IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:13.07.2011 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI WRIT PETITION NO.2046 of 2011 and M.P.No.1 of 2011 .. Mrs.Pappammal .. Petitioner vs. 1.The Union of India rep. By the Secretary to Government Home Department North Block, New Delhi. 2.The Secretary Home Department Government of India North Block, New Delhi. 3.The Secretary Ministry of Immigration Government of India North Block, New Delhi. 4.The Joint Secretary (FCRA) rep. By its Ministry of Home Government of India Jaisalmar House Monsingh Road, New Delhi. .. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus as stated therein. For petitioner : Mr.G.Ethirajulu for Mr.K.Balu For respondents : Mr.S.Narayanasamy Senior Panel Counsel .. ORDER The petitioner has filed the present writ petition for direction against the respondents, to give clearance to the Embassy of India, Washington DC to process the application for Visa applied https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ by the petitioner's son, viz., Muthuvel Chelliah, to visit India in respect of his Passport No.209088660, for the purpose of seeing the petitioner, who is his mother, stated to be ailing. 2. Admittedly, the petitioner's son is a permanent resident of United States of America (USA), and stated to have been promoting Tamil and Indian Culture in United States. It is the case of the petitioner that, on the basis of a remark made by Dr.Subramanyam Swamy, reported in a local newspaper that her son is a Sri Lankan Tamiliyan, however, during 1998, the petitioner's son had visited Tamil Nadu with his family for five weeks and in 2002, her son's 10 year Visa period had expired and he wanted to renew the Visa period to India for another 10 years and therefore, he made an application along with United States passport and fees to the United States Embassy in Washington DC. When the petitioner's son approached the Indian Embassy in Washington DC, he was informed that the Government of India has not given clearance. According to the petitioner, even though her son is of Indian origin or overseas citizen of India, as a foreigner, carrying a valid Person of Indian Origin (PIO) Card or Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) Card, along with valid National passport, he is authorised to enter into India without obtaining separate visa. Since the petitioner being the mother, who is living in Nagapattinam, wants to see her son, who is living in United States as its citizen and the Indian Embassy at Washington DC has refused to process the application on the basis that the Government of India has not given clearance, she has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition to process the said application. 3. The writ petition is vehemently opposed by the respondents. Mr.S.Narayasamy, the learned Senior Panel counsel appearing for the respondents has produced a sealed cover before this Court, when he was asked about the reason for the Government of India in directing the Indian embassy at Washington DC not to process the application of the petitioner's son, which states to the effect that the Government has issued a warning circular against the petitioner's son stating that he shall not be permitted to enter into India without specific permission from the Government of India. It is also stated that the petitioner's son is an American national. The learned counsel for the respondents has also stated that the Government of India has issued a black list circular in respect of the petitioner's son Muthuvel Chelliah, a United States national. 4. As per the Foreigners Order, 1948, no foreign national has any right to enter into India and if any entry is made, the same is prohibited either under the order issued by a competent authority or under the specific order of the Central Government. Clause 3(2)(e) of the Foreigners Order, 1948, reads thus: "3(2)(e). His entry is prohibited either under an order issued by a competent authority or under the specific https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ orders of the Central Government." Clause 3(3) empowers the 'civil authority' to attach any condition to grant leave to enter. The term 'civil authority' is defined as the authority who may be appointed by the Central Government in respect of the Foreigners Order, 1948. Inasmuch as by virtue of the powers conferred under the said Order, the Government of India has issued a notification in the form of a warning circular containing the names of various foreigners, who are prohibited to enter into India, without the authority of the Government of India, the petitioner's claim is not maintainable in law. Admittedly, the petitioner's son is residing in United States, and it is for him to approach the embassy in Washington DC and as and when the Government of India gives permission to enter into this country, he can do so. Merely because the petitioner is aged and ailing, she cannot claim that her son's application has to be processed by the Indian embassy at Washington DC, on humanitarian ground . In such view of the matter, the petitioner is not entitled to claim any relief as prayed for in this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Kh Sd/- Asst. Registrar //True Copy// Sub Asst. Registrar To 1.The Secretary to Government Union of India Home Department North Block, New Delhi. 2.The Secretary Home Department Government of India North Block, New Delhi. 3.The Secretary Ministry of Immigration Government of India North Block, New Delhi. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4.The Ministry of Home The Joint Secretary (FCRA) Government of India Jaisalmar House Monsingh Road, New Delhi. + 1 cc to Mr. K. Balu, Advocate SR No.41539 + 1 cc to Mr. Prof Mr. S. Narayanasamy, Advocate SR No.41230 Order in W.P.No.2046 of 2011 SGL(CO) SR/22.7.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/