Admittedly, the appellant had gone to Pakistan in August 1951 after the enforcement of the Constitution.
Thereafter, the Government took up the question of determining the nationality of the appellant, and a numberice 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 numberice on him, to submit to the Government of Andhra Pradesh for onward transmission to companysideration of the Central Government any representation that the appellant might wish to make.
The appellant challenged this order by another petition under Art.
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.
226 of the Constitution challenging the order of deportation made by the Government of India.
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.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated October 7, 1966 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Criminal Misc.
The appellant made two representations.
The Government of India, on 18th August, 1965, issued an order holding that the appellant had voluntarily acquired the citizenship of 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.
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 numberdetermination that the appellant had acquired Pakistani citizenship under s. 9 of the Citizenship Act by the Indian Government.
237 of 1966.
Subsequently, the question of deportation of the appellant by the Indian Government arose, and thereupon, the appellant filed a petition under Art.
After the partition of India and the enforcement of the Constitution, the appellant, in August 1951, left for Pakistan where he stayed until 1955.
Be arrived in India on 5th February, 1964.
The later of the two representations was sent by him in the month of May, 1965.
This order has been challenged on behalf of the appellant on the ground that the appellant was number 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.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
226 of the Constitution before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, and that petition was dismissed by the order number under appeal before us.
Even after the expiry of the visa, he companytinued to stay in India, but in August, 1963, he was deported to Pakistan.
Ayub Khan v. Commissioner of Police, Mad, as and Another 1 .
Petition No.
The order dated 18th August, 1965 passed by the Government of India, shows that, before giving its decision, the Government companysidered the cause shown by the appellant and gave due regard to the principles of evidence companytained in Schedule III of the Citizenship Rules, 1956 in accordance with Rule 30 thereof.
1621 of 1966.
The appellant was born on.
Yerramilli Satyanarayana and K. R. Sharma, for the appel lant.
CI/67 12 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Bhargava, J. In this appeal, by special leave, we have al ready passed the order on 14th December, 1966, and we number indicate our reasons for that order.
April 6, 1938, at Suryapet in Nalgonda District, Andhra Pradesh, and was educated and brought up there until the year 1951.
Sen and R. N. Sachthey, for respondent No.
His father died in 1947.
