Logo

Delhi High Court Rejects PIL Against Passport Fee Hike for Indians Living Abroad

CB News Desk
Add Court Book as a preferred source on Google

The Delhi High Court dismissed a PIL challenging increased passport fees for Indians abroad, holding that a 67% hike after 14 years did not warrant judicial interference.

Delhi High Court Rejects PIL Against Passport Fee Hike for Indians Living Abroad

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the Centre’s decision to increase passport fees, holding that a 67% hike after 14 years does not justify judicial interference in government policy.

A bench of Acting Chief Justice Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Justice Sanjay Sharma ruled that determining passport issuance and renewal fees falls within the government’s policy-making authority.

Background

The petition was filed by Pravasi Legal Cell, which challenged the higher passport fees payable by Indians living abroad compared with those residing in India.

The petitioner argued that overseas Indians, particularly low-income workers employed in Gulf countries, could be required to pay approximately ₹11,900 for passport services, compared with around ₹2,500 for Indian residents. It contended that the increased charges placed a substantial financial burden on workers earning modest salaries.

Court Book subscription: bare acts, legal drafts, court judgments and ad-free legal news, plans from ₹30/month

Advocate Neya AS urged the Court to consider a concession mechanism for economically weaker Indians working abroad.

The bench noted that passport fees were last increased in 2012 and questioned whether the revised charges could be considered unreasonable after such a long interval.

During the hearing, the Court observed,

“After 14 years, it's a reasonable increase...we're not inclined to show any indulgence.”

The judges also questioned how the economic condition of Indians living abroad could be assessed and who would certify their eligibility for reduced fees.

Emphasising the limits of judicial intervention in policy matters, the Court observed:

“As long as such fees, which are levied towards the renewal of passport or for processing of a passport, are not found to be unreasonably exorbitant, the Court is not required to interfere with such policies.”

The bench held that the determination of passport fees was a matter for the government to decide. Finding no sufficient statutory or constitutional basis to grant the requested relief, the Delhi High Court dismissed the PIL filed by Pravasi Legal Cell.

Take CourtBook Everywhere

Access your account on the go with our mobile app.

Get it on Google PlayDownload on the App Store
Join the Court Book WhatsApp channel for latest judgments, notifications, legal news and exam updates