037-NLR-NLR-V-56-R.-F.-BILLIMORIA-Appellant-and-COMMISSIONER-FOR-REGISTRATION-OF-INDIAN-AND-PA.pdf
ISO Billimoria v. Commissioner for Registration of Indian and Pakistani Residents
Present,: Pulle J.
R. F. BILLIMORIA, Appellant, and COMMISSIONER FORREGISTRATION OF INDIAN AND PAKISTANIRESIDENTS
S. C. 690—Appeal under the Indian and Pakistani Residents(Citizenship) Act
Indian and Pakistani Residents (Citizenship) Act, No. 3 of 1949, as amended by ActNo. 37 of 1950—Section 2A (6)—Effect of words " while in Ceylon
The words “ while in Ceylon ” in paragraph (6) of Section 2A of the Jndianand Pakistani Residents (Citizenship) Act connote actual physical presence inCeylon.
■AlPPEAL from an order of the Commissioner for the Registration ofIndian and Pakistani Residents. '
Cyril E. S. Perera, Q.C., with R. Mariieavasagar, for the applicant-appellant.-:
Mt Tiruehelvam, Crown Counsel, for the Commissioner-respondent.
Cur. advy vults
PUI.I.K J.—BiUimoria v. Commissioner for Registration of Indianand Pakistani Residents
167
December 15, 1953. Pcxxb J.—'-
On the 19th October, 1941, the appellant made an application to beregistered as a citizen of Ceylon under the provisions of the Indian andPakistani Residents (Citizenship) Act, No. 3 of 1949. In that applicationhe stated that he had been continuously resident in Ceylon during theperiod of ten years commencing on 1st January, 1936, and ending on 31stDecember, 1945, and thereafter he had been continuously resident from1st January, 1946, to the date of the application. Whether the appellanthad these periods of uninterrupted residence within the meaning of section3 of the Act had to be considered in relation to the fact that in Ootober,1941, he went to Bombay and there he became an employee under anIndian military organization called the Indian Engineer’s (Railway)Unit. From Bombay he proceeded to Africa on service with that unitand eventually returned to Ceylon in July, 1946. It is obviousthat at the time he made his application he was not qualified for citizenshipbecause the continuity of his residence in Ceylon had been interrupted.Vide section 3 (3). In 1951 the appellant requested that his case be-reconsidered in the light of section 2A of the Act as amended by theIndian and Pakistani Residents (Citizenship) (Amendment) Act, No. 37of 1950, which came retrospectively into operation on 5th August, 1949.
The question arising on this appeal is whether the Commissioner was*wrong in holding that the appellant’s case was not covered by seotion 2A,paragraph (b), which reads as follows :—
“ (2A) For the purposes of this Act, the continuity of residence of anIndian or Pakistani resident shall be deemed to have been uninterruptednotwithstanding his absence from Ceylon for any period,—
(6) if, having become while in Ceylon a member or an employee ofany of His Majesty’s forces, he was during that period on service inany other country as such member or employee ”.
It was argued for the appellant that although he was in Bombay atthe time he became an employee under the military unit he became so,in a legal sense, while in Ceylon. I cannot accept this argument. Para-graph (6) does not, in my opinion, make an exception in favour of anapplicant who became an employee of one of His Majesty’s forces at apoint of time when he could have been regarded as a resident of Ceylon.The words “ while in Ceylon ” are self explanatory and connote actualphysical presence in Ceylon. In other words, the commencement of theperiod of “absence from Ceylon” must be coincident with the time ofdeparture from Ceylon of the applicant in the character of an employeeof one of His Majesty’s forces.
The appeal fails and is dismissed with costs which I fix at Rs. 157-50.
Appeal dismissed.