Delhi High Court rejects petition alleging passport fee hike hits economically weak NRIs

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) petition challenging the government's decision to increase the fee charged for issuance and renewal of passports.

The petitioner specifically objected to the disparity in fees payable by Non Resident Indians (NRIs) and Indians living in the country, arguing that NRIs have to pay around ₹5,000 more than citizens living in India.

However, a bench of acting Chief Justice Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Justice Sanjay Sharma noted that the last increase in the passport fee was in 2012.

It said that an increase of around 67% after 14 years cannot be held to be unreasonable.

The Court further said that it is for the government to decide the policy regarding the passport fee.

"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 Court said.

The petition was filed by an organisation named Pravasi Legal Cell (petitioner) challenging the increase in passport fees.

Advocate Neya AS appeared for the petitioner and argued that the government has increased the charges exorbitantly.

It was stated that some Indian citizens living abroad would have to pay nearly ₹12,000 for renewal of their passports and that the amount is around ₹5,000 more than what a person living in India is paying.

The counsel said that such a fee will put an unbearable burden on migrants living in the Gulf region who make very little money.

She added that the government may come up with a mechanism to help persons belonging to economically weaker sections.

However, the Court asked who will certify that a person living abroad is economically weak.

It added that the issue was in the domain of policy decision of the government and the Court cannot pass a direction in the absence of any statutory or constitutional rights.

Therefore, it dismissed the plea.

Advocate Neya AS, Anto Robert G, Basil Jaison and Daniel George appeared for the petitioner.