Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

6. In the meanwhile, on 05.01.2009, respondent no.1 issued a notification (being No.S.0.36(E) [F.No.OI-15013/13/2008-DS] under Section 7(B)(1) of the Citizenship Act, inter alia, granting the doctors, dentists, nurses and pharmacists (registered as OCI cardholders) the right to pursue the medical profession in India.

7. Thereafter, the petitioner was registered as an OCI cardholder on 22.12.2012, and he was further issued a lifelong visa on the same date.

8. In the year 2013, the petitioner along with his family moved to India. Thereafter, on 01.01.2014, the petitioner got himself registered with the Medical Council of India and since then he has been practising as a doctor in the Duncan Hospital in Raxaul, Bihar.

12. The said petition was moved before this Court on 01.06.2016 and on that day, the counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioner‟s visa has been cancelled by the Consulate General of India, Houston on account of petitioner being found to be indulging in "evangelical and subversive activities" and the said Consulate has further recommended for the cancellation of OCI Card of the petitioner.

13. During the pendency of the said petition, the petitioner was informed that he was denied entry into the country as a Look Out Circular dated 30.12.2015 - bearing No. HOU/Cons/407/18/2015 - was issued against him by respondent no.3 on the ground that the petitioner has been involved in missionary activities in India. On 23.05.2017, during the course of hearing, this Court was informed that the petitioner was placed in the blacklist LOC and a decision had been taken to cancel the OCI Card of the petitioner.

14. Thereafter, on 01.08.2017, respondent no.3 passed an order under Section 7D(e) of the Citizenship Act cancelling the petitioner‟s OCI Card and lifelong Visa Sticker to respondent no.3. In terms of the said order, the petitioner was involved in missionary activities in India and as a consequence, he was included in the Blacklist, therefore, the said LOC was issued against the petitioner to prevent him from entering India.

15. Subsequently, the said writ petition - W.P.(C) 5374/2016 - was disposed of by an order dated 11.08.2017 granting the petitioner liberty to file a fresh petition challenging the order dated 01.08.2017 cancelling the petitioner‟s OCI Card.

33. This Court is, in no manner of doubt, that the decision of the CGI that it is necessary to cancel the petitioner‟s OCI Card in the interest of sovereignty and integrity of India, is wholly perverse and militates against the secular values engrafted in the Constitution of India.

34. There is no material whatsoever that could even remotely suggest that the cancellation of the petitioner‟s OCI Card is in the interest of general public. On the contrary, if the statements in the articles published on the website (the printout of which is relied upon by CGI) is believed, the cancellation of the petitioner‟s OCI card would deprive some of the patients belonging to the poorer section much needed medical assistance and such a decision, therefore, would be contrary to public interest rather than in favour of public interest.