Kerala floods outcome of cow slaughtering: BJP MLA

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.

New Delhi, Apr 16: South Delhi District Magistrate Brij Mohan Mishra on Thursday said that the administration is investigating how the pizza delivery boy contracted the coronavirus.

"In the last 15 days, we discovered houses he had delivered food. We contacted people living in 72 houses and they have been asked to stay in-home quarantine. No symptoms have been seen in people related to him. 

Testing of his roommate has been done and his reports are awaited. The rest of the people don't have any symptoms, they have been placed under institutional quarantine. Those in-home quarantines are also asymptomatic," Mishra said.

"Unless a positive case comes, we feel that transmission has not taken place. The boy told us that he was continuously wearing a mask while delivering the food. We are also finding out how he got infected. We are getting the information about the places he visited for delivery. He was tested on the basis of the doctor's advice. Later, he tested positive," he said.

72 families have to stay in home quarantine in the Malviya Nagar area after the delivery boy tested positive for COVID-19 on Wednesday.
Delhi Health Minister Satyendra Jain said that 17 other delivery boys linked with the infected person have also been placed under institutional quarantine.

"A pizza delivery boy has been detected with COVID-19 here. 17 other delivery boys linked with him have been placed under institutional quarantine and 72 people have been placed under home quarantine," Jain said.

Food delivery app Zomato said that the staff of the infected person's restaurant has delivered some orders which were placed on its platform.

"We've been made aware today that a restaurant's employee, who has been recently tested positive for COVID-19, had delivered food in the past to a few customers in the Malviya Nagar area in Delhi. All these customers have already been contacted by the govt authorities... We are not sure whether the rider was infected at the time of delivery," the company said in a statement.

Zomato also claimed that colleagues of the delivery boy have tested negative for COVID-19.
"This restaurant had instructed their riders to wear masks and follow strict hygiene to keep customers safe from any unintended mishap.

All co-workers of the said rider have been tested negative. And as a precaution, the restaurant where this rider worked has suspended operations," read the statement.

Mumbai, May 4: Days after Facebook, private equity firm Silver Lake said it will invest 56.56 billion rupees ($746.74 million) in Reliance Industries's digital arm, giving it a valuation of 4.90 trillion rupees. Silver Lake on Monday agreed to pay Rs 5,655.75 crore to buy 1.15 per cent stake in the firm that houses billionaire Mukesh Ambani's telecom arm Jio.

The investment in Jio Platforms comes within days of Facebook investing USD 5.7 billion to buy a 9.99 per cent stake in Jio Platforms. The investment is at a premium of 12.5 per cent to the Facebook deal.

"This investment values Jio Platforms at an equity value of Rs 4.90 lakh crore and an enterprise value of Rs 5.15 lakh crore and represents a 12.5 per cent premium to the equity valuation of the Facebook investment announced on April 22, 2020," Reliance said in a statement.