Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram
Keen on getting his seven-year-old sons passport renewed,Rajeev Bhardwaj did not think twice when the officials from New Delhis Regional Passport Office (RPO) asked him to deposit balance fee of Rs 1,000 in March last year.
Though Bhardwaj received the passport a few months later,he had no information regarding the extra money charged. To get details,Bhardwaj wrote a letter to the RPO.
The reply he received baffled him.
For,he was told the money was imposed as a penalty on his son,Nisiman,for giving false information regarding his place of birth.
Refusing to bow down to arbitrary and unilateral decision by the RPO,Bhardwaj moved the Delhi High Court filing a writ petition in December last year.
Almost five months later,Bhardwaj has not only succeeded in getting the penalty order quashed but the court ruling is also set to change the way the passport authorities handle penalties.
Directing the authorities to mend the procedure,Justice S Muralidhar has ruled that no penalty can be imposed on an applicant unless he or she is given prior notice and opportunities to contest the case.
The Passport Office is directed to devise a proper procedure so that no penalty is levied and collected without following a procedure that is consistent with the requirements of natural justice, the court said.
Slamming the officials for imposing a penalty on seven-year-old child Justice Muralidhar said: It is too much to expect that a seven-year-old child will knowingly furnish false information which is not going to help him in any way.
The RPO,meanwhile,claimed the penalty was justified,as there were discrepancies between Nisimans application form and personal particulars form. While the application form stated Nisiman was born at AIIMS,New Delhi,other forms indicated his place of birth was Ghaziabad.
The judge,however,dismissed their plea noting that Nisimans birth certificate clearly stated he was born at AIIMS while his family lived in Ghaziabad at the time.
Censuring the manner of collecting the penalty,Justice Muralidhar said,It is inconceivable how,under the pretext of collecting the balance fee,a sum of Rs 1,000 could have been collected and later on appropriated by the RPO towards penalty. A written order imposing a penalty under Section 12 of the Act is an imperative. Further,before passing such order,which obviously has adverse civil consequences for the person on whom such penalty is imposed,a show-cause notice and an opportunity of explaining must be granted.
Courting controversy
* Rajeev Bhardwaj asked to deposit Rs 1,000 extra for his sons passport
* Told it is penalty levied on the 7-yr-old boy for giving incorrect details about his place of birth
* High Court slams passport office for not following a procedure
* A written order imposing a penalty is an imperative,says court
Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram