Saturday 28 March 2015

Whether right to travel can be denied to valid T2 and T3 visa holder?


Kerala High Court: In a recent case where respondent authorities illegally seized the passport of the dependants (wife and children) of victim of human trafficking in USA and denied them to travel to America, a bench of A.V.R. Pillai J, held that the denial of the same is not only violation of the fundamental rights of the petitioners but also detrimental to the very concept of right, duties and obligations in matrimonial living of spouses.
The counsel for the petitioner M.P. Ramnath contended that when the petitioners are having due visas granted by the Government of USA and when there is nothing illegal about the petitioners duly traveling to USA to join their husband /father (victim of human trafficking in USA), it is absolutely illegal and baseless to restrain the petitioners to travel to USA. The counsel for the respondent N. Nagaresh contended that if the petitioners are permitted to go abroad, it would be against the provisions of the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act, 2000 passed by USA.
The Court observed that the Government of USA has granted proper visa to the petitioners to join their husband/father, and that the petitioners are not involved in any act prejudicial to the interest of the nation and are not the violators of the laws/ norms/ sovereignty and integrity of the country. The Court noted that United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) approves eligibility for grant of T-visa to a victim of severe form of trafficking and dependents only after detailed procedures, verification, adjudication and evaluation of independent evidence.
The Court found that in the instant case there is no violation of the provisions of Passport Act, 1967, and accordingly held that restraint of petitioners holding a valid T2 and T3 visa from traveling abroad to join husband/father who is duly employed therein is not only violation of the fundamental right of the petitioners but also detrimental to psychological growth and development of the spouse and children. The Court directed the respondents to permit and enable the petitioners to travel to USA.
A trafficking visa (T-visa) is a type of visa allowing certain victims of human trafficking and immediate family members to remain and work temporarily in the United States, if they agree to assist law enforcement in testifying against the perpetrators.
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT:

         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI

      WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH 2015
                    WP(C).No. 33046 of 2014 (E)
                
PETITIONERS:


            MARY REDI KOTTUNKAL JOY, 
RESPONDENTS:

           THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR/PORT REGISTRATION OFFICER (PRO)
       BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
       



           


     The petitioners, who are granted valid visa to travel

and join the first petitioner's husband (father of the

petitioners 2 and 3) in United States of America where he

is employed, has approached this Court seeking the

following reliefs:

       a)    issue    a    writ    in   the     nature     of
       mandamus or such other writs or orders
       directing the respondents forthwith to
       release the passports of the petitioners to
       them.

       b)    issue    a    writ    in   the     nature     of
       mandamus or such other writs or orders
       directing the respondents to permit and
       enable the petitioners to travel to the
       United States of America upon the visas
       duly    stamped        and      issued      by     the
       government authorities of the United States
       of America to the petitioners as per Exts.P8,
       P9 and P10.

       c)    direct the respondents to pay to the
       petitioners the entire ticket charges for
       them     to    travel      to    USA,      as     due
       compensation and damages.

WPC No.33046/2014         2


        d)    award the cost of this writ petition.

     2. The petitioners allege that when they went to

board the flight on 22.11.2014 at the Cochin International

Airport at Nedumbassery, the first respondent restrained

them illegally and did not clear them to travel and also

illegally seized their passports taking the stand that he

would not permit persons         who have T2 and T3 visas

granted by the American Government to travel to

America. The petitioners were issued with the letter of

seizure of their passports. It is with this background, the

petitioners have come up before this Court.

     3. This Court, by interim order dated 19th December

2014 directed the third respondent to release the passport

to the petitioners within a period of two weeks.

Accordingly, the passports were released. Therefore, the

only surviving question is whether the petitioners be

permitted to go abroad to join the first petitioner's

husband (father of petitioners 2 and 3) who is now in

United States of America.

WPC No.33046/2014         3

     4. In the counter affidavit filed by the 4th respondent,

it was contended as follows:

     A trafficking visa is a type of visa allowing certain

victims of human trafficking and immediate family

members to remain and work temporarily in the United

States, if they agree to assist law enforcement in

testifying against the perpetrators, it is submitted.

     The United States Government estimates that each

year up to 50,000 people are trafficked into the United

States against their will, mostly women and children who

are brought as sex slaves. As a response, it enacted the

Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000,

which among other things, allows such people to allow for

3 year temporary visas that lead to permanent resident

status.

