AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Jaichandren, J.—Heard Mr. D. Shivakumaran, the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, Mr. S. Rajasekar, the learned
Additional Central Government Standing Counsel for the first Respondent and Mr. V. Viswanathan, the learned Additional Government Pleader,
appearing for the Respondents 2 to 4.
This petition has been filed praying for a writ of mandamus to direct the Respondents to dispose of the application of the Petitioner, dated
26.6.2000, relating to the request of the Petitioner for registering her as a citizen of India, u/s 5(1)(c) of the Citizenship Act, 1955.
It has been stated that the Petitioner, who is a citizen of Malaysia by birth, had come to India in the year, 1976. She had married one Mr. K.
Thiyagarajan, who is an Indian by birth and a permanent resident in Namakkal District, on: 5.9.1976. Subsequent to the said marriage they have
been living at Salem after obtaining a residential permit which had been periodically renewed. The application made by the Petitioner to the fourth
Respondent, on 26.6.2000, has not been disposed of till date. It has been submitted by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the Respondents
2 to 4 have recommended the case of the Petitioner for the grant of Indian citizenship.
Paragraph-5 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of Respondents 2 and 4 reads as follows:
It is submitted that the Tahsildar, Salem, has also conducted detailed enquiry and submitted his report to the Collector, Salem, stating that the
Petitioner is living with her husband, who is a resident of Poddireddipatti village, Namakkal Taluk and District and recommended for registration as
a Citizen of India u/s 5(1)(c) of the Citizenship Act, 1955. On the recommendation of the subordinate officers, the proposals for the grant of
citizenship to the Petitioner was recommended to the Government in Lr. No. K. Dis.47/2001 C4, dated 23.5.2002, through the Deputy Inspector
General of Police, Chennai, by the fourth Respondent. The Deputy Inspector General, CID, Chennai, has returned the proposal to the 4th
Respondent stating that this type of Citizenship proposals need not be sent to him and informed the 4th Respondent to submit directly to the
Government.
Further paragraph-4 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the third Respondent is as follows:
This is being so, the said Renuha Devi applied before the District Collector, Salem, for Indian Citizenship since she had married to an Indian, on
5.9.1976. The said application of Renuha Devi was forwarded to the Commissioner of Police, Salem City for the purpose of enquiry and report.
Accordingly, the Commissioner of Police, Salem City conducted an enquiry through the Inspector of Police, Hastharnpatty P.S., Salem City and
send up the enquiry report to the District Collector, Salem District stating that Tmt. Renuha Devi is residing at . - No. 185/5A, TVS Colony,
Meenakshi Nagar, Hasthampatti, Salem-7, and that she has not come to any adverse notice to Police and that the claim of the foreigner is genuine.
The Commissioner of Police, Salem City dispatched the enquiry report and the application of the Petitioner to the District Collector, Salem, on
25.8.2000, vide C. No. Dl/199/F.R./. SLM(c)/2000.
From the counter affidavits filed on behalf of the Respondents 2 to 4, it is seen that the recommendations have been forwarded to the first
Respondent. However, the first Respondent has not passed any order on the application of the Petitioner, for grant of Indian citizenship, till date.
In such circumstances, the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner had submitted that it would suffice if the first Respondent is directed to
pass orders on the application of the Petitioner, dated 26.6.2000, on merits, and in accordance with law, within a specified period, taking into
consideration the recommendations made by the Respondents 2 to 4.
The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the first Respondent and the Respondents 2 to 4 have no objection for this Court passing such an
order.
In view of the submissions made by the learned Counsels appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, as well as the Respondents, the first
Respondents directed to dispose of the application of the Petitioner, dated 26.6.2000, on merits, and in accordance with law, within a period of
twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, in view of the recommendations made by the Respondents 2 to 4 for the grant of
Indian citizenship to her.
At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner had brought to the notice of this Court
that an interim order, dated 23.2.2004, had been granted by this Court, in W.P.M.P. No. 711 of 2004, restraining the Respondents from
deporting or taking any penal action against the Petitioner, under the Foreigners Act, pending disposal of the application of the Petitioner for
registering her as a citizen of India and the said interim order is in force till date.
In such circumstances, the Respondents are directed not to initiate any adverse proceedings against the Petitioner, including deportation or any
other penal action, till appropriate orders are passed on her application, dated 26.6.2000, and such orders are communicated to her in the manner
known to law.
With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.