https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282787 A foreign national could not invoke Article 19 citizen-specific freedoms to challenge cancellation of a Person of Indian Origin card, and Article 21 did not create a right to reside and settle in India. The Court treated the PIO Scheme, 2002 as an executive arrangement under Article 73 and noted that Clause 11(e) permitted cancellation in public interest without assigning reasons. On that basis, the petitioner had no enforceable constitutional or statutory right to insist on continuance of the card or disclosure of reasons, and the cancellation was upheld. en-us Fri, 11 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Aug 2019 18:20:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282787 A foreign national could not invoke Article 19 citizen-specific freedoms to challenge cancellation of a Person of Indian Origin card, and Article 21 did not create a right to reside and settle in India. The Court treated the PIO Scheme, 2002 as an executive arrangement under Article 73 and noted that Clause 11(e) permitted cancellation in public interest without assigning reasons. On that basis, the petitioner had no enforceable constitutional or statutory right to insist on continuance of the card or disclosure of reasons, and the cancellation was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 11 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282787