Devinder Gupta, J.

( 1 ) ON 12. 5. 1998 the petitioner filed this petition. Besides praying for (a) quashing of the order dated 5. 5. 1998 (annexure-P. 1) passed by the Foreigner s Regional Registration Officer asking the petitioner to leave India on or before 15. 5. 1998 and not to enter thereafter; and (b) declaring clause (c) of sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 as ultra vires of the Constitution; the petitioner has prayed for other reliefs, which read:- " (a)quash the order No. 1942/for (S. O. V.) dated 5. 5. 98 passed by respondent No. 2 asking the petitioner to leave India on or before 15. 5. 98 and not to enter India thereafter, as the same is contrary to law. (b)permit the petitioner to continue to stay in India, as he is not able to return to Afghanistan in the prevailing circumstances; (c)quash clause (c) of sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 (Act XXXI of 1946) as ultra vires and unconstitutional because the same is violative of the principles of natural justice and hence, illegal; (d)issue a writ of mandamus, or a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing respondent No. 1 to exempt the petitioner and such other refugees as a class or description of foreigners from the application of the Foreigners Act, 1946 (Act XXXI of 1946), as provided under clause (b) of sub- section (1) of section 3a of the said Act. "

( 2 ) AFTER show cause notice the respondents put in appearance, filed their reply on the affidavit of Shri Dharmendra Kumar, Foreigner s Regional Registration Officer, Hans Bhawan, New Delhi, to which the petitioner filed rejoinder. Record was also made available for our perusal. We heard learned counsel for the parties at length at the admission stage itself.

( 3 ) IN brief the petitioner s case is that he is an Afgan National by birth and left Afghanistan, with other refugees, in 1980 and came to India in 1981. He went to Tezpur (Assam) with some other refugees and started working there to earn his livelihood. He married an Indian National of Assam. There are three children of this marriage. In between the petitioner went to Afghanistan during the year 1986, when his father informed that conditions were not so congenial, therefore, in 1987 he left Afghanistan again. On arrival the petitioner approached United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, New Delhi. On the basis of available information, a certificate dated 23. 3. 1987 was issued certifying that the petitioner is a refugee. It was valid for one year. The same has been renewed thereafter regularly. Last renewal was done on 27. 2. 1998, which is valid upto 26. 2. 1999.

( 4 ) THE petitioner further alleged that in January, 1998, he was asked by respondent No. 2 to report in his office because of certain complaint received against him. In connection with the enquiry in the said complaint, the petitioner had been appearing before respondent No. 2. As there was nothing against the petitioner, he obtained renewal of his permit under which he is now permitted to stay in India till 26. 2. 1999.

( 5 ) IT is alleged that on 19. 4. 1998 he received a notice, which required him to visit the office of respondent No. 2 on 20. 4. 1998 along with documents including renewal permit. In response to the notice he visited the office of respondent No. 2. Documents were produced and were scrutinised. The petitioner was asked to submit photo copies thereof, which he provided. Abruptly on 6. 5. 1998 the impugned order dated 5. 5. 1998 was received. The petitioner states that he has been working in a Khari Baoli shop in Old Delhi and is a law abiding person. There is no danger from him. The impugned order has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice.

( 6 ) THE petitioner has sought the aid of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India saying that as a person he is entitled to invoke the provisions of the Constitution. He cannot be discriminated against. The impugned order is arbitrary and

Click Here to Read the rest of this document