Form Ii See Rule 18 (1) Certificate Of Registration No: Fill & Download for Free

To open a Beer Bar cum Restaurant in Maharashtra one needs to take as many as thirty three Licenses/Certificate from various government authorities, for a Permit room another nine licenses are required.1. Shops & Establishment Certificate2. Health License (to serve food)3. Health Madira License (to serve Liquor)4. Maharashtra License under Food and Drug control Act, Govt. of India5. Grading Certificate namely, I, II or III6. Weather Frame / Chapra / Sign Board License under License Department7. Medical/Health Certificate of the Kitchen Staff on yearly basis (Especially of Food Handlers)8. Grinding Stone Or Heavy Machine operating permission.9. Water Connection Certificate as per Grade.10. Drainage Inspection Certificate once in two years11. Neon-Sign Board Or Glow Sign Board License-provided it carries any advertisement12. Pollution Clearance Certificate-from Environment Department.13. Maharashtra State’s Weights & Measurement Department Certificate and its approval every year as per the M.W. & M Act, 1976, 1977, 1985 Amendment Act, 1987 and MRP.14. Rationing Permission to obtain food grains like Rava, Maida, Atta, Rice, Sugar etc.,15. ESIC Registration for the shop employing more than ten staffs under Govt. of India ESIC Rule 50.51 and 1952.16. Provident Fund Registration, if number of employees is more than twenty.17. Maintenance of Register of working staff on daily basis and temporary basis for the inspection.18. Professional Tax Registration of Employees.19. Professional Tax Registration for Employer. Certificate of Registration under Sub Sec. 1 of Sec 5 MAH/L Tax on Profession, Trade and Employment Act, 1975.20. Permission from Electric Supply Companies to operate heavy machine like Air-Conditioners, Cooling Plant, M/C, Grinding M/C etc., (Department PWP)21. Permission to operate more than two cylinder of gas at a time from Health Department.22. Permission & Certificate from CFO from fire department to operate more than two gas cylinders in hotel premises.23. Insurance of entire shop (Hotel) against natural calamities, fire, theft, robbery or any other damages (Not mandatory but advisable to do).24. Maintenance of Payment Register as per Bonus Act a & B 1965 (Annual Returns in Form-D)25. Police Registration Certificate26. License to keep place of Public Entertainment-by Police Act, 195127. Sales Tax Registration Certificate.28. Sales Tax Registration Certificate for Permit Room on Monthly Return basis.29. PNR for the said Hotel Or Restaurant Business from Income Tax Department30. The Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd., Govt. of India. Copy Right OfficeDepartment of Education Form II D (See Rule 14B 1952)31. PPL (Phonographic Performance License) for sound recorded music, Royalty to the singer etc., u/s. 33 (B) of CRA 195732. Bank Guarantee Certificate for opening new Permit Room in said Hotel,equivalent to the existing license fee on the date of issue.33. Nokarnama of each Employee’s Certificate with photograph. Form F.L.XIV Rule 22 (2) 49 40 (2)FOR PERMIT ROOMS34. Entertainment Tax Certificate and approval from Collector’s Department, Mumbai on Dance / Permit Room conducting dance.35. State Excise and Prohibition License for Permit Room Renewal every year.36. Excise Account RegisterBrand wise FLR 1/ARegister Book FLR3/A37. Excise Register: FLR 6-Rule 15 (b)Individual Permit No Register Book38. Excise Total Account Register on FLR-339 Excise Beer Register-Form BEER-A40. Monthly Statement of Excise Log Book-Form FLR-441. Excise Officer’s Visit Book to be endorsed on monthly basis.42. Customer’s Drinking Permit-As per Rule (FLX-C) Rule 70-D.

1. A certain school of thought in India appears concerned as regards the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, formerly a Bill, introduced by the Union Minister of Home Affairs, Shri Amit Shah, in the Lok Sabha.2. On 10 December 2019, the Bill was passed by Lok Sabha at 12:11 A.M. (IST) with 311 Members of Parliament voting in favour, and 80 against it.3. The Bill was subsequently passed by Rajya Sabha on 11 December 2019 with 125 Members of Parliament voting for it and 105 against it.4. The Bill received assent from the President of India on 12 December 2019, and it assumed the status of an Act. It shall come into force on such date as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint.5. It must first be clarified what the Act intends to achieve. It is an Act to further amend the Citizenship Act, 1955, hereinafter referred to as the Principal Act.6. The Amendment Act seeks to do the following:6.1. insert a proviso to Section 2(1)(b) (i.e. clause (b) of Sub-section 1 of Section 2) of the Principal Act. After the amendment, clause (b) of Sub-section 1 would read as follows.