BHARGAVA, J. - (1.) IN this appeal, by Special Leave, we have already passed the order on 14th December, 1966, and we now indicate our reasons for that order.
(2.) THE appellant was born on 6th April, 1938, at Suryapet in Nalgonda District, Andhra Pradesh, and was educated and brought up there until the year 1951. His father died in 1947. After the partition of India and the enforcement of the Constitution, the appellant, in August, 1951, left for Pakistan where he stayed until 1955. In 1955, he returned to India on a Passport obtained from the Pakistan Government as a Pakistani citizen with a visa from the Indian Government. Even after the expiry of the visa, he continued to stay in India, but in August, 1963, he was deported to Pakistan. He came again to India with a passport dated 4th December, 1963 issued by the Pakistan Government with a visa from the Indian High Commission dated 20th January, 1964. He arrived in India on 5th February, 1964. Subsequently, the question of deportation of the appellant by the Indian Government arose, and thereupon, the appellant filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the order of deportation made by the Government of India. The petition was allowed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh and the order of deportation was quashed on the ground that there had been no determination that the appellant had acquired Pakistani citizenship under section 9 of the Citizenship Act by the Indian Government. Thereafter, the Government took up the question of determining the nationality of the appellant, and a notice was issued to the appellant on 19th March, 1965 through the Government of Andhra Pradesh asking the appellant, within one month from the date of the service of the notice on him, to submit to the Government of Andhra Pradesh for onward transmission to consideration of the Central Government any representation that the appellant might wish to make. The appellant made two representations. The later of the two representations was sent by him in the month of May, 1965. The Government of India, on 18th August, 1965, issued an order holding that the appellant had voluntarily acquired the citizenship of Pakistan. The appellant challenged this order by another petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, and that petition was dismissed by the order now under appeal before us. It was not disputed as it could not be disputed in this case, that the Government of India was competent under section 9 (2) of the Citizenship Act, 1955 to determine whether the appellant had acquired the citizenship of Pakistan. Admittedly, the appellant had gone to Pakistan in August, 1951 after the enforcement of the Constitution. The question whether he had migrated with the intention of voluntarily acquiring the citizenship of Pakistan and had actually acquired such citizenship could, therefore, be determined by the Government of India alone under section 9 (2) of the Citizenship Act. The order dated 18th August, 1965 passed by the Government of India shows that, before giving its decision, the Government considered the cause shown by the appellant and gave due regard to the principles of evidence contained in Schedule HI to the Citizenship Rules, 1956 in accordance with rule 30 thereof.
(3.) THIS order has been challenged on behalf of the appellant on the ground that the appellant was not given an adequate opportunity of putting forward his case before the Government of India gave its decision on 18th August, 1965 holding that the appellant had voluntarily acquired the citizenship of Pakistan. It was urged that the Government of India should have held an enquiry before arriving at this decision, and for this proposition Reliance is placed on the decision of this Court in Mohd. Ayub Khan v. Commissioner of Police, Madras and another. It was held in that case that:;