ABDUL BARIK Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition by Abdul Bank under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order No. 8381-PP/S-692/59 dated the 14th September, 1960, made by the Governor under Clause (c) of Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 (XXXI of 1946) read with Govt. of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Notification No, 4/3/56-1 F. I. dated the 19th April, 1958. The order is as follows:

(2.) The petitioner's case is that he is not a foreigner of Pakistan nationality. He asserts that he is an Indian and of Indian nationality. He says further that he was born in Mymensingh in the year 1923 which is now in Pakistan. The petitioner says that he is the posthumous child of his father. At the age of 11 years he came with some Ferang by the name of Nuru Serang of an adjoining village Sabagh to Calcutta. He came to Bhawanipore at Calcutta and was employed by a firm called Idris and Co., 46, Strand Road. Calcutta at a pay of Rs. 15/- per month with food and lodging as a sales boy. Then he is supposed to have joined as a Khalashi with M/s. E. S. N. Co., on the Strand Head, Calcutta. Thereafter he started a Pan Biri shop at 6/1 Munshigunj Road, Calcutta-23. His shop is now at 32/1 Munshigunj Road and he says that in 1950 he took a lease of those premises paying a rental to the landlord a sum of Rs. 150/- per month. According to the petitioner, he has no property in My-meusingh although he said that he had a brother who had died and who enjoyed the property of his father. The petitioner does not say that after the death of his brother sometime in 1953 what happened to those properties and whether he still has legal right to such properties or not. He was silent on the point. In support of his claim for Indian citizenship he says that he is in the electoral roll of the Legislative Assembly and annexes a copy of that electoral roll for 1956 only. Although in the petition he says that he was on the electoral roll also for 1950, but no proof of 1950 electoral roll has been submitted.

(3.) The petitioner's further case is that he had applied to the Collector for registration as an Indian citizen under Section 5 (i) (a) of the Citizenship Act. While this application was pending the Governor made this order against him. Therefore, in his petition he asserts that no order could be made by the Governor while the application for citizenship under Section 5 of the Citizenship Act was pending. The Rule in this case was issued on the limited grounds Nos. 1 to 4 as set out in paragraph 12 of the petition. These grounds relate to the alleged pending application for citizenship under Section 5 of the Citizenship Act.