was no condition of the refusal made not to provide citizenship as per pleading held by the petitioners; hence, writ petition should be revoked. citizenship certificate by descent by the name of mother, Sarita Khadgi, showing the reason that the petitioners’ father, husband has been disappeared, and condition appears that he is yet to obtain the citizenship. Upon the pleading held by the writ petitioner that the opponent District Administration Office has refused to be provided with citizenship by giving oral reply that citizenship by descent could not be provided by mother’s name without father, opponent District Administration Office is seen to have mentioned the description in its affidavit up to that if citizenship certificate is demanded by fulfilling the rule of the law, citizenship certificate is being provided. No pleading is seen to have been held stating that citizenship as per the demand made by the petitioner cannot or shall not be obtained. Upon hearing the pleading made by the learned advocate and learned joint attorney as per above, by studying the document file and documents, it appears that decision is supposed to be made on the issue whether order as per petition claim is to be made or not. Upon considering towards the decision, petition claim seems to have been that an unidentified person, whose name, surname, address not known, married her, the petitioner, Sarita Khadgi, on date 2047/7/10 (October 27, 1990 A.D.), by deceiving, and the petitioner, Kiran Khadgi, was born on date 2051/12/30 (April 13, 1995 A.D.). Father disappeared after the birth of the son; hence, they were living at parental and maternal uncle’s home. Presently, the age of the petitioner, Kiran Khadgi, was complete for the sake of obtaining citizenship; hence, when they went to the opponent District Administration Office on date 2070/4/28 (August 12, 2013 A.D.) to furnish application for the sake of citizenship certificate by filling up the Schedule form and attaching to it including the recommendation of the Ward Office, they were refused to be provided with citizenship by descent by mother’s name, giving oral reply that citizenship could not provided to the son without father and that descent meant the father; hence, the petitioner became deprived of different opportunities, and the right conferred to them by the Constitution and law to obtain citizenship by mother’s name was breached; hence, mandamus should be issued on the names of the opponents to provide Nepalese citizenship certificate to the petitioner, Kiran Khadgi, by descent by mother’s name. In the affidavits of the opponents, the Office of the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers and the Ministry of Home Affairs, description is seen to have been mentioned stating that circulation had already been made on date 2068/5/5 (August 22, 2011 A.D) for all the District Administration Offices to provide citizenship certificate by mother’s name easily by fulfilling the procedure of the Citizenship Act and Rule if the person, who was born to a Nepalese citizen mother came to ask for the citizenship by mother’s name; whereas, in the affidavit of the opponent, District Administration Office, description is seen to have been mentioned that citizenship certificate is being provided if application is furnished upon attaching to it the evidence documents as per prescribed by law, and that reply that it could not be provided to the son without father was not given. In Article 8 (2) (B) of the Interim Constitution of Nepal, 2063, there is provision that if the father or mother was a citizen of Nepal at the time of his/ her birth, such person shall be a citizen of Nepal by descent and this provision is seen to have been continued in the Article 11 (2) of the present Constitution of Nepal. Similarly, legal provision is seen to have existed in Clause 3 (1) of the Nepal Citizenship Act, 2063, stating, “If the father or mother was a citizen of Nepal at the time of the birth of a person, such person shall be a citizen of Nepal by descent.” As per the aforementioned constitutional and legal provisions, it is seen that for the sake of the Nepalese citizenship by descent to be obtained by any person, his/her father of mother must be a Nepalese citizen at the time of his/her birth. Writ petitioner, Sarita Khadgi, is seen to have held the pleading that husband disappeared after the birth of the petitioner son, Kiran Khadgi, that she did not know even his name, surname, address and that she wanted to provided citizenship certificate by her name, and the petitioner, Kiran Khadgi, is seen to have held the pleading that he has been raised by mother upon nurturing and that he has not even seen his father; hence, citizenship certificate shall be obtained by mother’s name. As per the aforementioned constitutional and legal provisions, no obstruction is seen to have existed to obtain citizenship certificate by a person having any one of his/her father or mother a Nepalese citizen. The matter that the petitioner, Sarita Khadgi, is a Nepalese citizen is seen from her citizenship certificate issued by District Administration Office on date 2044/12/18 (March 31, 1988 A.D.) attached to the document file. Regarding this, in the writ of mandamus having including Sabina Damai versus including the Government of Nepal, Office of the Prime Minister and the Council of Ministers (N.L.M. 2068 Number 2, Page 247 D.No. 8557), mandamus As per mentioned above, it is seen from the writ petition and the description of the affidavits that the petitioner, Kiran Khadgi, wants to obtain Nepalese 95 Compilation of Selected Decisions of Supreme Court on CITIZENSHIP and BIRTH REGISTRATION