Economic Times: New Delhi: Monday, 29 June 2026.
Documents from 2010 reveal the Centre's interpretation of 'citizen' under the RTI Act, including Indian passport holders abroad but excluding OCIs and PIOs. This resurfaces as the legal status of Indian passports, whether proof of citizenship or a travel document, is debated. The MEA clarified passports are travel documents, not conclusive proof of citizenship, sparking political controversy and and calls for legislative changes.
Records of
inter-ministerial deliberations from 2010 show that the Centre had interpreted
the term "citizen" under the Right to Information (RTI) Act to
include Indian passport holders living abroad, while excluding Overseas
Citizens of India (OCIs) and Persons of Indian Origin (PIOs).
The documents, detailing consultations between the Ministries of External Affairs (MEA) and Home Affairs (MHA), have resurfaced at a time when the legal status of an Indian passport, whether it is conclusive proof of citizenship or primarily a travel document, has come under renewed public scrutiny.
The issue came up after US-based NRIs wrote to then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, urging the government to "recognise the legitimate desire of Indians living abroad to exercise their franchise and to have a voice in the governance of India."
Subsequent discussions among the MEA, MHA, Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs (MOIA) and the Central Information Commission (CIC) focused solely on interpreting the term "citizen" under the RTI Act, particularly after some RTI applicants sought to bring OCIs within its ambit.
During hearings before the CIC, the MEA maintained that the term "citizens" includes only persons holding Indian passports and living or working abroad i.e., NRIs and excludes OCIs and PIOs. Since the MHA is the nodal ministry on citizenship matters, its views were sought.
The records show that the MEA separately informed the MHA that the RTI Act's definition of "citizen" should cover NRIs but not OCIs or PIOs. The MHA endorsed this interpretation, while the DoPT and MOIA also supported referring the matter to the Home Ministry for a final view.
The deliberations were also prompted by difficulties faced by Indian RTI activists based overseas in filing applications, leading the CIC to hold meetings with government departments to streamline the process.
Why the issue resurfaced
The issue has returned to the spotlight after the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) clarified that an Indian passport is a travel document and not conclusive proof of citizenship. Speaking during Passport Seva Divas on June 24, a senior MEA official reiterated that while passports are issued after due verification, citizenship is determined under the Citizenship Act, not the Passports Act.
Legal experts say the government's position reflects the existing legal framework. While citizenship is governed by the Citizenship Act, 1955, passports are issued under the Passports Act, 1967, to facilitate international travel. Courts, including the Bombay High Court, have also held that possession of an Indian passport, by itself, does not conclusively establish citizenship.
The clarification, however, triggered a political row. Congress MP Shashi Tharoor described it as an "absurd legal paradox" and called for legislative changes to recognise passports as conclusive proof of citizenship. Leaders from the Trinamool Congress and Shiv Sena (UBT), including West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, also questioned what document citizens could rely on if a passport itself was not treated as definitive proof of citizenship.
Documents from 2010 reveal the Centre's interpretation of 'citizen' under the RTI Act, including Indian passport holders abroad but excluding OCIs and PIOs. This resurfaces as the legal status of Indian passports, whether proof of citizenship or a travel document, is debated. The MEA clarified passports are travel documents, not conclusive proof of citizenship, sparking political controversy and and calls for legislative changes.
 |
Passport-holding NRIs
qualify as 'citizens' under RTI, 2010 govt records show |
The documents, detailing consultations between the Ministries of External Affairs (MEA) and Home Affairs (MHA), have resurfaced at a time when the legal status of an Indian passport, whether it is conclusive proof of citizenship or primarily a travel document, has come under renewed public scrutiny.
The issue came up after US-based NRIs wrote to then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, urging the government to "recognise the legitimate desire of Indians living abroad to exercise their franchise and to have a voice in the governance of India."
Subsequent discussions among the MEA, MHA, Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs (MOIA) and the Central Information Commission (CIC) focused solely on interpreting the term "citizen" under the RTI Act, particularly after some RTI applicants sought to bring OCIs within its ambit.
During hearings before the CIC, the MEA maintained that the term "citizens" includes only persons holding Indian passports and living or working abroad i.e., NRIs and excludes OCIs and PIOs. Since the MHA is the nodal ministry on citizenship matters, its views were sought.
The records show that the MEA separately informed the MHA that the RTI Act's definition of "citizen" should cover NRIs but not OCIs or PIOs. The MHA endorsed this interpretation, while the DoPT and MOIA also supported referring the matter to the Home Ministry for a final view.
The deliberations were also prompted by difficulties faced by Indian RTI activists based overseas in filing applications, leading the CIC to hold meetings with government departments to streamline the process.
Why the issue resurfaced
The issue has returned to the spotlight after the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) clarified that an Indian passport is a travel document and not conclusive proof of citizenship. Speaking during Passport Seva Divas on June 24, a senior MEA official reiterated that while passports are issued after due verification, citizenship is determined under the Citizenship Act, not the Passports Act.
Legal experts say the government's position reflects the existing legal framework. While citizenship is governed by the Citizenship Act, 1955, passports are issued under the Passports Act, 1967, to facilitate international travel. Courts, including the Bombay High Court, have also held that possession of an Indian passport, by itself, does not conclusively establish citizenship.
The clarification, however, triggered a political row. Congress MP Shashi Tharoor described it as an "absurd legal paradox" and called for legislative changes to recognise passports as conclusive proof of citizenship. Leaders from the Trinamool Congress and Shiv Sena (UBT), including West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, also questioned what document citizens could rely on if a passport itself was not treated as definitive proof of citizenship.
.JPG)
.JPG)
