JOSHUA SADAGURSKY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Respondents waive service. By consent, rule made returnable forthwith and taken up for hearing and fnal disposal.

(2.) The petitioner ("Sadagursky") is a US national and is a citizen of that country. He has fled this petition invoking our jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. He seeks high prerogative remedies; specifcally, the issue of a writ of mandamus to restrain the respondents from obstructing or preventing Sadagursky's entry into India; and a writ of certiorari to quash and set aside a notice dated 21st May 2018 issued to him by the respondents. Alternatively, Sadagursky seeks that he be issued a show-cause notice, and the opportunity of a hearing and of fling a written representation contesting his expulsion from India. There are other, relatively minor prayers: that the respondents be directed to furnish complete reasons for his expulsion from India, and that he be reimbursed an amount of US$ 2,000 for his expenses for his return fight to the United States.

(3.) The 1st respondent is the Union of India through the Ministry of Home Affairs. The 2nd respondent is the Bureau of Immigration through the Immigration Ofcer, Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj International Airport ("CSMIA"), Mumbai, Maharashtra and the 3rd respondent is the Foreign Registration Regional Ofce, Mumbai.