Passport office to clear 500 more online applications daily

New Delhi, Jan 20: The BJP has got a brand new President in the form of JP Nadda. At around 2.30 pm, the announcement was made, bringing an end to the Amit Shah era in BJP. The party's Working President Jagat Prakash Nadda won unopposed, sparking celebrations outside the BJP headquarters here on Monday. 

Amit Shah himself was among the people who proposed Nadda's name along with Nitin Gadkari and Rajnath Singh. Soon after his annointment, BJP election returning officer Radha Mohan Singh told the media, "I announce JP Nadda as the new BJP President." Shah was also seen hugging Nadda.

The nomination process for the post of the BJP President began at 10 am and went on till 12.30 pm. For the next hour, the filed nomination paper, which was just one, was examined. Party members waitied till 2.30 pm for the candidate to withdraw if he wished to. It was after this that Nadda was declared as the man who would step into the shoes of Amit Shah.

Many in the BJP believe that although Nadda is the BJP chief now, Shah would still make all macro-level decisions like pre poll alliances or top organisational appointments. Nadda would be in charge of monitoring the day-to-day needs of the organisation. BJP sources say that Amit Shah himself wanted an arrangement like this one and personally wanted Nadda to take over. as he helped Shah formulate legislations like Triple Talaq and Citizenship Amendment Act.

The party constitution mandates completion of election of at least 50 per cent of state Presidents for the election of national President to happen. In the last few days, the BJP has completed the election of a slew of state Presidents like in West Bengal, Nagaland among others.

The process of election of the national BJP President is quite elaborate and has been described in detail in the party constitution, which says that the national president shall be elected by an electoral college, comprising members of the national council and the state councils.

"Any 20 members of the electoral college of a state can jointly propose the name of a person, who has been an active member for four terms and has 15 years of membership, for the post of national president. Such joint proposal should come from not less than five states where elections have been completed for the national council. The consent of the candidate is necessary," it says.

Who is JP Nadda?

Jagat Prakash Nadda, 59, who has his roots in the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and its affiliates, was appointed the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) national President on Monday, replacing his 'mentor' and Union Home Minister Amit Shah.

Former environment, health and law minister from Himachal Pradesh, which has just four of the Lok Sabha's 543 seats, Nadda has tried to carve out his own space in national politics with his low profile and astute organisational skills, believe his party leaders.

He rose through the ranks from the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), the student wing of the RSS, from where he has managed to build inroads from university to the state politics.

Nadda has been active on the national political scene since 2010 when he was picked by then BJP chief Nitin Gadkari to join his new team. He was made the party's national general secretary.

Born on December 2, 1960, Nadda did his graduation from Patna and holds a post-graduate degree in political science and Bachelor of Legislative Law (LL.B) from Himachal Pradesh University in Shimla.

Starting his political career as a student leader of the ABVP in 1978, Nadda had also worked both with Gadkari and Shah even in the party's youth wing -- the Bharatiya Yuva Morcha -- from 1991 to 1994.

His wife Mallika Nadda, who teaches history at the Himachal Pradesh University and is currently posted in university's campus in Delhi, was an ABVP activist too, and its national general secretary from 1988 to 1999.

In the previous BJP government (2007-12) in the state, Nadda was forced to resign as Forest Minister in 2010 owing to differences between him and then chief minister Prem Kumar Dhumal.

He was elected to the Rajya Sabha in 2012.

Nadda won his first Assembly election from Bilaspur (Sadar) in Himachal in 1993. In 1998, he again won from that seat and became the state Health Minister.

He lost the Assembly elections in 2003, but again won in 2007 and was appointed the Forest Minister in the Himachal Pradesh.

Nadda, as a forest minister, was the brain behind opening forest police stations to check forest crimes, launching community-driven plantation, setting up forest ponds and the massive plantation of deodars to boost the depleting green cover of the 'Queen of Hills', as Shimla was fondly called by the British.

A close confidant of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Nadda was among those who were mentioned as likely aspirants to the BJP top post after Rajnath Singh was inducted into the Central government as the Home Minister in 2014.

Later, Nadda was inducted into the union cabinet in its first expansion in 2014 as the Health Minister.

Hailing Nadda's appointment, Chief Minister Jai Ram Thakur told IANS it is a proud moment that a leader belonging to a small state in the national politics is today the leader of the country's biggest national party.

His father N.L. Nadda, who was a Vice-Chancellor of the Ranchi University, resides in Bilaspur town.

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.