Annamalai V. Commissioner For Registration Of Indian And Pakistani Residents

1957 Present: H. N. G. Fernando, J., and T. S. Fernando, J.

P. ANNAMALAI, Appellant, and THE COMMISSIONER
FOR REGISTRATION OF INDIAN AND PAKISTANI
RESIDENTS, Respondent

Citizenship Case No. 159 of 1956

In the matter of an Appeal under Section 15 of the Indian and Pakistani
Residents (Citizenship) Act

Indian and Pakistani Residents (Citizenship) Act, No. 3 of 1949-Application for registration-Order of refusal-Procedure that must be followed-Power of Supreme Court to order fresh inquiry-Sections 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 (6) and (7), 15.

An order refusing an application for registration under the Indian and Pakistani Residents (Citizenship) Act will not be valid if it is made only after holding an inquiry in purported pursuance of section 13 and without compliance with the procedure prescribed in section 9. In such a case the Supreme Court can, by virtue of the appellate jurisdiction conferred by section 15, order that the proper steps be taken This ruling was subsequently confirmed in Mohamed Ali v. Commissioner for Registration of Indian and Pakistani Residents (Citizenship Case No. 255, Application No. C 4607, S. C. Minutes of March 28, 1957).-Ed.

Obiter : The power to hold an inquiry under section 13 cannot be exercised at any stage after the publication of a statutory notice under section 10.

APPEAL under Section 15 of the Indian and Pakistani Residents (Citizenship) Act.

Walter Jayawardena, with M. Sanmuganathan, for the applicant-appellant.

J. W. Subasinghe, Crown Counsel, for the respondent.

Cur. adv. vult.

February 12, 1957. H. N. G. FERNANDO, J.-

This appeal raises a question of some difficulty and importance concerning the procedure which should be followed in the consideration and disposal of applications for Registration under the Indian and Pakistani Residents (Citizenship) Act, No. 3 of 1949. The first step in the procedure (prescribed by section 8) is that an application shall on receipt be referred to an investigating officer for a report in which that officer will inter alia set out a statement of facts and conclusions relevant to the application; his report must be taken into consideration when the application is dealt with. It is necessary to set out the text of sections 9 to 12 of the Act, and of sub-sections (6) and (7) of section 14 before I refer to the point in dispute. (References to the " Commissioner " in each case should be construed as being applicable to the Deputy Commissioner who deals With the particular application.)

" s. 9. (1) Where, upon the consideration of any application, the Commissioner is of opinion that a prima facie case has not been established, he shall cause to be served on the applicant a notice setting out the grounds on which the application will be refused and giving the applicant an opportunity to show cause to the contrary -within a period of three months from the date of the notice.

(2) Where no cause is shown by the applicant within the aforesaid period, the Commissioner shall make order refusing the application and cause a copy of the order to be served on the applicant.

(3) Where cause is shown by the applicant within the aforesaid period, the Commissioner may either-

(a) make an order appointing the time and place for an inquiry and cause a copy of that order to be served on the applicant; or
(b) take the steps he is hereinafter authorised to take whenever there is a prima facie case for allowing an application.

s. 10. Where, upon the consideration of an application, the Commissioner is of opinion that there is a prima facie case for allowing the application, he shall give public notice in the prescribed manner that an order allowing the application will be made unless any written objection to the making of such order together with a statement of the grounds or facts on which such objection is based, is received by him from any memb

Click Here to Read the rest of this document