Dr.Mumbiram
12 June 2009 at 10:43
Artist Mumbiram,an Indian citizen, has been married to Nadine Grenz, a german national, since 2002. Their India-born son Hansraj has a German passport. Their application on behalf of Hansraj for a routine 5-year visa extension had been stalled by the Pune FRO and then by the Alibag FRO for a period of 3 and 1/2 years. Also the Alibag FRO had refused to register Nadine for a period of 1 and ½ years thereby making it impossible for her to apply for a further 5-year visa extension..
Encouraged by advice on this forum of Lawyers Club we filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court under articles 226 and 14 of the constitution making the Govt. of Maharashtra and the MHA Respondents along with the FROs.. Upon the intervention of the High Court the Respondents processed and granted the requested visa extension to Hansraj, without any new documents from the Petitioners, within 6 weeks. Also the Respondents duly registered Nadine Grenz, accepted and granted her application for further 5-year visa extension, also within weeks. It is now clear that the Respondents had stalled the Petitioners’ legitimate requests arbitrarily and oppressively for an inordinately long period for no fault of the Petitioners. It is mentionworthy that Artist Dr. Mumbiram represented personally the Petitioners in the 3 hearings of the case.
In the WP the Petitioners have listed damages suffered by them by being made defaulters in the eyes of law for no fault of theirs thereby depriving them of their ability to travel freely within India, enrol Hansraj in educational institutes etc. The petitioners had asked for compensation for damages at the rate of 5000 Rs. Per day for every day of delay over a reasonable period of 1 year.
As the (interim) relief has been achieved, the Court inquired whether the Petitioners would like to withdraw the Petition. The Petitioners expressed their desire to request for compensation as a Public Law remedy for violation of their Fundamental Right to equal treatment under law, as distinct from compensation for damages in private law in torts. The petitioners asked for leave to amend the Petition for this purpose. The Court thereupon advised the Petitioner to make a ‘Civil Application’ for that at the next hearing on June 24.
How is this Civil Application made ? Is there a format to be followed ? Do we already need to include supporting arguments and quote precedents of SC cases where ‘in appropriate cases’ such compensation has been awarded ? We need the full quotations for the following citations: (Nilabati Behera v State of Orissa, 1993) 2 SCC p758 para 10
.(M.C.Mehta v Union of India , 1987, 1 SCC p.408 para 7)
Could anyone provide us these citations ? Other citations where such a compensation has been awarded recently ?
Dr.Mumbiram
11 April 2009 at 22:40
Artist Dr. Mumbiram is an Indian citizen. His wife and son have German passports. Through various malafide avoidance tactics the local Foreigner Registration Office failed to forward without any reason our application for a 5 year visa extension for our son, who has a German passport, to the Office of the Principal Secretary(special) Home Dept. Maharashtra, who is the competent authority to grant such extensions as well as the authority to seek redressal of grievances against local FROs. Our personal appearances at the Princ.Sec.’s Office, letters and a formal complaint against the local FROs also produce no relief. For a period of over 2 years we were even without an interim visa extension for our son, whose earlier visa had expired in the meantime. We have filed a Writ Petition in the Bombay High Court requesting the court to direct the local FRO and the Princ. Sec.’s Office to grant us the 5year visa extension for which we had applied for over 2 years ago. We have also asked the court to direct the Respondents to pay us compensation for the grievous damages we suffered on account of the malafide inactions of the respondents. In the first hearing the court appeared almost certain to grant our request for the visa extension but we are not so sure about the compensation part. We feel justice will not be fully served if we only get the visa extensions that we should have gotten 2 years ago. We feel we deserve exemplary damages (punitive damages) from the respondents for the damages we suffered on account of the malafide inactions of the Respondents. How should we argue before the court for our request for such compensation ?
Dr.Mumbiram
05 April 2009 at 15:10
After getting our register number for writ petition (criminal) under Art.226 against Maharashtra Gov. and others at Bombay High Court,do we automatically get assigned to a specific court ?
Our online case status says division bench.
At this pre-admission level do we have a choice about which division bench (which Judges) ?
