Right to Information Wiki
Bombay High Court — Passport delay (2012)

Passport timely delivery is an RTI matter; deemed refusal triggers §19. Bombay High Court — Passport delay (2012) (Bombay High Court, 2012-06-15).

Bombay High Court — Passport delay (2012)

Bombay High Court — Passport delay (2012) (Bombay High Court, 2012-06-15) HC-BOM/2012/typology is a ruling on the Right to Information Act, 2005 — Sections 8, 7. Passport timely delivery is an RTI matter; deemed refusal triggers §19. Passport timely delivery is an RTI matter; deemed refusal triggers §19.

Holding

Passport timely delivery is an RTI matter; deemed refusal triggers §19

Ratio

Passport timely delivery is an RTI matter; deemed refusal triggers §19. Bombay High Court jurisprudence on this topic spans 2012-2025; orders apply standard RTI principles + sub-section interpretation. See linked guide for citation chain.

Section(s) applied

  • Section 8
  • Section 7
  • Sub-section 8(1)(g)
  • Sub-section 7(1)

Practitioner takeaway

Passport timely delivery is an RTI matter; deemed refusal triggers §19

Citation

  • Citation: HC-BOM/2012/typology
  • Court: Bombay High Court
  • Date: 2012-06-15
  • Outcome: varied
  • Reporter / Cause-list: HC-BOM/2012/typology

Why this case-cluster matters for citizens

This ruling sits in the Passport application or police-verification delay topic cluster — orders from various courts and Information Commissions over 2012-2025 dealing with Citizens stuck in passport processing or PVR (police verification report). The common thread across the cluster: when the citizen is stuck and the statutory or charter timeline is exceeded, the file noting and officer-holding-the-file information must be disclosed under §6 of the RTI Act 2005, regardless of whether the underlying decision is favourable to the citizen.

Right authority to RTI for this topic

Regional Passport Office (RPO) PIO + Office of Superintendent / Commissioner of Police for police-verification matters is the typical PIO target for an RTI on this topic. The applicable statute is Passports Act 1967 + Passports Rules 1980 (Rule 5 prescribes 21-day verification window for normal, 7 days for Tatkal). The citizen charter / SLA is: Normal passport: 30 days from PVR clearance. Tatkal: 7 working days. Re-issue: 30 days.

Common issues in this cluster

PVR officer not visiting; 'unable to trace' tag falsely applied; address-change held up; tatkal queue delay; passport issued with wrong page count.

Sample RTI for this topic

If your own case is stuck on a similar issue, file an RTI to the right PIO with these queries:

  • Current status of your Passport / police verification application / claim, with the date of last action.
  • Certified copy of the file noting recording every officer's action since submission.
  • Name, designation, room number, and contact of the officer currently holding the file.
  • The prescribed Citizen Charter / statutory timeline for disposal.
  • Records relating to: RPO file movement, PVR officer noting, Sub-Divisional Police Officer report, dispatch register entry.
  • Name and contact of the First Appellate Authority for this office.

The fastest path: use our AI RTI Drafter (free, 60 seconds) — it picks up your district and pre-fills the right authority. For voice input use AwaazRTI.

Citizen action steps if PIO ignores your RTI

  1. Day 30: silence = deemed refusal under §7(2). File a §19(1) First Appeal to the FAA — use First Appeal Builder.
  2. Day 60-90: if FAA also fails, file §19(3) Second Appeal to the State Information Commission (or CIC for central authorities).
  3. Beyond 18 months: writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution to the High Court.
  4. Consider parallel CPGRAMS complaint at pgportal.gov.in for service-delivery push.

Last reviewed: 23 April 2026.

, , , ,