—"Illegal migrant means a foreigner who has entered into India--without a valid passport or other travel documents and such other document or authority as may be prescribed by or under any law in that behalf; orwith a valid passport or other travel documents and other such document or authority as may be prescribed by or under any law in that behalf but remains therein beyond the permitted period of time;(proviso) Provided that any person belonging to Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi or Christian community from Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan, who entered into India on or before the 31st day of December, 2014 and who has been exempted by the Central Government by or under clause (c) of sub-section (2) of section 3 of the Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920 or from the application of the provisions of the Foreigners Act, 1946 or any rule or order made thereunder, shall not be treated as illegal migrant for the purposes of this Act."6.2. insert section 6B after section 6A of the Principle Act. After the amendment, the aforementioned sections would read as follows.--"[6A. Special provisions as to citizenship of persons covered by the Assam Accord.―(1) For the purposes of this section―(a) “Assam” means the territories included in the State of Assam immediately before the commencement of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 1985 (65 of 1985);(b) “detected to be a foreigner” means detected to be a foreigner in accordance with the provisions of the Foreigners Act, 1946 (31 of 1946) and the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964 by a Tribunal constituted under the said Order;(c) “specified territory” means the territories included in Bangladesh immediately before the commencement of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 1985 (65 of 1985);(d) a person shall be deemed to be Indian origin, if he, or either of his parents or any of his grandparents was born in undivided India;(e) a person shall be deemed to have been detected to be a foreigner on the date on which a Tribunal constituted under the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964 submits its opinion to the effect that he is a foreigner to the officer or authority concerned.(2) Subject to the provisions of sub-sections (6) and (7), all persons of Indian origin who came before the lst day of January, 1966 to Assam from the specified territory (including such of those whose names were included in the electoral rolls used for the purposes of the General Election to the House of the People held in 1967) and who have been ordinarily resident in Assam since the dates of their entry into Assam shall be deemed to be citizens of India as from the lst day of January, 1966.(3) Subject to the provisions of sub-sections (6) and (7), every person of Indian origin who―(a) came to Assam on or after the lst day of January, 1966 but before the 25th day of March, 1971 from the specified territory; and(b) has, since the date of his entry into Assam, been ordinarily resident in Assam; and(c) has been detected to be a foreigner;shall register himself in accordance with the rules made by the Central Government in this behalf under section 18 with such authority (hereafter in this sub-section referred to as the registering authority) as may be specified in such rules and if his name is included in any electoral roll for any Assembly or Parliamentary constituency in force on the date of such detection, his name shall be deleted therefrom.Explanation.―In the case of every person seeking registration under this sub-section, the opinion of the Tribunal constituted under the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964 holding such person to be a foreigner, shall be deemed to be sufficient proof of the requirement under clause (c) of this subsection and if any question arises as to whether such person complies with any other requirement under this sub-section, the registering authority shall,― (i) if such opinion contains a finding with respect to such other requirement, decide the question in conformity with such finding; (ii) if such opinion does not contain a finding with respect to such other requirement, refer the question to a Tribunal constituted under the said Order hang jurisdiction in accordance with such rules as the Central Government may make in this behalf under section 18 and decide the question in conformity with the opinion received on such reference.(4) A person registered under sub-section (3) shall have, as from the date on which he has been detected to be a foreigner and till the expiry of a period of ten years from that date, the same rights and obligations as a citizen of India (including the right to obtain a passport under the Passports Act, 1967 (15 of 1967) and the obligations connected therewith), but shall not entitled to have his name included in any electoral roll for any Assembly or Parliamentary constituency at any time before the expiry of the said period of ten years.(5) A person registered under sub-section (3) shall be deemed to be a citizen of India for all purposes as from the date of expiry of a period of ten years from the date on which he has been detected to be a foreigner.