We wish to make circulation for early first hearing and immediately request interim relief.
Dr.Mumbiram
12 February 2009 at 07:32
The Art.226 (A) of the Constitution states that an order issued by the High Court in the nature of Mandamus will stand vacated if respondents were not furnished copies of the application for the writ or were not given an opportunity for hearing. Does the High Court provide copies of our application for writ to the respondents or is it left to us (the petitioner) to provide such copies of the application for writ to the respondents on our own ?
The Bombay High Court asks the petitioner to provide five copies of the writ petition. Are these extra-copies meant for the respondents ?
Dr.Mumbiram
11 February 2009 at 07:28
What should be the format and content of an “Affidavit of the petitioner duly sworn” that is to accompany a Writ Petition for a Writ of Mandamus.
Dr.Mumbiram
19 August 2008 at 04:32
Artist Mumbiram is personally filing a writ petition at the Bombay High Court requesting for a Mandamus to officials at FROs and their superiors at the MHA (PETITION UNDER Part III Article 14 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF Mandamus UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA).
These officials have failed to process Dr.Mumbiram’s application for a five-year-visa for his minor son, who qualifies as a PIO. Departmental remedies such as formal written complaints have also been exhausted. The petition seeks a Mandamus to these officials to immediately grant a visa for his minor son and also to grant the petitioner compensation for damges.
What action from the High Court can we expect and in what time framework ? Will we be informed about the next steps in the proceedings, such as a possible hearing ? Do they post such information on the case status page of the Bombay High Court ?
Would somebody enlighten us about possible scenarios ?
Dr.Mumbiram
15 July 2008 at 06:43
The Supreme Court of India has given in its website the format for a writ petition for mandamus under article 226 of the constitution of India. Is the same format to be used for a writ petition to be made to the Bombay High Court ?
What is the relative advantage of making the writ petition to the High Court as compared to making it to the Supreme Court ?
Can we appeal to the Supreme Court on the High Courts decision on our writ petition ?
Dr.Mumbiram
17 June 2008 at 08:04
Artist Mumbiram is an Indian citizen married to Nadine Grenz,a German citizen in 2002.She has a 5 year visa extension valid till 2009. Their son Hansraj Grenz was born in Alibag,south of Mumbai,in 2004.Their application for a 5 year visa extension for their son Hansraj was made at Pune FRO in Jan.2006. It was transferred to Alibag FRO in Jan. 2007. Both the FROs have failed to forward the application along with all supporting documents to the Principal Secretary (Special),Home Dept.Maharashtra who is the competent authority to grant the requested visa extension. Letters and a formal complaint to the Princ. Sec.´s office has not produced any action on our application. What course of action will get us our visa extension most expediently ?
Member Strength 9,50,430 and growing..
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Filing SLP in the Supreme Court
Our Writ Petition in the Bombay High Court had prayed for a Writ from the High Court to the visa officials to immediately process and grant visa-extensions that we had applied for three years ago. We had also prayed for compensation for violation of our fundamental right to get equal treatment under law, exemplary damages and legal costs of the writ procedures. Upon the intervention of the High Court the officials immediately granted us the requested visas.The High Court, however, disposed off our petition saying that we were granted our visa requests and that we could approach the Civil Courts for compensation.
We wish to approach the Supreme Court with a SLP to set aside the High Court’s order and grant us compensation as public law remedy for violation of our constitutional right, to levy exemplary damages on the violators of our rights to deter future further violations and to grant us legal costs.
According to the guidelines set by the SC in the M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India Case, we deserve compensation under writ jurisdiction as the violation of our right was ex facie glaringly obvious and incontrovertible. Further it is unfair to expect foreign nationals on a limited visa in India to pursue lengthy civil court proceedings against visa officials to obtain compensation. The High Court, in effect, failed to defend the constitution of India by allowing those who violated our fundamental rights to go scot-free. The HC also failed to give victims of the violation requisite relief such as Article 226 expects it to deliver to the victims.
1) How do we get the High Court’s permission to make the SLP ?
2) What are the time limits ?
3) How do we get Human Rights NGO’s to support our efforts ?