N.M. Jamdar, J.

By this Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the orders dated 17 August 2011 and 1 May 2013 passed by the Ministry of Home Affairs - Respondent no.3. The Petitioner has also sought that his 'Person of Indian Origin Card' issued to him by the High Commission of India in London, be returned to him.

2. The Respondent no.4 is an African National and the Petitioner is a British National. They were married on 29 December 1993 at Sheffield in United Kingdom. The marriage was registered in the office of the Marriage Registrar District of Sheffield in United Kingdom. Since the Respondent no.1 is holding a PIO (Person of Indian Origin) Card, being a spouse, the Petitioner was granted Person of Indian Origin Card. The Respondent no.4 filed an application on 15 May 2009 under Section 28 of the Special Marriages Act, 1982 in the Court of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, North Goa, for mutual divorce. The Respondent no.4 claimed that the Petitioner and the Respondent no.4 are living separately since the year 2005 and they did not wish to continue with the marriage. The learned Principal District Judge recorded the statements of the Petitioner and the Respondent no.4 granted Provisional Divorce, dated 13 January 2010, on the ground that the parties were residing separately and there was no possibility of reconciliation between them.

3. On 23 February 2011, the Respondent no.4 filed an application that provisional divorce granted on 13 January 2010 made absolute under Article 40 of the Law of Divorce and the final decree be published. Notice of the application was served on the Petitioner. The Petitioner filed reply stating that the Special Marriage Act was not extended to the State of Goa and the Court had no jurisdiction to pass the order dated 13 January 2010. The Petitioner also informed that he had withdrawn his consent.

4. On 17 August 2011, the Respondent no.3 - the Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs passed an order that the PIO Card issued to the Petitioner be surrendered since the marriage between the Petitioner and the Respondent no.4 has been dissolved by mutual consent. On 19 August 2011, pursuant to the order the Petitioner surrendered the PIO Card for residential purpose. On 22 August 2011 the Petitioner sent a legal notice to the Respondent no.3 in respect of the order dated 17 August 2011. The Petitioner pointed that the order of the Court is only a provisional divorce and he has withdrawn his consent. The Petitioner called upon the Respondent no.3 to recall the order dated 17 August 2011. On 26 August 2011, the Respondent no.3 wrote to the Respondent no.4 whether any application for confirmation of provisional divorce has been filed.

On 17 September 2011 the Petitioner made one more representation to the Respondent no.3. On 16 February 2011 the Director of Non Resident Indian Affairs, Ministry of Home Affairs, wrote to the Respondent no.3 in respect of the revocation of the Petitioner's PIO Card to expedite the proceedings.

5. In the meanwhile, the matrimonial proceeding were considered by the learned Principal District Judge. The learned Principal District Judge by an order dated 4 October 2012 upheld the contention of the Petitioner of lack of jurisdiction and that he has withdrawn the consent, and recalled the order dated 13 January 2010 and the application for divorce by mutual consent was dismissed. We are informed that this order is under challenge in this Court.

6. The Petitioner again wrote to the Respondent no.3 on 2 November 2012 drawing his attention to the fact that the learned Principal District Judge had withdrawn the order granting provisional divorce and the marriage subsists between the parties.

The Petitioner, in the meanwhile, was directed to quit India and he filed Writ Petitions in this Court, which were disposed of on 9 July 2012 and the Authorities were directed to consider the matter. Protection was granted to the Petitioner subject to reporting him to the Police