of Consumer Protection Act. Copy of the order be supplied to parties free of cost as per law. File be consigned to the record room. 

Announced in Open Forum

Dated: 28.01.2020

          (Parampal Kaur)                (Ajit Aggarwal)  

                                Member                            President