     It is contended by the respondents that a proposal to

treat the holder of Indian Passport whosoever has been

given the Trafficking visa on his/her passport issued by the

US Government as a violator of the Passports Act, 1967

was considered during an Inter-ministerial meeting on

WPC No.33046/2014           4

trafficking visas held on 10.2.2014. In the meeting it was

recommended to examine the feasibility of putting in

place a policy-frame work for placing 'T' visa holders in the

'Prior Approval Category for all Indian Consular services.

It was further recommended to examine from a legal

perspective the possibility of stopping 'T' visa holders with

valid passports from travelling US by suspending their

passports and handing over the same to CBI for

investigations     followed    by   subsequent     impounding/

revocation of the passports by Ministry of External Affairs.

On the basis of above mentioned recommendations and

the concurrence of L&T Division of the Ministry, with the

approval of the competent authority the following

decisions were taken:

       (i)   All the Missions/Posts abroad were instructed
       to place the Indian Passport holders holding
       United States T1, T2, T3, T4 and T5 visas in the
       prior Approval Category for availing all Indian
       consular services until further notice from the
       Ministry.

       (ii)  the Bureau of Immigration, Ministry of Home
       Affairs can stop Indian Passport holders from
       leaving the country, if they hold Trafficking Visa
       on their passports and the passports seized in this
       regard may be sent to the Ministry (in case the
       passport has been issued by the Missions/Posts

WPC No.33046/2014           5

       abroad) or to the concerned Passport Office (from
       where the passport has been issued for further
       course of action.

      A true copy of the approval order in this regard is

produced as Annexure R4(a).

      It is contended by the respondents that after the

implementation       of  this   policy  by   which     all the

Missions/Posts abroad were instructed to place the Indian

Passport holders holding United States T1, T2, T3, T4 and

T5 visa holders in the prior approval category for availing

of all indian consular services, until further notice from the

Ministry. A number of cases for grant of passport facilities

to Indians who were residing in the United States and

have been granted        'T' visa by that Government were

referred by CGI, Houston to the Ministry for consideration.

All the above cases were considered in view of the specific

guidelines/instructions of the Ministry mentioned above

and the Mission was requested to resort to the following

course of action:-

        (i)  To impound/revoke the passports under
        Section 10(3) (c) of the Passports Act, 1967 by
        following the due procedure as stipulates in the
        Passport Manual, 2010. However, they may be

WPC No.33046/2014           6

        given an opportunity to appeal before the
        appellate authority under Section 11 of the
        Passports Act, 1967.

        (ii)  They may be given an option to return to
        India for which Emergency certificate may be
        issued to them, in case they wish to do so.

        (iii) On their return to India, their names will be
        placed in the Prior Approval Category (PAC) up
        to a period of three years.

     5. Arguments have been heard.

     6. The learned counsel for the petitioners would

argue that the prevention of the petitioners from boarding

the flight in spite of having valid visas, due passports and

due tickets and the seizure of their passports are grossly

illegal, unreasonable, inequitable, baseless and without

authority. The learned counsel would argue that when the

petitioners are having due visas granted by the

Government of the United States of America and when

there is nothing illegal about the petitioners duly

travelling to the USA to join their husband/father, it is

absolutely baseless and illegal to restrain the petitioners

from boarding their flight to USA.

WPC No.33046/2014         7

     7. The first petitioner's husband Mr.Jeegan Joseph is

employed in the United States of America who went for

employment to USA under Type R;H2B class Visa.           He

being a skilled worker, that Mr.Jeegan Joseph like many

others were given employment in USA through an agency

recruiting skilled labour in India (Devan Consultancy,

Mumbai); it is alleged. The job offer was that they would

in due course be able to get green card also in USA.

