Read Time: 05 minutes
A petition was filed by Tan France, a queer fashion designer and co-host of multiple series including Netflix: Queer Eye, Next In Fashion and Discovery+: Say Yes To The Dress, seeking to expedite the processing of his application for an Indian Tourist Visa.
The Delhi High Court, through an order dated October 21, held that the right of foreign nationals to enter and reside in India is not absolute, but rather is subject to the discretion of the sovereign state. The bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula also remarked “In the case of foreign nationals, the right to enter and reside in India is not an absolute or unconditional right but is subject to the discretion of the sovereign State. Visa policies, and their application, inherently involve considerations that lie within the purview of the executive”.
Tan France also known as Tanveer Wasim Safdar held dual citizenship of the United States and the United Kingdom, and submitted a visa application at the VFS Global Center in San Francisco on September 12, 2024. Due to the lack of a decision on his application, he filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a directive for the respondents to process the visa application promptly.
Tan France, represented by Advocate Pankaj Mehta, argued the timelines provided in the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on the Consulate General of India’s website indicated that the processing period had been exceeded. He requested the Court to issue a mandamus to expedite the visa process.
Standing Counsel Nidhi Raman, for Union, submitted that the timelines in the FAQs were not legally binding and that processing times were conditional upon the completeness and accuracy of the application. Additionally, the Union highlighted that Tan France’s parents were of Pakistani origin, necessitating a thorough review due to potential security concerns.
Upon evaluating the arguments, the court noted that Tan France had no inherent right to demand entry into India, as the issuance of a tourist visa involved the State's sovereign discretion. National security and administrative considerations permitted the respondents to examine all relevant aspects of the application, especially given Tan France’s familial background.
The court further noted that the timelines in the FAQs could not be treated as statutory obligations, as they were merely indicative. Moreover, Tan France’s reliance on Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law, was found to be unfounded, as it did not confer an absolute right to foreign nationals to enter India.
Consequently, the court dismissed the petition.
For Petitioner: Advocates Pankaj Mehta, R. K. Mehta, Shweta Soni and Akansha Singh, Advocates.For Respondent: Standing Counsel Nidhi Raman and Government Pleader Amit Acharya with Advocates Zubin Singh and Rashi KapoorCase Title: Tanveer Wasim Safdar @ Tan France v Union Of India & Ors (W.P.(C) 14627/2024, CM APPL. 61427/2024)
Please Login or Register