(6) Without prejudice to the provisions of section 8―(a) if any person referred to in sub-section (2) submits in the prescribed manner and form and to the prescribed authority within sixty days from the date of commencement of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 1985 (65 of 1985), a declaration that he does not wish to be a citizen of India, such person shall not be deemed to have become a citizen of India under that sub-section;(b) if any person referred to in sub-section (3) submits in the prescribed manner and form and to the prescribed authority within sixty days from the date of commencement of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 1985(65 of 1985), or from the date on which he has been detected to be a foreigner, whichever is later, a declaration that he does not wish to be governed by the provisions of that sub-section and sub-sections (4) and (5), it shall not be necessary for such person to register himself under sub-section (3).Explanation.―Where a person required to file a declaration under this sub-section does not have the capacity to enter into a contract, such declaration may be filed on his behalf by any person competent under the law for the time being in force to act on his behalf.(7) Nothing in sub-sections (2) to (6) shall apply in relation to any person―(a) who, immediately before the commencement of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 1985 (65 of 1985), is a citizen of India;(b) who was expelled from India before the commencement of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 1985, under the Foreigners Act, 1946 (31 of 1946).(8) Save as otherwise expressly provided in this section, the provisions of this section shall have effect notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force.]6B. (1) The Central Government or an authority specified by it in this behalf may, subject to such conditions, restrictions and manner as may be prescribed, on an application made in this behalf, grant a certificate of registration or certificate of naturalisation to a person referred to in the proviso to clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 2.(2) Subject to fulfilment of the conditions specified in section 5 or the qualifications for naturalisation under the provisions of the Third Schedule, a person granted the certificate of registration or certificate of naturalisation under sub-section (1) shall be deemed to be a citizen of India from the date of his entry into India.(3) On and from the date of commencement of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, any proceeding pending against a person under this section in respect of illegal migration or citizenship shall stand abated on conferment of citizenship to him:Provided that such person shall not be disqualified for making application for citizenship under this section on the ground that the proceeding is pending against him and the Central Government or authority specified by it in this behalf shall not reject his application on that ground if he is otherwise found qualified for grant of citizenship under this section:Provided further that the person who makes the application for citizenship under this section shall not be deprived of his rights and privileges to which he was entitled on the date of receipt of his application on the ground of making such application.(4) Nothing in this section shall apply to tribal area of Assam, Meghalaya, Mizoram or Tripura as included in the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution and the area covered under "The Inner Line" notified under the Bengal Eastern Frontier Regulation, 1873.'."6.3. add clause (da) to clause (d) and insert a proviso after clause (f) of Section 7D. After the amendment, the aforementioned section would read as follows.--"7D. Cancellation of registration as Overseas Citizen of India Cardholder.―The Central Government may, by order, cancel the registration granted under sub-section (1) of section 7A, if it is satisfied that― (a) the registration as an Overseas Citizen of India Cardholder was obtained by means of fraud, false representation or the concealment of any material fact; or(b) the Overseas Citizen of India Cardholder has shown disaffection towards the Constitution, as by law established; or(c) the Overseas Citizen of India Cardholder has, during any war in which India may be engaged, unlawfully traded or communicated with an enemy or been engaged in, or associated with, any business or commercial activity that was to his knowledge carried on in such manner as to assist an enemy in that war; or(d) the Overseas Citizen of India Cardholder has, within five years after registration under sub-section (1) of section 7A, been sentenced to imprisonment for a term of not less than two years; or(da) the Overseas Citizen of India Cardholder has violated any of the provisions of this Act