[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
Anandharaj Thangavelu vs The Union Of India on 18 March, 2026
Author: N.Sathish Kumar
Bench: N.Sathish Kumar
W.A(MD)No.389 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 18.03.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
W.A(MD)No.389 of 2026
and
C.M.P(MD)Nos.3635 & 3636 of 2026
Anandharaj Thangavelu,
S/o.S.Thangavelu (Late),
25, Chinnakanmai Street, Goripalayam,
Madurai 625 002,
At Present
18, Coracina Vista,
Wellard, WA 6170,
Australia. ... Appellant/Petitioner
vs.
1.The Union of India,
Represented by its Secretary,
Ministry of External Affairs,
Jawaharlal Nehru Bhavan,
23-D, Janpath,
New Delhi - 110 011.
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 06:58:16 pm )
W.A(MD)No.389 of 2026
2.The Consul General,
Consulate General of India,
O/o.Indian High Commission,
Level-6, 12 Georges TCE,
Perth, WA 6000,
Western Australia.
3.The Secretary to Government of India,
Foreigners Division (OCI),
Ministry of Home Affairs,
New Delhi. ... Respondents/Respondents
PRAYER : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside
the order dated 25.02.2026 made in W.P(MD)No.3505 of 2026 on the file of
this Court.
For Appellant : Mr.M.S.Suresh Kumar
For Respondents : Mr.K.Govindarajan
Deputy Solicitor General of India
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.)
Challenging the order of the learned Single Judge in W.P.
(MD)No.3505 of 2026, dated 25.02.2026, whereby the Writ Petition was
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 06:58:16 pm )
disposed of granting liberty to the writ petitioner to approach the concerned
authorities to obtain a fresh Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI) card upon
his relief from the Western Australia Police Department, the writ petitioner,
as appellant, has preferred the present Writ Appeal.
2.The appellant/writ petitioner filed the said Writ Petition
seeking to quash the communication dated 21.01.2026 issued by the second
respondent, whereby the writ petitioner was requested to surrender his OCI
card before the authority concerned along with supporting documents.
3.According to the writ petitioner, he had made an application
under Section 7-A of the Citizenship Act, 1995, and was admitted as a
lawyer by the Supreme Court of Western Australia on 04.07.2025. Based on
his qualification, he was appointed as a Confiscation Officer on a fixed-term
contractual basis with the Western Australia Police.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 06:58:16 pm )
4.While being so employed, the communication dated
21.01.2026 was issued by the second respondent primarily on the ground
that the writ petitioner was then employed with the Police Department in
Australia. Since the writ petitioner was employed in a foreign Police
Department, there exists a regulation under the Citizenship Act which does
not permit issuance of an OCI card in such circumstances. Hence, the
communication was issued. Challenging the same, the writ petitioner filed
the Writ Petition.
5.The learned Single Judge, after considering the relevant
provisions of the Citizenship Act, 1955, disposed of the Writ Petition with
liberty to the writ petitioner to approach the concerned authorities to obtain a
fresh OCI card upon being relieved from the Western Australia Police
Department.
6.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 06:58:16 pm )
7.We have perused the entire record. After hearing the
submissions, we are of the view that the filing of the Writ Petition was
misconceived. The communication merely required the surrender of the OCI
booklet on the ground of employment in the Police Department, along with a
request to produce the passport and supporting documents at the time of
surrender. Instead of surrendering the OCI booklet and explaining that he
was not engaged in the Police Department, the writ petitioner cannot, as a
matter of right, challenge the communication.
8.No final order had been passed at that stage. The writ
petitioner was only asked to surrender the OCI booklet and provide an
explanation. Without complying, the Writ Petition is not maintainable. It is
not in dispute that the writ petitioner has now acquired Australian
citizenship. While it is contended that he is no longer employed in the Police
Department, it is for him to establish the same before the authorities
concerned. When the authorities called upon, he ought to have submitted his
explanation.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 06:58:16 pm )
9.In view of the above, we do not find any merit in the Writ
Appeal. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed, with liberty to the
appellant/writ petitioner to appear before the authority concerned and
furnish a proper explanation within fifteen days from today. On receipt of
such explanation, the authorities shall decide the matter in accordance with
law, as expeditiously as possible. No costs. Consequently, connected
Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
[N.S.K.,J.] [M.J.R.,J.]
18.03.2026
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
ps
Note: Issue Order Copy on 18.03.2026.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 06:58:16 pm )
To
1.The Secretary,
Represented by the Union of India,
Ministry of External Affairs,
Jawaharlal Nehru Bhavan,
23-D, Janpath,
New Delhi - 110 011.
2.The Consul General,
Consulate General of India,
O/o.Indian High Commission,
Level-6, 12 Georges TCE,
Perth, WA 6000,
Western Australia.
3.The Secretary to Government of India,
Foreigners Division (OCI),
Ministry of Home Affairs,
New Delhi.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 06:58:16 pm )
N.SATHISH KUMAR,J.
and
M.JOTHIRAMAN,J.
ps
ORDER MADE IN
DATED : 18.03.2026
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 18/03/2026 06:58:16 pm )
