--- 2 ---
Clean copy
In the high court of judicature at madras
(Special original jurisdiction)
W.P. No. of 2010
Velu Nadesan Gopinath,
Rep by its power Agent,
Thamayanthi Deepakumar,
No.86, 3rd Cross Street,
South Ramalinga Nagar,
Trichy-17. …..Petitioner
Vs
1. The Secretary,
Ministry of External Affaires
New Delhi.
2. The Immigration Officer
(MHA), Govt. of India
Chennai Airport
Chennai-27.
3. The Immigration Officer,
(TRY), Govt. of India,
Tiruchy Airport,
Tiruchy. …Respondents
Affidavit of the Petitioner
I, Thamayanthi Deepakumar, W/o Deepakumar, Hindu aged about 35 years residing at No.86, 3rd Cross Street, South Ramalinga Nagar, Trichy-17 do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely states as follows:
1. I submit that my younger brother is the petitioner herein I am well acquainted with facts and circumstances of the case and I am filing this affidavit on the capacity of Power Agent to my brother Velu Nadesan Gobinath.
2. I submit that my brother is a citizen of Sri Lanka. He has valid passport issued by Govt. of Sri Lanka Vide No. N3908994 on 21.05.2009 and the same is valid till 21.05.2009.
3. I submit that I am the elder sister of my brother Velu Nadesan Gopinath and I got married an Indian and residing in Trichy District at No. 86, 3rd cross, South Ramalingam Nagar, Vayalur Road, Trichy-17. He used to come to my house i.e., to Tamilnadu after he got a valid Visa from Govt. of India.
4. I submit that in one occasion my brother had traveled to India with Gold ornament which excess to the permissible limit as per India law. Hence, he paid fine amount of Rs.25,000/- to the air port authority and he was departured him to Colombo.
5. I submit that while the fact being so, in one occasion, on 11.1.2010, he arrived at Chennai Airport from Colombo by flight No. IX672 with a valid Visa Issued by Govt. of India in its Ref. No. AL297563 for the period 6 months by the Indian Immigration office at Colombo after the due procedure. But he was refused permission to land in India without stating any valid reasons for the same by the immigration officer at Chennai Airport. Even he have valid visa issued by the Indian Immigration at Colombo which had validity till 03.06.2010.
6. I submit that thereafter he obtained new Multiple visa from the High Commission of India at Colombo vide Ref. No. AL 779958 for a period of 6 months on 22.02.2010 which will be valid till 21.08.2010 after showing the entire relevant documents. Having the above said Visa issued by the Govt. of India, he traveled to Trichy airport to meet me and again he was refused to land in India on 03.03.2010. That apart, his passport was sealed as “entry refused” by the Port Regional officer at Triuchirappalli, Tamilnadu.
7. I submit that though he showed the entire valid and relevant documents to enter into India in both time but he was sealed as an inadmissible passenger to enter into India that too without stating any reasons for the same. So far he has no any bad remark or incidents and he have not been convicted for any offence either by the Govt. of Sri Lanka or Govt. of India. In such a situation, the act of the Immigration authority is against the law. He was denied the Constitutional right guaranteed under article 21 of the Constitution of India.
8. I submit that though he had all the relevant and valid documents to travel to India he was treated as one of the accused in Chennai as well as in Trichy Airport even after he showed the valid Visa Issued by the Govt. of India. While he was issued Visas he was thoroughly enquired into with the passport and other relevant documents after verifying that he was permitted to travel to India. In this situation, the act of the respondent is against the law and well settled principle laid down by the apex court of India.
9. I submit that in this regard he gave a representation on 20.04.2010 to the Indian Immigration office in Colombo and also enquired into in person several times where he was clarified orally that there is no any bad remark on him and further if he wanted to get new Visa to travel to India there are ready to give. But in India he was banned to enter. His representation was not yielded any response so far. The act of the 2nd respondent is against the law. He is very much entitled to know the reason why repeatedly the Airport authority of India is denying entering into India.
10. I submit that now I am under the treatment and wanted a person to aid in my medical needs. Being alone with my husband without any assistance of anybody else my brother tried to come to India with valid documents and refused by the authority concerned. In such a way, recent application submitted by my brother was refused even to give visa on the basis of the entry made in the passport.
