Originally Posted by
jinglebear
Although admittedly a dull knife, I was sharp enough to grasp that I need to carry both passports in future, but thanks for reminding me
Perhaps my wordiness obscured the intent of my post: what was the logic of stamping the new passport?
I was hoping to discover from y'all some new reasoning beyond the possibilities I had already deduced: A) the visa should not have been moved to the new passport because the IT system has irrevocably married the visa to the (old) passport number; or, B) the IT system allows the visa to be re-assigned to the new passport number but the Immig officer neglected to make the change; or, C) the Immig officer made the change but the IT system is/was buggy.
Thanks again for the replies.
The logic of having the visa stamped in your new passport is that immigration officers can still look up your visa if you travel with only the current passport, even though scanning the passport alone may not bring the visa to the screen. That was pretty clearly the intention of the helpful (DEL) officer who transferred the visa to my new passport with the words "now you only need to carry this passport".
However, some of his colleagues may not be immediately willing to look up the visa information unsupported by the passport number because they are are uneasy about non-standard procedures or because regulations require the visa and passport to match unalterable data held in the system, or data that is "read only" for front-line officers.
Fortunately check-in agents at origin airports simply see the visa and send you to the gate, untroubled by any system links to passport numbers. Once landed in India with a valid visa stamped in a passport I'd hope common sense would eventually take over, even if that involved the immigration officer escalating the case to the shift's duty manager. But to avoid any chance of that happening, I'm happy to suffer the inconvenience of carrying the old document - as an insurance against delay and confrontation