or provisions of any other law for time being in force as may be specified by the Central Government in the notification published in the Official Gazette; or";(e) it is 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; or(f) the marriage of an Overseas Citizen of India Cardholder, who has obtained such Card under clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 7A,―(i) has been dissolved by a competent court of law or otherwise; or(ii) has not been dissolved but, during the subsistence of such marriage, he has solemnised marriage with any other person.Provided that no order under this section shall be passed unless the Overseas Citizen of India Cardholder has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard."6.4. insert clause (eei) after clause (ee) in sub-section (2) of Section 18 of the Principal Act. After the amendment, the aforementioned sub-section would read as follows.--(2) In particular and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing power, such rules may provide for―(e) the cancellation of the registration of, and the cancellation and amendment of certificates of naturalisation relating to, persons deprived of citizenship under this Act, and the delivering up of such certificates for those purposes;(ee) the manner and form in which and the authority to whom declarations referred to in clauses (a) and (b) of sub-section (6) of section 6A shall be submitted and other matters connected with such declarations;(eei) the conditions, restrictions and manner for granting certificate of registration or certificate of naturalisation under sub-section (1) of section 6B;6.5. insert a proviso in clause (d) in the Third Schedule of the Principal Act, which would read, after the amendment, as follows.--THE THIRD SCHEDULE[See Section 6(1)]The qualifications for naturalisation of a person (Subs. by s. 18, ibid., for “who is not a citizen of a country specified in the First Schedule” (w.e.f. 3-12-2004)) are―(a) that he is not a subject or citizen of any country where citizens of India are prevented by law or practice of that country from becoming subjects or citizens of that country by naturalisation;(b) that, if he is a citizen of any country (Subs. by s. 18, ibid., for “he has renounced the citizenship of that country in accordance with the law therein in force in that behalf and has notified such renunciation to the Central Government” (w.e.f. 3-12-2004)),(c) that he has either resided in India or been in the service of a Government in India or partly the one and partly the other, throughout the period of twelve months immediately preceding the date of the application;[Provided that if the Central Government is satisfied that special circumstances exist, it may, after recording the circumstances in writing, relax the period of twelve months up to a maximum of thirty days which may be in different breaks.](d) that during the [fourteen years] immediately preceding the said period of twelve months, he has either resided in India or been in the service of a Government in India, or partly the one and partly the other, for periods amounting in the aggregate to not less than [eleven years];(proviso) [Provided that for the person belonging to Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi or Christian community in Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan, the aggregate period of residence or service of Government in India as required under this clause shall be read as "not less than five years" in place of "not less than eleven years"](e) that he is of good character;(f) that he has an adequate knowledge of a language specified in the Eighth Schedule to the Constitution; and(g) that in the event of a certificate of naturalisation being granted to him, he intends to reside in India, or to enter into, or continue in, service under a Government in India or under an international organisation of which India is a member or under a society, company or body of persons established in India:Provided that the Central Government may, if in the special circumstances of any particular case it thinks fit,―(i) allow a continuous period of twelve months ending not more than six months before the date of the application to be reckoned, for the purposes of clause (c) above, as if it had immediately preceded that date;(ii) allow periods of residence or service earlier than [fifteen years] before the date of the application to be reckoned in computing the aggregate mentioned in clause (d) above.6.6. The Third Schedule requires us to see Section 6(1) i.e. sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the Principal Act. For the purpose of comprehension, I enumerate here what the aforementioned sub-section details:6. Citizenship by naturalisation.