The phrase 'was earlier citizen of independent India' under Section 5(1)(f) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, includes all individuals who held citizenship at any point since August 15, 1947, and is not restricted solely to former citizens who have renounced their nationality.

O R D E R:

Heard Sri Zeeshan Adnan Mahmood, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri B. Narsimha Sharma, learned Additional Solicitor General on behalf of Respondent No.1 and learned Government Pleader for Revenue on behalf of Respondent No. 2.

2. The case of petitioners is that petitioner No.1, who is the mother of petitioner No.2, was born on 26.01.1963 at Hyderabad, Erstwhile Andhra Pradesh presently Telangana, India and is an Indian citizen by birth and holds an Indian Passport. On 17.06.1992, petitioner No.1 married Saeed Omer Ba Maher, who holds citizenship of Yemen. Petitioner No.2 was born on 25.11.1995 at Riyadh, Saudi Arabia out of this lawful wedlock and he holds citizenship of Yemen.

2.1. It is the further case of petitioners that petitioner No.2 registered himself as an Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) cardholder on 16.08.2017 under Section 7A of the Citizenship Act, 1955 (for short, ‘the Act’); he has been residing in India continuously since 08.12.2021; his brother, Ahmed Sayeed Bameher, born of the same parents, was granted Indian citizenship and holds an Indian Passport. Petitioner No.2 married Muskaan Begum, an Indian citizen, on 08.05.2023. While so, on 08.12.2022, petitioner No.2 applied on line for registration of Indian citizenship under Section 5(1)(f) of the Act, in Form VI as per Rule 8(1)(a) of the Citizenship Rules, 2009. The application was allotted MHA File No. 2022050067. On 13.12.2022, petitioner No.2 submitted the printed Application form along with all necessary documents to the District Collector, Hyderabad (Respondent No.2). He furnished his valid Yemeni passport, OCI card, his mother's Indian Passport, oath of allegiance, and other required documents.

2.2. Petitioners further state that Respondent No.2 forwarded a positive report to Respondent No.1, finding Petitioner No.2 eligible in all respects with no adverse remarks. However, the Application remained pending without any response for nearly three years. On 18.09.2025, petitioner No.2 sent e mail to Respondent No.1 enquiring about the status of his Application. In response, Respondent No.1 issued the impugned proceeding dated 06.10.2025, which was communicated via e mail on 07.10.2025. The impugned proceeding stated that neither the applicant nor either of his parents were earlier citizens of independent India on the date of application and therefore the Petitioner No.2 is not eligible for citizenship under Section 5(1)(f) of the Act. Respondent No.1 requested the State Government to revisit the recommendation. Aggrieved by this proceeding, petitioners approached this Court.

3. Respondent No. 1 filed a detailed counter opposing the Writ Petition. It is stated, in all matters pertaining to foreigners, the Central Government is vested with absolute and unfettered discretion and has exclusive legislative competence to enact citizenship laws. It is the further case of Respondent No. 1 that for the purpose of an Application under Section 5 of the Act, the applicant must not be an illegal migrant as defined under Section 2(1)(b). Under Section 5(1)(t), only a person of full age and capacity, who himself or either of whose parents was an earlier citizen of Independent India, and who has been ordinarily resident in India for a period of at least twelve months immediately before making the application, is eligible to apply for registration as an Indian citizen. In terms of