married with foreign citizen, if he/she was born in Nepal and has permanently resided in Nepal and has not obtained citizenship of the foreign country on the basis of father’s citizenship, he/ she can obtain naturalized citizenship of Nepal as per prevailing law. • Clause 5 (2) of Nepal Citizenship Act, 2063 : In connection to sons and daughters born from Nepalese citizen woman married with foreign citizen, if he/she was born in Nepal and has permanently resided in Nepal and has not obtained citizenship of the foreign country on the basis of father’s citizenship, he/she can be conferred naturalized citizenship of Nepal as prescribed. • Sub-Clause (3) of the same Act : The person who wants to obtain naturalized citizenship as per Sub-Clause (2), shall have to furnish application before the prescribed official by including the following documents : such a long time indicates the slight delay remained in government functions and actions. Now, while considering towards the second issue, the petitioners are seen to have made demand that even in connection to the persons like Raju Shaiyad Mohammad of the petitioners who have furnished applications for the sake of naturalized Nepalese citizenships as well, the Home Ministry has not made any decision till now; hence, order of Mandamus should be issued on the name of the opponent, the Home Ministry, stating to immediately confer the naturalized Nepalese citizenships in connection to such persons as well. One whose welfare is affected by the functions and actions of the Home Ministry is likely to come to ask for the remedy oneself. The situation is also not seen that the person who is supposed to come to make demand for remedy, stating that the rights are affected. In such situation, only on the basis of the petitioners’ claim in the present writ petition in general, stating that Mandamus should be issued in connection to the other persons who have not come to make demand for the remedy, there is not situation that Mandamus can be issued on the opponent, the Home Ministry, through the present petition in connection to such person. (A) Photocopy of mother’s Nepalese citizenship, (B) Recommendation of village development committee or municipality concerned disclosing the description of permanently residing upon being born in Nepal, Now, while looking for decision upon the third issue determined to be decided, jurisdiction to make decision upon the application furnished by Raju Shaiyasd Mohammad of the petitioners, to District Administration Office, Chitwan, stating that naturalized Nepalese citizenships, is seen to have vested in the Home Ministry. In the affidavit submitted by the Home Ministry, it is mentioned that investigation is still going on upon the aforementioned application. From this, the situation is clearly seen that the Home Ministry has committed unjust delay in making decision on the issue as per petition claimed. The analysis made above has justified about this, as well. The principal claim held in the writ petition is that Mandamus should be issued on the name of Home Ministry, stating to confer the naturalized Nepalese citizenship to Raju Shaiyad Mohammad of the petitioners as soon as possible. Decision can be made only after the investigation on the issue of that claim. Moreover, it is seen that after investigating, the right to make decision on this issue is vested in the Home Ministry itself. As per the principle of separation of powers also, it is not right for the judicial sector to presently state to decide to confer naturalized citizenship to the petitioner, Raju Shaiyad Mohammad, by intervening through writ on the issue remained pending and under investigation under the jurisdiction of executive body. However, the functions and actions to be accomplished by the opponent, Home Ministry, remained as a body that (C) Proof of not receiving citizenship of any foreign country on the basis of father’s citizenship. By fulfilling the aforementioned constitutional and legal conditions, the writ petitioner furnished the application for the sake of naturalized citizenship in District Administration Office, Chitwan on date 2064/11/06 (February 18, 2008 A.D.) along with necessary evidence, whereas, after examining the things to be examined, the aforementioned Office is seen to have sent the necessary documents along with the petitioner’s application to the Home Ministry on date 2064/11/2 (February 14, 2008 A.D.). In the affidavit submitted by the Home Ministry pertaining to that, it is seen to have been mentioned that the documents including the petitioner’s application are under investigation and necessary decision shall have to be made on whether the petitioner is supposed to be conferred the naturalized citizenship or not only after the investigation. Even making calculation of the date of the present writ petition filed from the date of the application of the applicant, Raju Shaiyad Mohammad, asking for naturalized citizenship, which is said to have been sent by District Administration Office, Chitwan, to the Home Ministry on the date of 2064/11/29 (March 12, 2008 A.D.), the situation is seen that 3 months have already gone. The statement of the Home Ministry that the application has been under investigation till 65 Compilation of Selected Decisions of Supreme Court on CITIZENSHIP and BIRTH REGISTRATION