revoked by the aforementioned ground and reason. Affidavit of the Government of Nepal, Ministry of Women, Children and Social Welfare reads as above. established fact upon the issue of dispute claimed by the opponents that action can be furthered on out of the address of father or mother, he cannot specified that this the address of this Office out of the addresses of his or his parents, hence, jurisdiction cannot be accepted by breaching the law. The petition filed by mentioning different facts of the condition that cannot attract the precedents mentioned in the context of the petition, should be revoked in connection to this Office. Affidavit of Hetauda Sub-metropolitan City, Office of Ward No. 1 reads as above. If the opponents had registered any application for the sake of recommendation by being present in this Office, they would have submitted those documents evidence. If anyone furnishes application to this Office along with necessary documents, recommendation is being provided by not fulfilling process; the opponents have not be furnished any application yet nor is it seen to have been registered; hence, the writ petition, which the opponent have filed with an intention to just exert unnecessary trouble and harassment should be revoked. Affidavit of Kathmandu Metropolitan City, Office of Ward No.4 reads as above. In the present case that has been submitted upon being inducted to the daily cause list as per rule, document file and documents along with the application have been studied. Instead of furnishing application as per rule to this Office by the party who asks for citizenship certificate of Nepal, being abided by the rule, process and procedure determined in the Citizenship Act and Rule, he/she has not submitted citizenship of father or husband to expose descent; upon trying to crossmatch of the record of his/her father or husband in this Office, the record of 3640 of the date of 2025 B.S. (1968/69 A.D.) of his citizenship certificate has been tattered and torn off; hence there was no record; hence, upon providing information that citizenship certificate has to be made with new process in the condition of such record undiscovered, he/she was sent back by asking to furnish application for the sake of new process by providing information of rule, process and procedure of the Citizenship Act; hence, the writ petition filed by making this Office an opponent by mentioning false description should be revoked. Affidavit of District Administration Office reads as above. Pleading has been heard which was made by learned advocate Mr. Pabitra Raut, present on behalf of the petitioners, stating that Gopal Khanal, of the petitioners, had clearly claimed that father being Badri Prasad Khanal and mother being Jayanti Shikari (Khanal), they were Nepalese citizens, and that mother had got citizenship certificate and father’s citizenship No. was 3640. The condition was that petitioner wanted to obtain citizenship by keeping identification of the mother, Jayanti Shikari (Khanal), mentioning father’s name, surname; and father’s name had been mentioned as Badri Prasad Khanal in his character certificate of passing out grade 8 of Gopal Khanal as well; hence, relationship was exposed and relationship was justified. Among the documents as per Rule 3 (1) of Nepal Citizenship Rule, 2063, though the Ward Office had not accepted the recommendation of local body or birth registration and relationship verification letter to expose relationship with relative, instead of providing citizenship certificate upon the application submitted, asking that Nepalese citizenship certificate should be granted as per the format of Schedule 1 of Nepal Citizenship Rule, 2063 by conducting spot investigation as per Rule 3 (2) of the same Rule, from the opponent’s act of depriving of citizenship without speaking regarding providing or not providing citizenship, the petitioners were deprived of the guarantee of the rights to obtain certificate and provide citizenship to her child by her name; hence, order including mandamus should be issued in the names of the opponents as per petition claim. If the writ petitioners furnish application from the place, where there is his/her father’s permanent residence, before the Chief District Officer concerned by obtaining recommendation of the local body concerned, its actions shall happen from the District Administration Office concerned. Writ petitioners themselves have the responsibility to fulfill the documents to be submitted to obtain citizenship certificate by the Citizenship Act and Rule; hence, if he/she goes to the District Administration Office along with the documents concerned as determined by the Act and Rule by fulfilling the procedure prescribed, all the acts and actions shall happen from there; hence, writ petition furnished by making this Ministry an opponent is revocable; hence, should be revoked. Affidavit of the Government of Nepal, Ministry of Home Affairs reads as above. Pleading has been heard which was made by learned joint attorney, Mr. Snajiv Raj Regmi, stating that instead of furnishing application to obtain Nepalese citizenship certificate, by submitting the recommendation or birth registration certificate and relationship verification letter to expose relationship with the relative, done by local body as per Rule 3 (1) (B) (C) of Nepal Citizenship Rule, 2063 in the format as per Schedule 1 of the same Action can be furthered out of the address of father or mother in the condition that it is factually unclear where the address of the opponent is; but the 111 Compilation of Selected Decisions of Supreme Court on CITIZENSHIP and BIRTH REGISTRATION