Therefore, it is prayed that this Hon’ble court may be pleased to issue writ or order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st to 3rd respondents to dispose of his representation submitted by him on 20.04.2010 to the respondents and thus render justice.
Solemnly affirmed at Colombo on this the 22nd day of July 2010, and signed his name in my presence. / Before me,Advocate : Chennai.
--- 2 ---
Clean copy
In the high court of judicature at madras
(Special original jurisdiction)
W.P. No. of 2010
Velu Nadesan Gopinath,
Rep by its power Agent,
Thamayanthi Deepakumar,
No.86, 3rd Cross Street,
South Ramalinga Nagar,
Trichy-17. …..Petitioner
Vs
1. The Secretary,
Ministry of External Affaires
New Delhi.
2. The Immigration Officer
(MHA), Govt. of India
Chennai Airport
Chennai-27.
3. The Immigration Officer,
(TRY), Govt. of India,
Tiruchy Airport,
Tiruchy. …Respondents
WRIT PETITION
The address for the petitioner is stated above.
The address for service of all notice and processes on the above named petitioner is that of his counsel M/s. P. VAJRAVELU, T. AROKIADASS & A. SULOCHANA, Advocates, having office at Madras Bar Association, High Court Campus, Chennai - 600 104.
--- 2 ---
--- 2 ---
The address for service of all notices and processes on the above named respondents are as stated above.
For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue writ or order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st to 3rd respondents to dispose of his representation submitted by him on 20.04.2010 to the respondents and thus render justice.
Dated at Chennai on this the 26th day of July 2010
Counsel for Petitioner
--- 2 ---
In the high court of judicature at madras
(Special original jurisdiction)
W.P. No. of 2010
Velu Nadesan Gopinath,
Rep by its power Agent,
Thamayanthi Deepakumar,
No.86, 3rd Cross Street,
South Ramalinga Nagar,
Trichy-17. …..Petitioner
Vs
1. The Secretary,
Ministry of External Affaires
New Delhi.
2. The Immigration Officer
(MHA), Govt. of India
Chennai Airport
Chennai-27.
3. The Immigration Officer,
(TRY), Govt. of India,
Tiruchy Airport,
Tiruchy. …Respondents
AFFIDAVIT OF S. VISWANATHAN
I, S. Viswanathan S/o Subramanian Hindu, aged
about 24 years residing at No. 4, Silapathigaram Street, New Perungalathur, Chennai do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely state as follows :-
I am the counsel attached to the office of the appellant herein and as such I am well acquainted with the facts.
--- 2 ---
--- 2 ---
The above writ petition was filed against the order passed in against the respondent herein. I crave leave of this Hon’ble Court to read the affidavit filed in support of the writ appeal.
I state that the above writ petition was filed on 26th July 2010 the same was returned on 27.07.2010 for compliance of certain mistakes by the office. The advocate on record who was dealing with the case has left office. Only now, I came to known that the petition papers have not been represented in time and hence there is a delay of 48 days in filing the writ petition. The delay is neither willful nor wanton but for the reasons stated above. The petitioner will be greatly prejudiced if the delay is not condoned. Hence, this petition.
For the reasons stated above it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to condone the delay of 48 days in representing the writ petition and thus render justice.
Solemnly affirmed at Chennai
on this the 24th day of September 2010 Before me,
and signed his name in my presence
Advocate : Chennai
--- 2 ---
In the high court of judicature at madras
(Special original jurisdiction)
W.P. No. of 2010
Velu Nadesan Gopinath,
Rep by its power Agent,
Thamayanthi Deepakumar,
No.86, 3rd Cross Street,
South Ramalinga Nagar,
Trichy-17. …..Petitioner
Vs
1. The Secretary,
Ministry of External Affaires
New Delhi.
2. The Immigration Officer
(MHA), Govt. of India
Chennai Airport
Chennai-27.
3. The Immigration Officer,
(TRY), Govt. of India,
Tiruchy Airport,
Tiruchy. …Respondents
PETITION FOR CONDONE DEALY
For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit it is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to condone the delay of 48 days in representing the Writ petition and thus render justice.
Dated at Chennai on this the 24th day of September 2010.
Counsel for Petitioner