However, the conditions under which these contract

employees were made to work and confined to work were

not only quite inhuman but also against the basic law and

policies of USA and its State laws.         Thus, the US

Government       has  enacted    the  Trafficking   Victims

Protection Act whereby such victims like the first

petitioner's husband are protected and they are issued T1

visas and their spouses, children and their parents are

entitled to T2, T3 and T4 visas respectively. It is how the

petitioners obtained T2 and T3 visas to join Mr.Jeegan

Joseph.   Admittedly, the petitioner's husband is a valid

resident and employee in USA, as evident from Ext.P1

WPC No.33046/2014         8

which is the true scanned copy of the H2B class visa

stamped by the United States of America in favour of

Jeegan Joseph. The petitioners have also produced Ext.P2

which is the true scanned copy of letter of approval of T1

class which is valid from 4.1.2012 to 3.1.2016 issued by

the Department of Home Land Security, United States of

America    Citizenship    and    Immigration    services   to

Mr.Jeegan Joseph. Ext.P3 is the true scanned copy of the

Employment Authorisation Card issued by USA to

Mr.Jeegan Joseph. It is evident from the document now

placed on board that Mr.Jeegan Joseph is validly stationed

in United States of America and the American Government

has issued due visas for petitioners' travel. Petitioners 2

and 3 have to join school in USA at the earliest and the

petitioners' visa would expire by 15.3.2015.

     8. The main contention of the respondent is that a

Trafficking visa is a type of visa allowing certain victims of

human trafficking and immediate family members to

remain and work temporarily in the United States, if they

agree to assist law enforcement in testifying against the

WPC No.33046/2014         9

perpetrators.    It was strenuously argued that if the

petitioners are permitted to go abroad and to join

Mr.Jeegan, the same would be against the provisions of

the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act,

2000 passed by the 160th Congress of the United States of

America at its second session. The learned counsel for

the petitioners made available to me a copy of the said

statute which he obtained from the website. The said Act

is organized into three divisions. viz. Division A, B and C.

Division A deals with victims of Trafficking.

     9. Section 102 of Division A of the Act deals with the

purposes and findings. As per S.102(a), the purposes of A-

division  are    to combat    trafficking   in  persons,  a

contemporary manifestation of slavery whose victims are

predominantly women and children, to ensure just and

effective punishment of traffickers and to protect their

victims.

     10. S.103(8) deals with severe forms of trafficking in

persons. It reads -

          The term 'severe forms of trafficking in
     persons' means (A) sex trafficking in which a

WPC No.33046/2014             10

     commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or
     coercion or in which the person induced to
     perform such act has not attained 18 years of
     age; or

     (B)   the recruitment, harboring, transportation,
     provision, or obtaining of a person for labor or
     services, through the use of force, fraud, or
     coercion for the purpose of subjection to
     involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage,
     or slavery.


      11. Sub Sections 19 to 24 of Section 102 reads as

follows:


           (19) Victims of severe forms of trafficking
     should not be inappropriately incarcerated,
     fined, or otherwise penalized solely for unlawful
     acts committed as a direct result of being
     trafficked, such as using false documents,
     entering the country without documentation, or
     working without documentation.
           (20) Because victims of trafficking are
     frequently unfamiliar with the laws, cultures,
     and languages of the countries into which they
     have been trafficked, because they are often
     subjected to coercion and intimidation including
     physical detention and debt bondage, and
     because they often fear retribution and forcible
     removal to countries in which they will face
     retribution or other hardship, these victims
     often find it difficult or impossible to report the
     crimes committed against them or to assist in
     the investigation and prosecution of such
     crimes.

           (21) Trafficking of persons is an evil
     requiring concerted and vigorous action by
     countries of origin, transit or destination, and
     by international organizations.

WPC No.33046/2014         11


          (22) One of the founding documents of
    the    United   States,   the  Declaration     of
    Independence, recognizes the inherent dignity
    and worth of all people. It states that all men
    are created equal and that they are endowed
    by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.
    The right to be free from slavery and
    involuntary    servitude   is   among      those
    unalienable rights. Acknowledging this fact, the
    United States outlawed slavery and involuntary
    servitude in 1865, recognizing them as evil
    institutions that must be abolished.    Current
    practices of sexual slavery and trafficking of
    women and children are similarly abhorrent to
    the principles upon which the United States
    was founded.