— (1) Where an application is made in the prescribed manner by any person of full age and capacity [not being an illegal migrant] for the grant of a certificate of naturalisation to him, the Central Government may, if satisfied that the applicant is qualified for naturalisation under the provisions of the Third Schedule, grant to him a certificate of naturalisation:Provided that, if in the opinion of the Central Government, the applicant is a person who has rendered distinguished service to the cause of science, philosophy, art, literature, world peace or human progress generally, it may waive all or any of the conditions specified in the Third Schedule.7. Now that the Amendment Act has been described in its entirety, it is of prudence to understand a few basics.8. What is meant by naturalization? It is the admittance of a foreigner to the citizenship of the concerned country. The qualifications for the naturalization of a person are enumerated in the Third Schedule of the Principal Act.9. What are the objections raised by the critics of the Amendment Act? Leading opposition parties say the bill is discriminatory as it singles out Muslims who constitute nearly 15 percent of country's population. It is also said that the Amendment Act is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution — the Right to Equality.10. Quoting from the Economic Times, "The Bill has triggered widespread protests in northeastern states where many feel that permanent settlement of illegal immigrants will disturb the region's demography and further burden resources and decrease employment opportunities for indigenous people. A large section of people and organisations opposing the Bill also say it will nullify the provisions of the Assam Accord of 1985, which fixed March 24, 1971, as the cut-off date for deportation of all illegal immigrants irrespective of religion."11. Opponents have also raised the following concerns: If the Bill (now Act), like it says is to protect the minorities, why are they excluding the Muslim minorities, who have faced persecution in their own countries?12. On Swarajya – Read India Right, an online news portal, a constitutional defence for the Act was published. It can be accessed here: A Constitutional Defence Of The Citizenship Amendment Bill .13. In actuality, the Act does not confer citizenship upon anyone but merely removes the disability on Hindus, Jains, Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists and Parsis from Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan from acquisition of citizenship by “naturalization”, if they are illegal immigrants (those who have entered the country without valid travel documents or overstayed).14. The Third Schedule of the Principal Act detailed in point 6.5. needs to, however, be satisfied.15. In 1947, India's leadership had to, on one hand, accept the cold hard fact of mass migration of Hindus from Pakistan (includes present Bangladesh), and on the other hand, ideologically, they were unwilling to accept the two-nation theory.16. Articles 5 to 10 of the Indian Constitution accommodated these concerns. The crux of the articles can be articulated as follows:Article 5: anyone born in India and domiciled in India would be an Indian citizen.Article 6: if he has entered from the territory of Pakistan or Bangladesh, he has to register.Article 7: anyone migrating to Pakistan from India will lose Indian citizenship if they have migrated to the Islamic nation.Article 8: extends citizenship to persons of Indian origin.Article 9: terminates Indian citizenship upon acquisition of foreign citizenship.Article 10: the citizenship of persons having acquired the same under these provisions cannot be taken away.17. Therefore, if analyzed critically, it would be evident that these provisions do not identify the communities by name but clearly create a de-facto policy favouring the Hindu and Sikh immigrants from Pakistan over largely Muslim emigrants from India.18. According to Suvrajyoti Gupta, an Assistant Professor of Law at the OP Jindal Global University, this is not occasioned by any malice towards the Muslims, but simply an acknowledgement of the fact that the erstwhile Pakistan (Pakistan + Bangladesh) is an Islamic country (as per 1949 Objectives Resolution and later the Constitution of Bangladesh), and given the nature of politics of these countries, the return of the Hindu/Sikh migrants would never be possible.19. Post commencement of the Constitution, the power to enact a law for acquisition and termination of citizenship was left to the Parliament (Article 11).20. A common objection raised to the Amendment Act is the principle of "secularism". Critics argue that since all laws in India have to be in accordance with provision of Part-III, (fundamental rights), even acquisition of citizenship has to comply with the principle of “secularism”.21. Suvrajyoti Gupta says that Secularism is a Constitutional value diffused throughout Part-III. The relevant Articles could be:Article 14 (Equality before law);Article 21 (right to life and liberty);Article 15 (Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth);Article 16 (Equality of opportunity in public employment);Article 25 (freedom