After Modi biopic, Vivek Oberoi gearing up to contest from Gujarat in 2024 polls

Kolkata, Mar 1: The Calcutta High Court has ruled that it is not mandatory for foreigners to produce a valid passport and its particulars for processing of application for grant of Indian citizenship if he is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non-availability of the document.

Justice Sabysachi Bhattacharya passed the order while disposing off a petition by granting the petitioner liberty to file an application before the authority "as contemplated in Rule 11 of the Citizenship Rules 2009, upon furnishing explanation as to the non-availability of the passport".

Bismillah Khan had filed the petition saying he was being denied the citizenship of India because of his inability to file an application under Section 5 (1) (c) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, apparently due to the mandatory requirement of furnishing a copy of the passport for such application.

The petitioner's counsel submitted that Khan was a Pakhtoon citizen and due to political turmoil in the said state, which subsequently merged partially into Afghanistan and partially into Pakistan, he, as a five-year old, had to migrate to India with his father in 1973.

Under such circumstances, the petitioner could not have any opportunity of having a valid passport, since they were refugees under distress, the counsel said.

The petitioner had previously approached a coordinate Bench of the court, wherein a single judge, passed an order on July 25, 2018, directing him to comply with the formalities required, as communicated by the secretary to the Government of India to the Secretary to the Government of West Bengal (Home), vide a letter dated December 7, 2017.

The court had then also given liberty to the petitioner to apply afresh before the appropriate authority under Section 5(1)(c) of the 1955 Act, having complied with all the formalities.

The petitioner then moved Bhattacharya's court submitting that a complete application as directed by the Coordinate Bench cannot be possibly filed by his client due to the mandatory requirement of uploading a copy of his passport, which the petitioner does not have due to reasons beyond his control.

The counsel said Khan is married to an Indian citizen, has a daughter and living in India for close to half a century.

The counsel for the union of India submitted that in view of no application having been filed by the petitioner, there is no scope of granting such proposed application at the present juncture for the Union.

The counsel argued that it is mandatory to file an application in Form III for the application of the petitioner under Section 5(1)(c) of the Act to be considered at all.

In view of the petitioner not complying with the mandatory requirement of submitting a copy of his passport, the state government cannot, under the law, forward such application to the union government.

After hearing all sides, Justice Bhattacharya said although the rule "contemplates that an application shall not be entertained unless the application is made in Form III, such provision ipso facto does not make the availability of a passport a mandatory requirement".

"..the Form given with the Rules or the Rules themselves cannot override the provision of the statute itself, under which the said Rules are framed, which does not stipulate such a mandate on the applicants for citizenship under Section 5 (1)(c) of the 1955 Act mandatorily to carry a passport".

The court said although such provision is included in the Form, which has to be complied with by the applicant, "it is nowhere indicated in such Form that all the relevant particulars, including the particulars regarding passport of the petitioner have to be furnished mandatorily, along with a copy of a valid foreign passport, even in the event the petitioner, for valid reasons, is not in a position to produce such passport".

Justice Bhattacharya ruled that under such circumstances, it cannot be held that the provision of producing a passport and its particulars is mandatory in nature and there has to be a relaxation in such requirement "in case the petitioner is able to satisfy the appropriate authorities the reasons for non- availability of such passport".

"Unless such a leeway is given to the applicants, genuine persons who otherwise have all the formal documents indicating that they have been residing in India for a long time and have married a resident of India would also be unable to apply for Indian Citizenship despite having lived their entire lives and contributed to the economy and diverse culture of this country."

He said such a scenario would be contradictory to the spirit of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

"In such view of the matter, the requirement of having a passport has to be read as optional in Form III of the Citizenship Rules, 2009 and the authorities are deemed to have the power to relax such 6 requirement in the event the applicant satisfied the authorities for genuine reasons why the applicant is not in a position to produce such passport," the February 24 order said.

The court ruled that despite the provision of making applications online, a provision has to be made for persons who do not have all the particulars of their passport, which is read as optional, to file applications manually, which are to be treated as valid applications under Rule 5 of the Citizenship Rules, 2009.

