Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: citizenship constitution of india Year: 2002 Page 1 of about 22 results (0.054 seconds)

Oct 07 2002 (HC)

State of Jammu and Kashmir, Vs. Dr. Susheela Sawhney and State of Jamm ...

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Decided on : Oct-07-2002

Reported in : AIR2003J& K83,2003(1)JKJ35

..... high court opined that the position that emerges as a result of the combined reading of the provisions of articles 5 & 6 of the constitution of india, of the citizenship act and of section 6 of the state constitution is that the juristic or artificial persons like companies and corporations have not been included within the ambit of the term 'permanent resident'.38. state ..... of the power vested in him under clause (i) of article 370 of the constitution of india, made certain previsions of the constitution of india applicable to the state of j & k under the constitution (application to jammu and kashmir) order, 1954. as noticed earlier, part-11 of the constitution, relating to citizenship, was also made applicable and it is provided that this part shall be deemed ..... was agreed between the two government that the right of the 'permanent residents' of the state would be protected but at the same time citizenship of india should not be denied to them. the constitution application order of 1954 applied part ii of the constitution to the state but with modifications' and with new article, under article 35-a under article 370, president of ..... unless, it be shown that he has permanently migrated to pakistan.26. as articles 10 and 11 of the constitution of india have been extended to the state of j & k, the citizenship act, 1955 extends to the state.27 section 7 of the state constitution provides that all references in any existing law to 'hereditary state subject' or to the 'state subject of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 02 2002 (SC)

Bhanwaroo Khan and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-02-2002

Reported in : AIR2002SC1614; 2002(2)ALLMR(SC)940; 2002(3)ALT49(SC); JT2002(3)SC464; 2002(3)SCALE239; (2002)4SCC346; [2002]2SCR872; 2002(1)LC675(SC)

..... (2) of the citizenship act where the person concerned had obtained a pakistan passport and observed ..... & ors. vs . union of india & ors. : air1962sc1052 , considered the validity of rule 3 of ..... schedule iii of the citizenship rules and the order passed under section 9 ..... be conclusive proof of his having voluntarily acquired the citizenship of that country before that date.'12. relying upon this rule the union of india in its order passed under section 9(2) of the citizenship act dated 21st july, 1995 determined the national status of the appellants to be that of pakistani.13. a constitution bench of this court in izhar ahmad khan .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 02 2002 (HC)

World Human Rights Protection Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Jammu and Kashmir

Decided on : Aug-02-2002

Reported in : AIR2004J& K6

..... pakistan but her minor children were held entitled to indian citizenship because the father had continued to stay in india. it was concluded that the citizenship of ..... -wife was born in india, domiciled in india lateron migrated to pakistan after 1st march, 1947 was not held to the benefit of provisions of article 5 of the constitution of india and was not treated as a citizen of india. though she was born in india, she lost her indian citizenship as she had migrated to ..... concealing the bodies of the dead, rape of women, molestation of them, and detention of women and children indeed against the provisions of the constitution of india and the substantive and procedural law of the land debased the rule of law. no official agency of the state of uttar pradesh accepts the ..... self-respect and plan out a life with full realization of a role which they have to play. article 15, clause 3 of the constitution of india enables the state to make special provisions for children; article 21 provides that no child below the age of 14 shall be employed to ..... nationality. therefore, even if this salutary principle is applied, even then, so far as the minor is concerned, she would be entitled to claim citizenship of india. to repeat, it be seen that the minor (m) was conceived and has taken birth in the state of jammu and kashmir. under normal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 06 2002 (HC)

Dr. Soumen Paul Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Feb-06-2002

Reported in : (2002)3CALLT329(HC)