of conscience);Article 26 (freedom to manage religious affairs);Article 27 (prohibition on religion specific tax);Article 28 (protection of minority script and culture) and finallyArticle 30 (rights of minorities to administer educational institutions).Unfortunately, except for Articles 14 and 21, all these Articles apply to “citizens”, and thus the secularism of the Constitution seems to be directed exclusively towards citizens and not foreigners yet to acquire citizenship.22. Now, Article 14 of the Constitution states expressly: The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.23. However, there are exceptions to the Article. It allows reasonable classification, i.e. classification if:the classification is based on an intelligible differentia, andthe differentia has a rational relation with the object sought to be achieved.This was upheld by the Supreme Court of India in Shri Ram Krishna Dalmia vs Shri Justice S. R. Tendolkar & ... on 28 March, 1958: Shri Ram Krishna Dalmia vs Shri Justice S. R. Tendolkar & ... on 28 March, 195824. Opponents say that the Amendment Act is under-inclusive because if the purpose of classification is “religious persecution” then it fails to bring Muslim communities like Rohingyas in Bangladesh and Ahmediyas in Pakistan within its ambit.25. Suvrajyoti Gupta says that the justiciability of citizenship or laws that regulate the ingress of foreigners is often treated as a ‘sovereign space’ where the courts are reluctant to intervene. This is illustrated by the following:In Trump v Hawaii No. 17-965, 585 U.S. (2018), the US Supreme Court upheld travel ban from several Muslim countries holding that regulation of foreigners including ingress is “fundamental sovereign attribute exercised by the government’s political departments largely immune from judicial control.”Indian Courts have followed a similar approach. In David John Hopkins vs. Union of India (1997), the Madras High Court held that the right of the Union to refuse citizenship is absolute and not fettered by equal protection under Article 14.Similarly in Louis De Raedt vs. Union of India (1991), the Supreme Court held that a right of a foreigner in India is confined to Article 21 and he cannot seek citizenship as a matter of right.26. Therefore, if the court enters into a review of the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019, on merits, the State can easily satisfy the technical test for reasonable classification.27. In point 23, a term "intelligible differentia" was used. What does it mean? It simply means a classification basis capable of being understood. It has been explained by Suvrajyoti Gupta in a historical context.28. The partition of Bengal and Punjab have been diametrically opposite historical experiences. In Punjab, partition was a jhatka — mass slaughter followed by population exchange. By 1949, the relative demographics of the communities have stabilized. Articles 5 to 10 of the Constitution more or less settled the question of citizenship in the west.29. In Bengal, it was a “halal” — slow destruction of the Bengali Hindus in Bangladesh over a period of 70 years. The Hindu population in Bangladesh fell from 23 per cent in 1947 (when it was East Pakistan) to about 9 per cent in 2011. Since the early 1980s, the eastern border also saw the proliferation of Muslim migrants. This migration created justified demographic anxieties in Assam and the North East, resulting in protracted insurgencies.30. India has traditionally not been able to address this. In 1950, the Nehru-Liaquat Ali Treaty was entered into to ‘ensure to the minorities throughout its territory complete equality..’ which included ‘freedom of movement’. It failed miserably. Thereafter, India maintained a policy of granting citizenship under registration under section 5(1) of the Act.31. This, too, was discontinued after the Bangladesh war through an executive order dated 29 November 1971, whereby the Government of India through its Under Secretary C.L. Goyal issued an express letter No. 26011/16/71-10 to the Chief Secretaries to all state governments and Union Territory Administrations.The order reads: Grant of Indian citizenship to refugees from East Bengal who have crossed over to India after 25 March 1971 — instructing not to register the refugees from East Pakistan as Citizens.32. This policy was solidified by the amendment of the Citizenship Act in 2004 that now requires a person not to be an “illegal immigrant” (i.e. someone who has entered India without valid papers) to be registered as citizens.33. Thus, a vast number of Bengali Hindus from Bangladesh live and work in India and own properties and documents but have no locus standi for citizenship. The Act merely seeks to address their predicament.34. This being settled, further concerns were raised. The reasoning was that migration is largely driven by ‘climate vulnerabilities, economic opportunities, community networks et cetera’.35. While these could indeed be ancillary