MARGAO: In a legal battle unfolding in the High Court (HC) of Bombay at Goa, petitioner Ian Fernandes has challenged the rejection of his application for registration as an Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) by the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO). The petitioner, represented by legal counsel, stands firm against the Union of India, including the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA).
Fernandes has contested the necessity of a surrender certificate for OCI registration, emphasising that such a requirement is not mentioned in the Citizenship Act or its associated rules.
At the heart of the petitioner’s argument lies the interpretation of Section 7A of the Citizenship Act. He contends that the revocation of his Indian passport should not disqualify him from OCI registration, as the statute primarily concerns one’s past Indian citizenship status rather than the current status of their passport.
The petitioner has maintained that the absence of a surrender certificate should not hinder his OCI eligibility, given his prior Indian citizenship.
He clarified that the reissuance of his Indian passport in 2016 was solely to update personal details, particularly to include his spouse’s name. He insisted that this action was a procedural necessity for obtaining a Portuguese passport reflecting his marital status.
The petitioner also referred to the counter-arguments, submitted by FRRO and pointed out that the respondents have not directly refuted his past Indian citizenship claim.
The petitioner also pointed out that the respondents, however, cited procedural documents, including a “Frequently Asked Questions” (FAQ) document, to justify the requirement of a surrender certificate for OCI registration.
The petitioner, in turn, questioned if the FAQ document constitutes the laying down of a rule or requirement of the surrender certificate, as has been claimed by the respondent. He further argued that the FAQ document does not constitute formal legal requirements and are merely advisory in nature.
The petitioner then asserted that the absence of any explicit requirement for a surrender certificate in the Citizenship Act or its rules should be interpreted as a validation of his OCI eligibility. He insisted that the respondents have failed to provide concrete evidence to justify the rejection of his OCI application solely based on passport revocation.
The Goa bench of the HC adjourned the matter to April 16 as other petitions involving similar matters have been posted on that date.
The outcome of this case could set a significant precedent regarding the eligibility criteria for OCI status, impacting numerous individuals of Indian origin seeking overseas citizenship.