          (23) The    United    States   and     the
    international community agree that trafficking
    in persons involves grave violations of human
    rights and is a matter of pressing international
    concern.     The international community has
    repeatedly condemned slavery and involuntary
    servitude, violence against women, and other
    elements of trafficking, through declarations,
    treaties, and United Nations resolutions and
    reports, including the Universal Declaration of
    Human      Rights; the   1956   Supplementary
    Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the
    Slave Trade, and Institutions and Practices
    Similar    to Slavery;   the   1948   American
    Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man;
    the 1957 Abolition of Forced Labor Convention;
    the International Covenant on Civil and Political
    Rights; the Convention Against Torture and
    Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment
    of   Punishment;     United   Nations   General
    Assembly     Resolutions  50/167,   51/66   and
    52/98; the Final Report of the World Congress
    against    Sexual   Exploitation   of  Children
    (Stockholm,     1996);   the    Fourth    World
    Conference on Women (Beijing, 1995); and the

WPC No.33046/2014           12

     1991 Moscow Document of the Organization
     for Security and Cooperation in Europe.

           (24) Trafficking    in   persons    is  a
     transnational crime with national implications.
     To deter international trafficking and bring its
     perpetrators to justice, nations including the
     United States must recognize that trafficking is
     a serious offense. This is done by prescribing
     appropriate punishment, giving priority to the
     prosecution    of   trafficking  offenses,  and
     protecting rather than punishing the victims of
     such offenses. The United states must work
     bilaterally and multilaterally to abolish the
     trafficking industry by taking steps to promote
     cooperation among countries linked together
     by international trafficking routes. The United
     States must also urge the international
     community to take strong action in multilateral
     fora to engage recalcitrant countries in serious
     and sustained efforts to eliminate trafficking
     and protect trafficking victims.


     12. The statute clearly indicates that the purpose of

the enactment is to protect the victims of trafficking. The

Government of United States of America where Mr.Jeegan

is working, has granted proper visa to the petitioners to

join Mr.Jeegan.

     13. As far as Indian citizens are concerned, the only

legislation which covers the field is the Passport Act, 1957.

      14. Section 6 deals with the refusal to transfer

documents etc. which reads as under:

WPC No.33046/2014            13

    6. Refusal of passports, travel documents etc. -

      (1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the
    passport authority shall refuse to make an endorsement
    for vising any country under clause (b) or clause (c) of
    sub section (2) of section 5 on any one or more of the
    following grounds, and on no other ground, namely:-

           (a)    that the applicant may, or is likely to,
    engage in such country in activities prejudicial to the
    sovereignty and integrity of India:

           (b)   that the presence of the applicant in such
    country may, or is likely to, be detrimental to the
    security of India;

           (c)   that the presence of the applicant in such
    country may, or is likely to, prejudice the friendly
    relations of India with that or any other country;

           (d)   that   in   the   opinion    of    the  Central
    Government the presence of the applicant in such
    country is not the public interest.

    (2)    Subject to the other provisions of this Act, the passport
    authority shall refuse to issue a passport or travel document
    for visiting any foreign country under clause (c) of sub section
    (2) of section 5 on any one or more of the following grounds,
    and on no other ground, namely:-

    (a)    that the applicant is not a citizen of India;

           (b)   that the applicant may, or is likely to engage
    outside India in activities prejudicial to the sovereignty
    and integrity of India;

           (c)   that the departure of the applicant from
    India may, or is likely to, be detrimental to the security
    of India;

           (d)   that the presence of the applicant outside
    India may, or is likely to, prejudice the friendly relations
    of India with any foreign country;

           (e)   that the applicant has, at any time during
    the period of five years immediately preceding the date

WPC No.33046/2014           14

    of his application, been convicted by a court in India for
    any offence involving moral turpitude and sentenced in
    respect thereof to imprisonment for not less than two
    years;

           (f)   that proceedings in respect of an offence
    alleged to have been committed by the applicant are
    pending before a criminal court in India;

           (g)   that  a   warrant    or  summons       for the
    appearance, or a warrant for the arrest, of the applicant
    has been issued by a court under any law for the time
    being in force or that an order prohibiting the departure
    from India of the applicant has been made by any such
    court;

           (h)   that the applicant has been repatriated and
    has not reimbursed the expenditure incurred in
    connection with such repatriation;

           (i)   that  in   the   opinion    of   the    Central
    Government, the issue of a passport or travel document
    to the applicant will not be in the public interest.

    15. Section 10 deals with variation, impounding and

revocation of passports and travel documents.