The court also ordered that alternatively the necessary software be amended so that the online applications can be presented with or without passports, in the latter case furnishing detailed reasons as to non-furnishing of passports.

"Sanctioning of such forms, however, will be conditional upon the satisfaction of the relevant authorities about the reasons for the applicant not being able to produce her/his passport," the order said.

May 11: Saudi Arabia will triple its value-added tax rate and suspend a cost of living allowance for state workers, it said on Monday, seeking to shield finances hit by low oil prices and a slump in demand for its lifeline export worsened by the new coronavirus.

Historic oil output cuts agreed by Riyadh and other major producers have given only limited support to prices after they sank on oversupply caused by a war for petroleum market share between the kingdom and its fellow oil titan Russia.

Saudi Arabia, the world's largest oil exporter, is also being hit hard by measures to fight the new coronavirus, which are likely to curb the pace and scale of economic reforms launched by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

"The cost of living allowance will be suspended as of June 1, and the value added tax will be increased to 15% from 5% as of July 1," Finance Minister Mohammed al-Jadaan said in a statement reported by the state news agency. "These measures are painful but necessary to maintain financial and economic stability over the medium to long term...and to overcome the unprecedented coronavirus crisis with the least damage possible."

The austerity measures come after the kingdom posted a $9 billion budget deficit in the first quarter.

The minister said non-oil revenues were affected by the suspension and decline in economic activity, while spending had risen due to unplanned strains on the healthcare sector and the initiatives taken to support the economy.

"All these challenges have cut state revenues, pressured public finances to a level that is hard to deal with going forward without affecting the overall economy in the medium to long term, which requires more spending cuts and measures to support non-oil revenues stability," he added.

The government has cancelled and put on hold some operating and capital expenditures for some government agencies, and cut allocations for some reform initiatives and projects worth a total 100 billion riyals ($26.6 billion), the statement said.

Central bank foreign reserves fell in March at their fastest rate in at least 20 years and to their lowest since 2011, while oil revenues in the first three months of the year fell 24% from a year earlier to $34 billion, pulling total revenues down 22%.

"The reforms are positive from a fiscal side as greater adjustment is essential. However, the tripling of VAT is unlikely to help that much in 2020 revenue wise with the expected fall in consumption," said Monica Malik, chief economist at Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank.

She said she kept unchanged her deficit forecast of 16.3% of GDP for this year, which already factors in a greater than previously announced spending cut.

About 1.5 million Saudis are employed in the government sector, according to official figures released in December.

In 2018, Saudi Arabia's King Salman ordered a monthly payment of 1,000 riyals ($267) to every state employee to compensate them for the rising living costs after the government hiked domestic gas prices and introduced value-added tax.

DIFFICULT TIMES

A committee has been formed to study all financial benefits paid to public sector employees and contractors, and will submit recommendations within 30 days, the statement said.

In late 2015, when oil prices fell from record highs, the kingdom slashed lavish bonuses, overtime payments and other benefits once considered routine perks in the public sector.

In a country without elections and with political legitimacy resting partly on distribution of oil revenue, the ability of citizens to adapt to such reforms is crucial for stability.

"Tripling the VAT will test the limits of the balance between revenues and consumption as the economy dives into a deep recession. The move will impact consumption and could also lower the expected revenues," said John Sfakianakis, a Gulf expert at the University of Cambridge.

"These are pro-austerity and pro-revenue moves rather than pro-growth ones," he said.

Hasnain Malik, head of equity strategy at Tellimer, said the VAT rise could bring about $24-$26.5 billion in additional non-oil fiscal revenue. The rise would hit consumer spending further but was a needed step towards fiscal sustainability, he said.

Mangaluru, May 6: Three more coronavirus positive cases have been reported in Dakshina Kannada district. 

According to fresh bulletin of health and family welfare department, an 11-year-old girl and a 36-year-old woman from Boloor in Mangaluru and a 16-year-old girl from Bantwal tested positive for the covid-19. 

All of them are undergoing treatment at Wenlock Hospital. Their condition is said to be stable. 

With this the total number of cases in the district reached 28 including 22 residents of Dakshina Kannada, 4 from Kasaragod, 1 from Udupi and 1 from Uttara Kannada.