reasons for migration, the prosecution of the Hindus and Buddhists in Bangladesh is a well-established fact. This is acknowledged internationally, being part of the records of the United National High Commission for Refugees, Report of the US Commission on Religious Freedom and various international organisations.36. The Muslim immigrants, all said and done, do not suffer from religious persecution. The court can simply take judicial notice of it under section 57 of the Indian Evidence Act (IEA) thereby establishing the “intelligible differentia”. The law, by taking note of the fact, has eliminated the need for every migrant to prove the fact of “persecution”. Under section 57, all Courts are required to take judicial notice of all laws in force in the territory of India as well as all Acts passed by Parliament. If the Court is called upon by any person to take judicial notice of any fact, it may refuse to do so unless and until such person produces any such book or document as it may consider necessary to enable it to do so.37. What are the summed up objectives of the legislation? They are twofold, namely.--Protection of the de-facto refugees (de-facto because in India refugee is an administrative rather than legal category)Protection of national security by regulating immigration in India.38. These objectives have been vetted by the Supreme Court itself. The court has considered refugee influx as external aggression under Article 355 (Sarbananda Sonowal (2005) 5SCC 655).39. It was the Supreme Court which took the initiative on the NRC in Assam. (Assam Public Works v Union of India 2009).40. At the same time, it has been proactive in protecting the rights of the de-facto refugees from Bangladesh (National Human Rights Commission v. State of Arunachal Pradesh (1996).41. As for the Ahmediyas and Rohingyas, nothing prevents them from seeking Indian citizenship through naturalization (if they enter with valid travel documents).42. Harish Salve, a leading luminary in the field of law and the ex-Solicitor General of India, had the following points to make in an interview to NDTV:The people of the three neighbouring countries chosen in the Amendment Act have a lot of ethnic connections to India. Therefore, it is perfectly legitimate classification.As regards non-inclusion of other countries such as China or those in Africa, it is a policy argument and not a constitutional law argument.Under-inclusion (i.e. not including other countries) of this kind in a citizenship law does not violate Article 14. It could have been made one-country specific (for e.g. Pakistan-specific), which would have been arbitrary. The extent of relaxation of migration law is purely a matter of policy. One Government may expand it to Myanmar, Sri Lanka, China, beyond the immediate neighbours and so on. Article 14 is not to second-guess the policy of Parliament.The requirement of intelligible differentia has been satisfied. The three chosen countries are neighbouring countries which are Islamic states. There is a basis, that these are Islamic states where the other communities named in the Amendment Act are minorities. This is a relaxation of migration law and not a ban on migration. Therefore, it does not violate Article 14. The law as it stands excludes everybody, and is merely opening a window for the minorities of those countries.For the purpose of this Act, migration for reasons other than state persecution on the ground that these are Islamic states, is not a valid basis. If a person, who belongs to the majority community of these countries, wants to migrate for reasons such as political asylum or economic factors, the doors are still open to him. Such a migrant shall be treated according to the existing laws of asylum or immigration. This Amendment Act is merely an extra window open for minorities. This does not violate Article 14 at all.Persecution can be on account of political beliefs, on account of religious beliefs, on account of social beliefs. We have, through this Act, recognized one form of persecution, which is constitutionally valid. Whether or not we recognize other forms of persecution is a matter of policy. These countries are indeed Islamic republics, so we allow migration to those who are declared minorities in these countries. The classification is legal. Should others be allowed? It is a matter of policy.The Amhadiyas and the rest are not persecuted on grounds of religion. There are, as mentioned earlier, other forms of persecution as well. Are we going to recognize all forms of persecution? Legally, we don't have to. In constitutional law, we do not have to redress all wrongs in order to redress some wrongs. That is how Article 14 is to be understood in legal terms. It is not the job of the Courts if the Government addresses some wrongs. It is for the Parliament to debate and discuss whether the scope is to be expanded (a policy argument)."Minorities in a country which have a declared state religion" constitutes