Team Goemkarponn
PANAJI: A Division Bench of the High Court of Bombay at Goa comprising of Justice M.S. Karnik and Justice Nivedita P. Mehta has adjourned to December 16th the further hearing on the contempt petition filed by Adv. Aires Rodrigues over the failure of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) to comply with the High Court passed on July 25th directing the MHA to consider and decide within 30:days the application filed by Adv. Rodrigues for an Overseas Citizen of India (OCI ) Card.
While the Central Government Advocate Raviraj Chodankar submitted that the MHA has filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court, the High Court observed that the MHA should either obtain a stay order or comply with the 25th July order.
On 15th May last year, Adv. Aires Rodrigues obtained his Portuguese Passport in Lisbon and on his return to Goa in the first week of June immediately surrendered his Indian Passport at the Goa Passport Office as was required by law.
After surrendering his Indian passport and obtaining a Surrender Certificate and all the other required documents he applied for his OCI card only to be told by the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) at Mumbai that the new rule required six months’ residence in Goa before filing an OCI application.
After completing the requisite six months’ residence, Adv. Rodrigues once again on 25th January this year applied for an OCI card and was given an appointment on 5th of March at FRRO Mumbai for verification of his original documents which was successfully completed on that day and paying the requisite processing fee of Rs 15000.
Three months later on 6th June 2024, Adv. Rodrigues received a one-line email from FRRO Mumbai that his OCI Application has been cancelled under Rule 32(2) of Citizenship Rules Rules, 2009.
Aggrieved by the decision of FRRO, Mumbai, Adv. Rodrigues immediately on 20th June moved the High Court. Adv. Rodrigues in his petition submitted that the decision by FRRO Mumbai to cancel his OCI application was arbitrary, illegal, erroneous, unjust and contrary to law. Adv. Rodrigues further submitted that the mere one sentence decision by FRRO Mumbai without giving any reasons violated the principles of natural justice.