    It reads-

           (1)   The passport authority may, having
    regard to the provisions of sub section (1) of section
    6 or any notification under section 19, vary or
    cancel the endorsements on a passport or travel
    document or may, with the previous approval of the
    Central Government, vary or cancel the conditions
    (other than the prescribed conditions) subject to
    which a passport or travel document has been
    issued and may, for that purpose, require the holder
    of a passport or a travel document, by notice in
    writing, to deliver up the passport or travel
    document to it within such time as may be specified
    in the notice and the holder shall comply with such
    notice.

WPC No.33046/2014           15


     (2)   The passport authority may, on the application of
the holder of a passport or a travel document, and with the
previous approval of the Central Government also vary or
cancel the conditions (other than the prescribed conditions)
of the passport or travel document.

     (3)   The passport authority may impound or cause to
be impounded or revoke a passport or travel document,-

     (a)   if the passport authority is satisfied that the
holder of the passport or travel document is in wrongful
possession thereof;

     (b)   If the passport or travel document was obtained
by the suppression of material information or on the basis of
wrong information provided by the holder of the passport or
travel document or any other person on his behalf;

     Provided that if the holder of such passport obtains
another passport, the passport authority shall also impound or
cause to be impounded or revoke such other passport.

     (c)   if the passport authority deems it necessary so to
do in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India,
the security of India, friendly relations of India with any
foreign country, or in the interests of the general public;

     (d)   if the holder of the passport or travel document
has, at any time after the issue of the passport or travel
document, been convicted by a court in India for any
offence involving moral turpitude and sentenced in respect
thereof to imprisonment for not less than two years;

            (e)  if proceedings in respect of an offence alleged
     to have been committed by the holder of the passport or
     travel document are pending before a criminal court in
     India;

            (f)  if any of the conditions of the passport or
     travel document has been contravened;

            (g)  if the holder of the passport or travel

WPC No.33046/2014           16

    document has failed to comply with a notice under sub
    section (1) requiring him to deliver up the same;

           (h)   if it is brought to the notice of the passport
    authority that a warrant or summons for the appearance,
    or a warrant for the arrest, of the holder of the passport
    or travel document has been issued by a court under any
    law for the time being in force or if an order prohibiting
    the departure from India of the holder of the passport or
    other travel document has been made by any such court
    and the passport authority is satisfied that a warrant or
    summons has been so issued or an order has been so
    made.

           (4)   The passport authority may also revoke a
    passport or travel document on the application of the
    holder thereof.

           (5)   Where the passport authority makes an order
    varying or cancelling the endorsements on, or varying the
    conditions of, a passport or travel document under sub
    section (1) or an order impounding or revoking a passport
    or travel document under sub section (3), it shall record
    in writing a brief statement of the reasons for making
    such order and furnish to the holder of the passport or
    travel document on demand a copy of the same unless in
    any case the passport authority is of the opinion that it
    will not be in the interests of the sovereignty and
    integrity of India, the security of India, friendly relations
    of India with any foreign country or in the interests of the
    general public to furnish such a copy.
           (6)   The authority to whom the passport authority
    is subordinate may, by order in writing, impound or cause
    to be impounded or revoke a passport or travel document
    on any ground on which it may be impounded or revoked
    by the passport authority and the foregoing provisions of
    this section shall, as far as may be, apply in relation to
    the impounding or revocation of a passport or travel
    document by such authority.

           (7)   A court convicting the holder of a passport or
    travel document of any offence under this Act or the rules
    made thereunder may also revoke the passport or travel

WPC No.33046/2014           17

      document;

       Provided that if the conviction is set aside on appeal or
 otherwise the revocation shall become void.

           (8)   An order of revocation under sub section (7)
      may also be made by an appellate court or by the High
      Court when exercising its powers of revision.

           (9)   On the revocation of a passport or travel
      document under this section the holder thereof shall,
      without delay, surrender the passport or travel document,
      if the same has not already been impounded, to the
      authority by whom it has been revoked or to such other
      authority as may be specified in this behalf in the order of
      revocation.

     16.   The respondents have no case that the

petitioners are offenders or persons involved in any act

prejudicial to the interest of the nation or violators of the

laws and norms or the sovereignty and integrity of our

country. No question of any alleged implementation of

any valid policy arises as rightly pointed out by the

learned counsel for the petitioners.

