Denial of passport linked to SIR creates disqualification Parliament never enacted: CPI(M) leader John Brittas

CPI(M) Rajya Sabha leader John Brittas urged S Jaishankar to intervene in the case of senior journalist and former Telegraph editor Rajagopal Ramadas. File | Photo credit: The Hindu

CPI(M)Rajya Sabha leader John Brittas said the denial of a passport to a citizen whose name had been struck off the electoral rolls in a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) goes beyond an individual complaint and raises broader constitutional questions about the administration of the Passport Act, 1967. In a letter to External Affairs Minister S.Junekar, Monday 29 Mr.29. urged the minister to intervene in the case of senior journalist and former Telegraph editor Rajagopal Ramadas, who was denied renewal of his passport as his name was deleted from electoral rolls in the ongoing SIR in West Bengal.

Also read | SIR: Citizens, citizenship and suffrage

Mr. Ramadas was issued an Indian passport in 2005 and renewed in 2015 with no change to his identity, address, origin or nationality. The notice issued by the Regional Passport Office mentioned only one adverse circumstance: “Voter list deleted from SIR”. If that were the only basis for refusing renewal, Mr. Brittas said, it could set a precedent with national implications for passport management.

The CPI(M) leader argued that while the government has consistently maintained that a passport is not conclusive proof of citizenship, this contention does not diminish the legal significance of the document. He argued that the passport constituted a statutory decision made by a competent authority under an Act of Parliament and could not be rendered meaningless by an interim administrative decision made under another Act.

Referring to the Supreme Court’s Satwant Singh Sawhney and Maneka Gandhi judgments, Mr. Brittas said that the right to travel abroad is part of the personal liberty guaranteed by Article 21 and that decisions under the Passport Act must meet the standards of fairness, reasonableness and non-arbitrary.

He also noted that the Supreme Court, while upholding the constitutionality of the SIR, reiterated that the Electoral Commission’s activities are limited to the preparation of electoral rolls and are not citizenship decisions.

“The larger constitutional question is whether the sovereign assurance represented by the Indian passport will continue to command the confidence of citizens, foreign governments and the Republic itself, or whether that assurance may subsequently be challenged by the interim administrative consequence of an entirely different legal regime,” Brittas said.

Published – 29 Jun 2026 22:44 IST