of Nepal, Office of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers has argued that law has not barred the married women from obtaining citizenship by decent in the name of her father. certificate has mentioned her husband’s name and intended to obtain citizenship certificate by mentioning her husband’s name however she has not submitted the evidence substantiating her marital relationship; therefore, recommendation has not been provided thereto. Advocate Sujandra Maharjan representing on behalf of Kirtipur has stated that the applicant Nakkali Maharjan in her application form submitted for obtaining citizenship certificate has mentioned her husband’s name and intended to obtain citizenship certificate by mentioning her husband’s name however she has not submitted the evidence substantiating her marital relationship; therefore, recommendation has not been provided thereto. There is no situation of rejecting the application and deny to make recommendation if an application is submitted for recommendation for obtaining citizenship certificate by descent in the name of either father or mother. Therefore, the writ petition should be quashed. 3. Going through the duplicate copy of the application form submitted by the petitioner Nakkali Maharjan for obtaining citizenship, it is mentioned as :- Nakkali Maharjan with an age of 29 years, daughter of Dev Maharjan, resident of Kirtipur Municipality Ward No 6 which also contained the Citizenship Certificate Number of her father which has been verified/ certified from the Ward Secretary of Ward No 6 on July 16, 2006. The Executive Officer of the respondent Kirtipur Municipality has not made recommendation to it and therefore, the contention of the written response of Kirtipur Municipality that the petitioner had intended to obtain citizenship certificate by mentioning the name of her husband does not seem to be based on fact. After hearing the arguments presented by the learned advocates and reviewing the documents enclosed in the case file including the writ petition the court has to decide whether or not an order as sought by the petitioner needs to be issued? 4. Article 11 of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal, 1990 which was in force at the time of filing of this writ petition guaranteed the right to equality and Article 13 of the Interim Constitution of Nepal, 2007 which is now in force has provided the right to equality. In Clause (1) of Article 13, it is provided that “All citizens shall be equal before the law. No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws. Likewise, in Clause (2) it is provided that “No discrimination shall be made against any citizen in the application of general laws on grounds of religion, color, sex, caste, tribe, origin, language or ideological conviction or any of these.” Guaranteeing these constitutional provisions of fundamental rights the Article 32 has ensured the right to proceed in the manner set forth in Article 107 for the enforcement of these rights. 2. To consider about the ruling, in the writ petition it is stated that, the constitution in the Article 11 of the Kingdom of Nepal, 1990, the right to equality has been guaranteed. Article 9(1) of the Constitution and Section 3 of the Citizenship Act, 19963 provide that any person, whose father or mother was a citizen of Nepal at his or her birth, shall be deemed to be the citizen of Nepal by descent. Likewise, Article 9 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women provides that “States Parties shall grant women equal rights with men to acquire Nationality” and Nepal has already ratified that convention and therefore, married woman has right to make choice whether to obtain citizenship in the name of her father or husband. On these grounds, a writ of mandamus has been sought in the name of Kirtipur Municipality causing it to make recommendation wherefrom the Executive Officer denied making recommendation for citizenship when the petitioner had asked for it stating that a married woman cannot obtain citizenship from the name of father. The order of mandamus has also been sought in the name of other respondents making interpretation in respect to other women residing in the country who have been suffered from such problem. Going through the written response submitted from Kirtipur Municipality it is stated that, the petitioner Nakkali Maharjan in her application form submitted for obtaining citizenship 5. Article 9(1) of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal, 1990 has provided the constitutional provision that any person whose father or mother was a citizen of Nepal at his or her birth shall be a citizen of Nepal by descent. Likewise, according to the Article 8(2) of the Interim Constitution of Nepal, 2007 “At the commencement of this Constitution, the following persons who have their permanent domicile in Nepal shall be deemed to be the citizens of Nepal by descent: (a) any person who has acquired citizenship by descent prior to the commencement of this Constitution; 15 Compilation of Selected Decisions of Supreme Court on CITIZENSHIP and BIRTH REGISTRATION