     17. This Court vide order dated 9.1.2015 in

I.A.No.354/2015 directed the respondents to produce the

records required to be produced as detailed in the said

interlocutory application.    But in spite of the repeated

directions and opportunities granted, the respondents

WPC No.33046/2014           18

have not produced those documents. This, according to

the learned counsel for the petitioners, is obviously

because such records are actually not existing and

factiously referred to in Ext.R1(d) or that if produced, it

would be patently clear that what the respondents are

trying to portray before this Court are absolute falsities

and illegalities. I see valid force in the said submission.

     18. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for

the petitioners, it is after detailed procedures, verification,

adjudication and evaluation of independent evidence that

a victim of severe form of trafficking in persons that the

United states Citizenship and Immigration Services

(USCIS) which is a division of the homeland security,

approves eligibility for grant of T-visa. The United States

immigration     laws   providing    for  T-visa   have   clear

provisions and detailed procedures for verification of the

veracity of the testimony of the victim who applies for

T visa. Independent secondary evidence which is also

mandatory in the procedure also would be insisted. It is

common for the USCIS to reject T visa application for lack

WPC No.33046/2014         19

of credible secondary evidence. More over, if the victim

applying for T-visa is found to have fraudulently or wilfully

provided false information to USCIS as part of visa

application, he will face penalties for perjury and also

would be completely debarred from obtaining a future

visa also in any other category in/or to enter USA.

     19. Now, the respondents would give thrust to the

argument that by the granting of visa, there would be

compulsion to testify. As rightly submitted by the learned

counsel for the petitioners, it is the law as well as the

process of any modern judicial and investigation system

that when a person is a victim of an offence or is a

witness to an offence or has necessary information as to

proof of planning, preparation and commissioning of any

offence, he would be required to testify in any prosecution

proceedings, on oath to testify truth and that is the right

in law abiding human being and that cannot be

prevented. The learned counsel for the petitioners would

submit that every year only about 600-800 persons were

granted T visa status and many applications are duly

WPC No.33046/2014         20

rejected as the scrutiny and evaluation is very strict and

stringent in the grant of such visa by the USCIS. T2, T3

and T4 visas are granted to the dependents of the

victims. Admittedly, the first petitioner is the wife and

she is duly granted T2 visa and petitioners 2 and 3 are the

children who are granted T2 and T3 visas respectively.

The visa stamping process which was duly completed

after the issuance of Exts.P5 to P7 as evidenced by

Exts.P8(2), P9(2) and P10(2). It is also crucial to note that

on no other grounds except the grounds stated in Section

6 of the Passport Act, 1967, travel documents could be

refused. The petitioners will not come under any of the

interdicts in Section 6 of the Passport Act, 1967.

     20. The right to travel is a fundamental right

guaranteed and protected under Article 21 of the

Constitution of India. The right to life includes the right of

spouse and children to join, to be in the company and to

grow with the spouse and parents.         The denial of the

same is not only violation of the fundamental rights and

natural rights of the petitioners but also detrimental to

WPC No.33046/2014         21

the very concept of matrimonial living as well as the

rights, duties and obligations in matrimonial living of

spouses.     It is also detrimental to the psychological

growth and development of the spouse and children.

     21. The learned counsel for the petitioners invited

my attention also to the provisions of the Universal

Declaration of Human Rights as well as International

Covenant on Civil and Political rights which protects the

individuals to travel and join the spouse and parents.

Admittedly, India is a signatory to both these documents.

More over, as per Article 10 of the Convention on the

Right   of   the  Children,    State   must    facilitate the

reunification in a positive human and expeditious manner

of the child and family. It is also specified that no adverse

consequences are to be imposed on the child and family

members.

     22. On a consideration of the entire materials now

placed on record, this Court is of the definite view that the

respondents cannot in any manner restrain the petitioners

from holding derivative visas, T2 and T3 from travelling to

WPC No.33046/2014        22

USA to join husband/father who is duly employed therein.

     In the result, this writ petition is allowed.     The

respondents are directed to permit and enable the

petitioners to travel to USA upon the visas duly stamped

and issued by the government authorities of the United

States of America to the petitioners as per Exts.P8, P9 and

P10.


                          SD/-A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI
                                      JUDGE


Print Page

No comments:

Post a Comment