intelligible differentia. The provision has a nexus with this differentia, in the sense that these minorities are allowed migration. That is where the Article 14 inquiry must end, because Courts do not second-guess this form of legislative wisdom.We are not forbidden to do something not expressly written in the Constitution, unless what we do has itself been prohibited by the Constitution. Speaking for myself, I do not see how accommodating persecuted minorities violates the principles of secularism. In the Tamil context, if we announce that we would allow people of Indian ethnicity to migrate to India, that would not violate either Article 14 or principles of secularism. One may argue that the policy should have been more magnanimous, but again, it is not legally tenable that the Act violates the Constitution.When one announces, for example, that we would allow Sikhs to migrate owing to potential persecution, it is not necessary for the migrating Sikhs to prove that they have been persecuted. It is based on a class. Is there a basis for this class? Yes, that these are minorities in those countries. Are these countries generally intolerant of minorities? In India's view, yes. The onus is not on the migrants to prove persecution. On the contrary, the onus is on those who assert that the Amendment Act is violative of Article 14, to prove that there is no persecution in the mentioned countries.The Indian minorities would not be affected even if NRC is passed without the Amendment Act succeeding, because the Act does not intend to make conditions of Indian minorities worse, but make the conditions of the minorities in the mentioned countries better.This Amendment Act has nothing to do with the NRC. If the NRC exercise is flawed, it would lead to many Indians being thrown out even without the Amendment Act coming into force. Even the Government has recognized the flaws of NRC. However, the NRC is a completely different concern. The Act has nothing to do with that. It, in fact, reduces the enormity of that exercise, because it reduces the number of people who would have had to leave India otherwise.43. My only personal objection is that the Act has a shortcoming. It does not address the possibility of granting refuge to atheists, who also face persecution in these three countries.44. Thus, my answer on the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019, stands concluded.

A medical examination is required for issue of driving license in India. The relevant form content is as below :::::FORM 1-AMEDICAL CERTIFICATE[See Rule (1) 30.7(a)-14(d) and 18 (d)]1. Name of Applicant ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………2. Identification marks (i) ……………………………………………………………………………..……….(ii) ………………………………………………………………………………………3 (a) Does the applicant to the best of your judgment, readily suffer from any defect of vision? If so, hasit been corrected by suitable spectacles? Yes/No(b) Can the applicant to the best of your judgment, readily distinguish the pigmentary colors, red andgreen? Yes/No(c) In your opinion, is he able to distinguish with his eye sight at a distance of 25 meters in good day amotor car number plate? Yes/No(d) In your opinion, does the applicant suffer from a degree of deafness which would prevent hishearing the ordinary sound signals? Yes/No(e) In your opinion, does the applicant suffer from night blindness? Yes/No(f) Has the applicant any defect or deformity or loss of member which would interfere with the efficientperformance of his duties as a driver? If so, give your reasons in details. Yes/No……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….....(g) ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….OPTIONALBlood group and RH factor of the applicant (if applicant so details that the information may be noted in his driving licence)(a) Blood group …………….…………………….…… (b) RH Factor ………………………………….Declaration made by the applicant in Form-1 as to his physical fitness is attached.CERTIFICATE OF MEDICAL FITNESSI certify that :(i) I have personally examined the applicant. Shri/Smt./Km. …………………………………………………………(ii) That while examining the applicant I have directed special attention to his/her distant vision.(iii) While examining the applicant I have directed special attention to his/her hearing ability, the condition of the armslegs, hand and joint of both extremities of the applicants :&(iv) I have personally examined the applicant for reaction time side vision and glare recovery, (applicable in case ofpersons applying for a licence to drive goods carriage carrying goods of dangerous or hazardous nature to human life) And, therefore I certify that to the best of my judgment, he/she is medically fit/not fit to hold a driving licence. The applicant is not medically for to hold a licence for the following reasons …………………………………... Strike out which is inapplicable.SignaturePhoto1. Name and designation of the Medical Officer/Practitioner(Seal)2. Registration Number of Medical Officer