Orissa High Court: Refusing NOC For Passport On Ground Of Pending Disciplinary Proceedings Or Criminal Cases Infringes Fundamental Right To Liberty

The Orissa High Court held that refusing NOC (No Objection Certificate) on the ground of pending disciplinary proceedings or criminal cases, infringes Fundamental Right to Liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.

The Court held thus in a Writ Petition preferred by a doctor working under the State Government, who was aggrieved by non-issuance of NOC by the concerned authorities for issuance of passport.

A Single Bench of Justice Sashikanta Mishra observed, “From a conspectus of the facts, contentions raised and the analysis made, this Court holds that the decision of the authorities to refuse NOC to the petitioner on the ground of pendency of disciplinary proceedings/ criminal cases against him indirectly amounts to infringement of his fundamental right to liberty as per Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The impugned order therefore, deserves interference.”

Advocate S. Mallik appeared for the Petitioner, while Addl. Government Advocate (AGA) S.N. Pattnaik, DSGI P.K. Parhi, and Central Government Counsel (CGC) S. Patra appeared for the Opposite Parties.

Facts of the Case

The Petitioner was a doctor working under the State Government and was due to retire in January 2026. His daughter resided in Singapore with her family and hence, he desired to visit her at Singapore for few days. He submitted an online application before the authorities for issuance of passport. In view of the requirement in the application form, being a government servant, the Petitioner requested the Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Health and Family Welfare Department, Odisha for issuance of NOC. The said application was rejected on the ground that the Petitioner was unauthorizedly absent since September 28, 2013 and three departmental proceedings were pending against him. Being aggrieved by such rejection, the Petitioner approached the High Court.

Reasoning

The High Court after hearing the contentions of the counsel, noted, “As already stated, the Passport Act does not place an absolute bar for travel abroad on the ground of pendency of disciplinary proceedings (or criminal proceedings). Letter dated 28.01.2014 cannot by any stretch of imagination be treated as enacted law. However, it serves to curb the right of a person to travel abroad albeit indirectly, for without NOC, the employee cannot even apply for passport leave alone being issued with one.”

The Court added that the letter serves to place an embargo on the fundamental right of a citizen to travel abroad and in effect, amounts to infringement of the right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.

“Viewed from another angle, the restriction imposed by the State Government is unjustified also for the reason that mere pendency or contemplation of disciplinary proceeding cannot, under any circumstances, be treated as proven guilt of the employee concerned. It would militate against the fundamental tenet of criminal jurisprudence that every person is presumed innocent until proven guilty”, it said.

The Court, therefore, concluded that the non-issue of NOC on the ground cited cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.

Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Writ Petition, quashed the impugned Orders, and directed the concerned authorities to issue NOC in favour of the Petitioner without any further delay and in any case, not later than 6 weeks.

Cause Title- Dr. Ashok Kumar Behera v. State of Odisha and Others (Case Number: W.P.(C) No. 5362 of 2025)

Appearance:

Petitioner: Advocates S. Mallik, P.C. Das, M. Mallik, and A.P. Mohanty.

Opposite Parties: AGA S.N. Pattnaik, DSGI P.K. Parhi, and CGC S. Patra.

Click here to read/download the Judgment