The impugned order was set aside due to being made against a deceased person, not communicated to the petitioner, and in gross breach of the principles of natural justice and fair play.

JUDGMENT

M. S. Sonak, J. - Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. This petition was in fact tagged along with Writ Petition No.245 of 2018 and Writ Petition No. 1187 of 2018. However, Mr. Wachasundar, learned counsel for respondent no.2 submitted that the facts in the present petition are different from the facts in Writ Petition No.245 of 2018 and Writ Petition No. 1187 of 2018. Therefore, this petition was detagged, heard separately and is now disposed of by a separate Judgment and Order.

3. This petition pertains to property bearing Survey No.4l6/4, Benaulim, Salcete, Goa admeasuring 3050 sq.mtrs. (said property). The survey records in respect of the said property reflected the name of the late husband of the petitioner namely Felipe do Rosario Fernandes. The said Felipe do Rosario Fernandes expired on 18.11.2007 and in the inventory proceedings which followed, a consent decree was drawn out, in which, the said property was allotted to the petitioner. Since the petitioner wished to reconstruct and renovate old residential house in the said property, she applied for the survey records and was alarmed to note that the name of the Custodian of Enemy Property was recorded therein by deleting the name of petitioner''s late husband namely Felipe do Rosario Fernandes.

4. The petitioner has pleaded that on account of old age her movements were severely restricted and therefore through her son she approached respondent no.4 to find out as to how the name of the Custodian appears in the survey records after deleting the name of petitioner''s late husband. The petitioner''s son was thereafter furnished copy of order dated 08.10.2010 made by the Custodian i.e. respondent no.2 purportedly under Sections 5 and 24 of the Enemy Property Act, 1968 (E.P. Act).

5. The petitioner, has pleaded that no notice had ever been issued to the petitioner prior to making of the impugned order dated 08.10.2010 nor was such order served upon the petitioner. The petitioner has pleaded that neither she nor any of the other co-owners were ever granted any opportunity of hearing before the order was made. The petitioner has therefore submitted that the impugned order is in gross violation of principles of natural justice and fair play.

6. The petitioner has further pleaded that as on 10.09.1965, the petitioner''s late husband namely Felipe do Rosario Fernandes was an Indian National who was merely residing in Pakistan. The petitioner has pleaded that sometime in 1963 the petitioner and her late husband, for the purpose of employment of her late husband, were at Karachi and they returned to India for good in the year 1968. The petitioner and her husband were in Pakistan for less than 5 years. The petitioner and her husband throughout continued with their Indian citizenship whilst residing in Pakistan but by way of abundant caution and to remove all doubts the petitioner and her husband were granted Indian Citizenship on 31.12.1971. The petitioner has produced on record true copies of expired Indian Passport, current Indian Passports as well as Adhar Cards. On basis of all this material, the petitioner urges that the petitioner''s late husband could never have been declared as "enemy" for the purpose of Section 2(b) of the E.P. Act.

7. Mr. J.A.Lobo, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon ruling of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Gangadhar Yashwant Bhandare v. Erasmo Jesus de Sequeira, (1975) 1 SCC 544 to submit that in almost similar circumstances, the Hon''ble Apex Court has negated the contention that an Indian citizen loses his citizenship or becomes an enemy by merely residing in a enemy country.

8. Mr. J.A.Lobo submits that in the present case the impugned order has been made against Felipe do Rosario Fernandes, who had already expired on 18.11.2007. he submits that the impugned order is therefore a nullity. Without prejudice Mr. J.A.Lobo submits that there was no compliance whatsoever with the principles of natural jus