IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 6230 of 2008(N)
1. ZOHRA, AGED 37 YEARS, D/O.LATE
... Petitioner
2. ZAMREENA (MINOR) AGED 17 YEARS,
3. ZEESHAN (MINOR) AGED 11 YEARS,
Vs
1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
4. THE JOINT SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
For Petitioner :SRI.S.ABDUL SALAM
For Respondent :SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :01/07/2008
O R D E R
S.SIRI JAGAN, J
==============
W.P.(C).No. 6230 OF 2008
====================
Dated this the 2nd day of July, 2008.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioners herein are Pakistani citizens. The 1st
petitioner is the mother and the petitioners 2 and 3 who are
minors represented by the 1st petitioner as mother and guardian.
1st petitioner claims that her parents were originally of Indian
origin, who migrated to Pakistan and became Pakistani citizens.
Now, the 1st petitioner wants to obtain Indian citizenship, by
virtue of Section 5(1)(f) of the Citizenship Act, 1955 for which
the petitioner has to reside in India for one year. The 1st
petitioner submits that to acquire one year residence qualification
also, an application under Section 5(1)(f) is maintainable. The 1st
petitioner therefore submitted Ext.P4 application before the 1st
respondent. The same was forwarded to the 2nd respondent for
his report as is evidenced by Ext.P5 letter from the 2nd
respondent to the Superintendent of Police, Mahe. In the
meantime, by Exts.P6 to P8, the 1st respondent has directed the
1st petitioner to leave India, within the time stipulated therein. In
the above circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition
W.P.(C).No. 6230 OF 2008 2
seeking the following reliefs:
a) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate
writ, direction or order directing the respondents to abstain
from arresting the petitioners and detaining them in Civil
Prison and also from deporting them to Pakistan under the
Foreigner’s Act.
b) To issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ,
direction or order calling for the records relating to the
proceedings of the respondents for arrest and deportation
of the petitioner and quashing the same.
c) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate
writ, direction or order directing the 1st respondent to
consider and dispose of Ext.P4 application dtd. 10.10.2007
on merits and to maintain status quo till its disposal.
d) To award the cost of this petition to the petitioner.
Section 5(1)(f) of the Act reads thus:
“5. Citizenship by registration-(1) Subject to the
provisions of this section and such other conditions and
restrictions as may be prescribed, the Central Government
may, on an application made in this behalf, register as a
citizen of India any person not being an illegal migrant
who is not already such citizen by virtue of the
Constitution or of any other provision of this Act if he
belongs to any of the following categories, namely:-
x x x x x x x x
(f) a person of full age and capacity who, or either of
his parents, was earlier citizen of independent India, and
has been residing in India for one year immediately before
making an application for registration.
W.P.(C).No. 6230 OF 2008 3
2. The learned Assistant Solicitor General would oppose
the prayers mainly on the ground that only after residing in India
for one year the petitioners can make an application under
Section 5(1)(f) and admittedly they have not resided in India for
one year. She would also submit that for permission to reside in
India for acquiring residence qualification no application under
that Section would lie.
3. I am not going into the question as to whether by
virtue of Section 5(1)(f), petitioner is entitled also to apply for
residence in India for one year for the purpose of applying for
registration under the Section. It remains a fact as evidenced by
Ext.P5 that the 1st respondent has accepted the 1st petitioner’s
application and forwarded the same to the 2nd respondent for his
report. That being so, it is only appropriate that the 1st
respondent passes final orders in the application expeditiously.
4. In the above circumstances, I dispose of this writ
petition with the following directions:
W.P.(C).No. 6230 OF 2008 4
The 1st respondent shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P4
application submitted by the petitioner, as expeditiously as
possible, at any rate within two months from the date of receipt
of a copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity of
being heard to the 1st petitioner. Till orders are so passed, the
petitioner shall not be deported from India. However, the 1st
petitioner shall report to the 3rd respondent once on every week
and it would be open to the respondents 2 and 3 to take
appropriate action against the petitioners if it is found that they
are engaged in activities which is detrimental to the State.
S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
bkn/-