..... ., reported in : [1994]1scr754 wherein it has been settled that right to information and right to be informed reason, have its strong ground in terms of article 21 of the constitution of india, in the case reliance petrochemicals ltd. v. proprietors of indian express newspapers, bombay pvt. ltd. and ors., reported in : air1989sc190 , the apex court on application of article 21 ..... the communication of the district magistrate, 24-parganas (south) whereby and whereunder it was only communicated that the petitioner's application for grant of indian citizenship was rejected. the learned advocate for the union of india is present and he frankly submits that no instruction has been received from his clients and accordingly he cannot assist the court. from the impugned ..... also deemed, to be quashed and set aside.the respondents concerned are directed to hear the petitioner's case afresh and to adjudicate the petitioner's application for grant of citizenship within four weeks from the date of communication of this order. such decision is to be taken by the authorities concerned and after disposal of the application, the petitioner to ..... terms of section 15 of the said act by opposing the grounds which became hindrance before the authorities concerned in the matter of allowing the application of the petitioner's citizenship. hence, by due to non-assignment of the reason the petitioner has also been deprived of from exercising his statutory right under section 15 of the said act rightly .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 08 2002 (HC)

Anand Swaroop Verma and Sherab Shenga Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Aug-08-2002

Reported in : 100(2002)DLT78

..... only the short question which remains for consideration is whether the foreigners are entitled to the basic fundamental rights as enumerated in article 21 of the constitution or not? it is the settled position that the opportunity in consonance with the principle of natural justice will depend on the facts and circumstances of ..... any political organization nor is he a member of any organization. it is mentioned that he could have applied for indian citizenship under section 5(1)(c) of the indian citizenship act but in view of the status of nepalese under the indo-nepal friendship treaty there was no need for him do ..... pro-cpn (maoist) journal, teesaro sansar. their photographs and other details are in the confidential file of the respondent. they were all given 'quit india' notices. they were allowed to meet their counsel and thereafter they have been deported to nepal.9. it may be pertinent to mention that the abnes ..... nepal.3. in the petition it is prayed that a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari be issued for quashing the 'quit india' notices. it is also prayed that the writ of quo warranto seeking the authority by which the respondents have/are about to deport partha chhetri ..... foreigners act. it is incorporated in the petition filed on 12.7.2002 that the morning newspapers published that they have been served with 'quit india' notices. it is also mentioned in the petition that to the best of the petitioner's knowledge partha chhetri is an indian citizen hailing from .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 13 2002 (HC)

Tasleem Murad Vs. Government of A.P.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-13-2002

Reported in : 2002(5)ALD307

..... from pakistan was convicted and sentenced for possessing drugs. after his release, he was again arrested. anwar sought for a writ oi habeas corpus under article 32 of the constitution of india. the detention was defended on the ground that his expulsion from the state of j&k; is being arranged. while recognising the rights of anwar, though he is an ..... administrative law and whether there is any infringement of petitioner's right to life and liberty?in re point nos.(i) and (ii) :9. part iii of the constitution of india confers fundamental rights on all citizens. some of the fundamental rights are also conferred on persons who are not citizens. a foreign national who holds an indian visa and staying ..... . if the petitioner is now asked to quit india, she would be deprived of the opportunity to seek indian citizenship. he, therefore, prays to declare the impugned order as arbitrary and unconstitutional. the counsel, however, does not dispute that the petitioner cannot claim fundamental rights under articles 19 or 14 of the constitution of india. he also placed reliance on the judgments of ..... the supreme court in louis de readt v. union of india, : [1991]3scr149 , state .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 17 2002 (FN)

Jpmorgan Chase Bank Vs. Traffic Stream (Bvi) Infrastructure Ltd.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-17-2002

..... an aggression upon his sovereign" rendering alienage jurisdiction "essential to ... the security of the public tranquility"). thus, the first congress granted federal courts the alienage jurisdiction authorized in the constitution, even while general federal-question jurisdiction was withheld. see judiciary act of 1789, ch. 20, 11, 1 stat. 78 (providing for jurisdiction where "an alien is a ..... view long since replaced by the conception of corporations as independent legal entities, see id., at 93-107.3 thus, traffic stream's whole notion of corporate citizenship derived from natural persons is irrelevant to jurisdictional enquiry in the united states today. but the argument's more significant weakness is its failure to recognize that jurisdictional ..... in the united kingdom 130-131 (4th ed. 1995) (describing 98 98 jpmorgan chase bank v. traffic stream (bvi) infrastructure ltd. categories of united kingdom citizenship).2 traffic stream insists that because it is legally nothing more than a collection of noncitizen individuals, the corporation itself cannot be treated as deserving of access to the ..... of shareholders residing in the corporation's jurisdiction, traffic stream is not a citizen or subject under the alienage diversity statute. first, its outdated notion that corporate citizenship derives from natural persons has long since been replaced by the conception of corporations as independent legal entities. second, it fails to recognize that jurisdictional analysis under united .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 04 2002 (HC)

