that the Government of Nepal has not made any discrimination to provide citizenship for the Nepalese citizens like the petitioner. For the sake of substantive right of obtaining citizenship claimed by the petitioner, some procedural processes also have to be fulfilled. Without fulfilling process as per law, it is not right to imply that to confer citizenship was refused due to the disappearance of the father. Hence, writ petition should be revoked. 9. has never come to this Office of Ward No. 5 of K.M.C. to ask for the recommendation for the sake of citizenship, and child’s birth registration was needed for the sake of getting citizenship; she has furnished application without submitting it as well. 12. Upon looking into our constitutional provision regarding citizenship, upon looking into our constitutional provision regarding citizenship, as per the provision made in Section (B) of Sub-article 2 of Article 11 of the Constitution of Nepal, provision is seen to have been made that a person whose “father or mother” was a citizen of Nepal at his or her birth shall be a citizen of Nepal by descent. In Sub-clause (1) of Clause 3 of Citizenship Act, 2063, provision is seen to have been made that if a person’s “father or mother” is a citizen of Nepal at the time of his/her birth, such person shall be a citizen of Nepal by descent. Upon hearing the aforementioned pleading, while considering towards the decision, is the order as per petition claim supposed to be issued in the present case or not? It appears that decision is to be made on this issue. 10. Upon considering towards the decision, pleading is seen to have been held, stating that Kriti Thapa, of the petitioners, is the daughter of Bishwa Nath Thapa, a resident of Rautahat, and Kabita Thapa; that Kabita Thapa, the mother of Kriti Thapa, held love marriage with Bishwa Nath Thapa, a resident of Rautahat, at the age of 15; after the birth of Kriti Thapa from that marital relationship, saying that he would go to work in the garment, the father, Bishwa Nath Thapa, went away and then disappeared; he has not been in contact since that time; and presently she was adult; hence, upon requesting for the recommendation to obtain citizenship by mother’s name, the opponent, Kathmandu district, K.M.C., Office of Ward No. 5 refused to be provided with recommendation. 13. In the Constitution and the Act, the phrase “father and mother” has been used, from this, if any one of the father or mother is a Nepalese citizen, it is seen that their child can obtain Nepalese citizenship certificate as soon as they are 16 years of age. Person concerned can make a choice of either father’s or mother’s name through which he/she wants to obtain citizenship. There is the condition that this Court has accepted this matter. (N.L.M. 2066 D.No. 8175 P. 1014) In this condition, it is not right to ward off by telling her to submit the father’s citizenship or go to inconvenient place to obtain citizenship. 11. Upon looking into the replica copies of the document evidence attached to the petition, affidavit of Chief District Officer, Kathmandu is found to have been attached, stating that Kabita Thapa, the mother of Kriti Thapa, of the petitioners, was born on 2037/3/30 (July 13, 1980 A.D.) in Kathmandu district, K.M.C., Ward No. 5 and on date 2062/8/7 (November 22, 2005 A.D.), citizenship certificate of C.C.No. 2023 was issued on her name from Kathmandu District Administration Office, and from the replica copy of the certificate of S.L.C., attached to the document file, it is seen that the petitioner, Kriti Thapa, was born on date 2052/11/26 (March 9, 1996 A.D.). It is also seen to have been mentioned in the writ petition that an application was submitted to the District Administration Office, Kathmandu on date 2072/6/7 (September 24, 2015 A.D.) to get citizenship by descent upon being identified by mother. The petitioner has not furnished application in this Office; and affidavit of Om Prakash Paudel, administrative chief of the K.M.C., Ward No. 5, of the date of 2072/11/19 (March 2, 2016 A.D.), stating that the petitioner 14. From the S.L.C. certificate, it is seen that the petitioner was born in Nepal on date 2052/11/26 (March 9, 1996 A.D.), and the father had gone to work in garment while the petitioner was still an infant; then he did not return, but not come in contact being disappeared, and when application was submitted to obtain citizenship by descent by mother’s name upon identifying by the mother, the opponent refused to be provided with recommendation and certificate of citizenship saying citizenship had to be obtained from the father’s name and address and that the law of providing citizenship,, without father, by mother’s name had not been made yet. 15. So far as to the connection to the issue that the petitioner’s father has been disappeared, it is not right that daughter, Kriti Thapa, of the applicants, cannot obtain citizenship simply because the father has been disappeared, and that Kabita Thapa, of the petitioners, cannot provide her child, daughter, with citizenship through her name. Upon looking through the 121 Compilation of Selected Decisions of Supreme Court on CITIZENSHIP and BIRTH REGISTRATION