petitioner, was or is a Nepalese citizen; hence, it was said that recommendation could not be made for the sake of Nepalese citizenship by descent. In the writ petition, though the opponent mentioned that all the documents connected to him were also burnt down after the death of their father as per their custom and tradition, the matter of burning down the documents in that way is unconvincing; if burnt down, in the record of which office were the aforementioned documents, without mentioning relating to whether or not the replica copies could have been obtained, the condition is that they entered without clean intention. The secretary of village development committee has not behaved so as to humiliate the opponents; instead, the persons including the opponent, who were brought by her, had threatened the secretary and staff of village development committee, vilifying. The writ petition, which has been filed to trouble the secretary of village development committee, putting on false accusation, should be revoked. Affidavit furnished on behalf of the previously Kitani and present Godawari Village Development Committee, reads as above. hence, writ should be revoked. On the ground of documents evidence attached to the document file, including the pleadings made by the learned legal professionals, it seems that, in the writ petition, decision is supposed to be made regarding whether or not the order is supposed to be issued as per claim. Upon considering towards the decision, main writ petition claim is found to have been that after the death of father, his all documents were burnt down as per their custom and tradition; hence, when tried to get recommendation from village development committee, they were refused; district administration office also refused to confer; but, their constitutional and legal right to obtain citizenship by mother’s name has been ensured by the Interim Constitution of Nepal, 2063 and Nepal Citizenship Act and Rule; hence, mandamus order should be issued to confer recommendation to obtain citizenship by mother’s name and to confer the citizenship as well. Description of affidavit of the opponent, village development committee, appears to state that no substantial evidence was submitted stating that the petitioners’ father was or is a Nepalese citizen; hence, recommendation was not given for the sake of the Nepalese citizenship certificate, and of the opponent District Administration Office that application was not submitted congruent to rule stating to obtain citizenship. In this, attaching the documents together with the decisions on certiorari mandamus writ petition having such content involved, having the petitioner including Bhola Nagarkoti and opponent including District Administration Office, Kathmandu, decided on date 2070/12/10 (March 24, 2014 A.D.), and in certiorari mandamus writ petition, having the petitioner Bijay Basnet and the opponent District Administration Office, Lalitpur, decided on date 2071/12/30 (April 13, 2015 A.D.), submit the as per rule. Order of this Court, of the date of 2072/1/9 (April 22, 2015 A.D.), reads as above. In this, writ petitioners Diwakar Chhteri and Prabhakar Chhetri seem to have been the sons of father Rudal Chhetri and mother Sushma Cheetri. Upon minutely looking into the documents evidence furnished by them along with the petition, it appears that writ petitioners’ father Rudal Chhetri died on date 2036/8/26 (December 12, 1979 A.D.) and after that his wife writ petitioners’ mother Sushma Rai married Yogendra Rai on date 2042/5/23 (September 8, 1985 A.D.). Upon looking into the replica copy obtained on date 2033/4/3 (July 18, 1976 A.D.) by this Sushma Rai, she is found to have obtained from District Administration Office, Lalitpur by descent. Citizenship if an important certificate issued by the state for the sake of identity of its citizens. Citizenship is a matter connected to the nationality of a person; hence, the state prepares the grounds for obtaining citizenship by formulating constitution and law. A person does not automatically become a citizen of the country where he/she resides or is involved in employment, occupation, business. Being under the policy of the state, law prepares the particular grounds and processes to obtain citizenship. The citizenship certificate is issued to the persons who fulfill such grounds and processes. According to Article 8 (2) (B) of the then prevailing Interim Constitution of Nepal, 2063, it is found that there is the provision Document file of the present case that was submitted upon being inducted in the weekly and daily cause lists of the case as per rule was studied. Learned advocated duo Ms. Mira Dhungana and Ms. Sushma Gautam present on behalf of the petitioners presented the pleading stating that Sushma Rai, the petitioners’ mother, is a citizen of Nepal by descent; the petitioners have the right to obtain citizenship of Nepal on the ground of the Interim Constitution of Nepal, 2063, Nepal Citizenship Act, 2063 and various international covenants in which Nepal is a party country; hence, the writ should be issued. Learned deputy attorney Mr. Bal Krishna Wagle present on behalf of the opponent including the District Administration Office, Lalitpur presented the pleading stating that the petitioners have not been reached up to the authoritative body for the sake of citizenship certificate; hence, it is not right to say that citizenship was refused to confer. After investigating, authoritative body decides whether one can or cannot obtain citizenship; 117 Compilation of Selected Decisions of Supreme Court on CITIZENSHIP and BIRTH REGISTRATION