Mohan Lal Arya Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Oct-04-2002

Reported in : AIR2003All11

..... we are clearly of the opinion that respondent no. 1 was not entitled to apply for grant of a writ of mandamus under article 226 of the constitution and the high court was not competent to issue the same.'7. we are, therefore, clearly of the opinion that a foreign national has no ..... changed to mohan lal arya. he then made an application to the ministry of home affairs, government of india, to grant him indian citizenship. the petitioner claims that he made several representations for granting him indian citizenship. it is averred in paragraphs 7 and 8 that the senior superintendent of police, meerut, passed an order ..... can be issued at the instance of a foreign national, for commanding the central government to decide the application moved by him for grant of indian citizenship to him.5. the principles on which a writ of mandamus can be issued have been stated as under in the law of extraordinary legal remedies ..... summoned by the order dated 3-4-2002. on these facts, the petitioner prays that the respondents be commanded to decide the issue of his citizenship and he may not be deported to pakistan.3. since the complete facts of the criminal case have not been given in the writ petition, ..... g.p. mathur, j.1. this writ petition under article 226 of the constitution has been filed praying that a writ of mandamus be issued commanding the respondents to decide the issue of citizenship of the petitioner at the earliest possible time and further not to deport him to pakistan till the matter is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 27 2002 (FN)

Raygor Vs. Regents of Univ. of Minn.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Feb-27-2002

..... are so related to claims in the action within such original jurisdiction that they form part of the same case or controversy under article iii of the united states constitution. such supplemental jurisdiction shall include claims that involve the joinder or intervention of additional parties." subsection (b) places limits on supplemental jurisdiction when the district court's ..... grant of jurisdiction over "all civil actions" could be read to include claims by indian tribes against nonconsenting states, but we held that such language was insufficient to constitute a clear statement of an intent to abrogate state sovereign immunity. blatchford, supra, at 786. likewise, we cannot read 1367(a) to authorize district courts to exercise ..... original jurisdiction is based only on diversity of citizenship jurisdiction under 28 u. s. c. 1332 (1994 ed. and supp. v). subsection (c) allows district courts to decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction in certain situations, ..... decide state law claims not within their subject matter jurisdiction if the federal and state law claims "derive from a common nucleus of operative fact" and comprise "but one constitutional 'case.'" mine workers, supra, at 725. jurisdiction over state law claims in such instances was known as "pendent jurisdiction." this court later made clear that, absent authorization .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 20 2002 (HC)

Peter James Gifran Von KalkesteIn Bleach Vs. State of West Bengal and ...

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Sep-20-2002

Reported in : 2003CriLJ332

..... consideration of the mercy petition, filed on behalf of mr. peter bleach, the president rejected the same on merits under article 72 of the constitution of india (page a/28 of the petition).11. at page a/32 of the petition, there is another communication dated 11-9-2001 addressed ..... is not open to judicial review in the way it has been asked for and the power of the president of india under article 72 of the constitution is unfettered and absolute and not subject to judicial review in the manner it has been asked for by mr. bleach ..... from that, it is clear that while exercising the power under article 32 of the constitution of india, the hon'ble supreme court has also the power under article 142 of the constitution of india to do complete justice between the parties and the directions which were given by the hon ..... india, ministry of home affairs, new delhi. in the said affidavit it has been categorically denied that mr. bleach is serving the sentence just because he is a british national. the stand is that he is in jail in view of an order passed by a competent court upon a regular trial, which has nothing to do with the nationality or citizenship ..... of anyone. it is also stated that the mercy petition filed on his behalf was considered on merits and rejected and not because he is a british citizen. thus the charge of recall discrimination was denied.31. it is also stated that the executive power of the union, which vests in the president under article 72 of the constitution .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //