The Regional Passport officer, Chandigarh directed by the The Punjab & Haryana High Court to take steps to incorporate the name of a petitioner’s deceased biological mother in her passport.
Petiton filled by Divya , submitted her all documents , recorded her biological mother’s name as ‘mother’, whereas her stepmother was shown as her mother in her passport alone, , including her Aadhaar and her educational certificates.
It was contended by The Passport Authority the change has came to effect only when the petitioner attained the age of majority, and not thereafter. They relied on a clause of the Passport Manual to argue in this manner.
The clause states
Citing the Madras High Court’s ruling in R Gayatri v State of Madras, Divya’s counsels, Advocate SS Behl, and Advocate Harpreet Kaur argued that the guidelines of the Passport Manual could not be used to deny the petitioner a change in details, especially as the details were entered correctly in other documents
Divya’s plea accepted by the Court holding that the Passport Manual’s directions were “mere guidelines”
Passport Authority directed by the Court to effect the substitution of Divya’s stepmother’s name with her biological mother’s name and issue a fresh passport within ten days.
(Divya Nagpal v. Union of India)