APPEAL BEFORE AIT BY SENIOR SOLICITOR, SFA
SECTION 03 D :GROUNDS OF APPEAL
IN THE FIRST TIER TRIBUNAL (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)
BETWEEN
M. RANJANI
Enterprizes, Galle
Road, Molligoda, Sri Lanka.
APPELLANT
AND
Entry
Clearance Officer Chennai Visa
Section British High Commission Sri Lanka.
RESPONDENT
GROUNDS OF APPEAL
1 I, the Appellant hereby appeal
against the Decision dated 11/01/2012 (12/01/2012 as per the passport seal)
made by the Entry Clearance Officer( The ECO ), Chennai Visa
Section, British High Commission, Sri Lanka.
(Post
References: Chennai / 134xxxx)
2 .I, the Appellant appeal under
the grounds specified below ;
GROUNDS OF APPEAL
A. The ECO’s decision is not in
accordance with the Immigration Rules
B. The ECO’s decision is
otherwise not in accordance with the Law.
C. The ECO should have exercised
differently, a discretion conferred by.
3. I, the Appellant, a Sri Lankan National
living in Sri Lanka, applied
for the 1st time, for
Family Visit Visa to visit my
Daughter and her family in the United Kingdom.
4. My application for Family Visit Visa was refused without any valid
reason
under UKImmigration Law and thereby my Human Rights
were disregarded.
5 . The ECO’s refusal has NO VALIDITY underUK Immigration Rules.
6. I
the Appellant respectfully submit and present this appeal and say
that…………………………..
7 .I, the Appellant’s entry clearance
application was refused on following
findings of the ECO as his refusal reads
8. I
the Appellant would like to forward my explanations as how the ECO was wrong in
his findings and made injustice to my Family
Visit Visa application to see
my Daughter, Granddaughter & Son-in-Law in
UK……………………………………………………………………………………
·
The ECO’s decision was a mere presumption
………………………………….
·
I cannot understand why the ECO could not see these
explanations and facts in my Cover Letter, unless one read in blind eyes.
·
That decision by ECO, completely out of the
Immigration Laws.
·
The ECO’s decision is completely Bad in Law.
·
It is obvious that a Tenant is not legally entitled to
sublease or sublet a room of the rented property but there’s no Rule,
Regulation or Law according to UK housing regulations or any other Laws to say
that ‘One must have the written permission from the Land Lord to let
your mother stay in a VACANT ROOM in your Leased property.’
·
It is unfair by the ECO to say in this way.
09. ECO’s
Decision is Purely a Mistake and BAD in LAW
·
Apart
from above mentioned facts to say that the ECO was wrong in his findings and
conclusions, there are more facts to say that the ECO was VERY POOR on
assessing my application.
·
10. VIOLATION
OF HUMAN RIGHTS of the Appellant
·
It
is regret …………………………………………
13. The
Appellant rely on further arguments such as ;
a. The ECO has made an error by ………………….
b. The
decision was otherwise not
accordance……………….
c. The
ECO should have called for further evidence
d. The
ECO’s decision is thereby “Bad in Law”
M.
RANJANI
APPEAL BEFORE AIT BY SENIOR SOLICITOR, SFA
SECTION 03 D :GROUNDS OF APPEAL
IN THE FIRST TIER TRIBUNAL (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)
BETWEEN
M. RANJANI
Enterprizes, Galle
Road, Molligoda, Sri Lanka.
APPELLANT
AND
Entry
Clearance Officer Chennai Visa
Section British High Commission Sri Lanka.
RESPONDENT
GROUNDS OF APPEAL
1 I, the Appellant hereby appeal
against the Decision dated 11/01/2012 (12/01/2012 as per the passport seal)
made by the Entry Clearance Officer( The ECO ), Chennai Visa
Section, British High Commission, Sri Lanka.
(Post
References: Chennai / 134xxxx)
2 .I, the Appellant appeal under
the grounds specified below ;
GROUNDS OF APPEAL
A. The ECO’s decision is not in
accordance with the Immigration Rules
B. The ECO’s decision is
otherwise not in accordance with the Law.
C. The ECO should have exercised
differently, a discretion conferred by.
3. I, the Appellant, a Sri Lankan National
living in Sri Lanka, applied
for the 1st time, for
Family Visit Visa to visit my
Daughter and her family in the United Kingdom.
4. My application for Family Visit Visa was refused without any valid
reason
under UKImmigration Law and thereby my Human Rights
were disregarded.
5 . The ECO’s refusal has NO VALIDITY underUK Immigration Rules.
6. I
the Appellant respectfully submit and present this appeal and say
that…………………………..
7 .I, the Appellant’s entry clearance
application was refused on following
findings of the ECO as his refusal reads
8. I
the Appellant would like to forward my explanations as how the ECO was wrong in
his findings and made injustice to my Family
Visit Visa application to see
my Daughter, Granddaughter & Son-in-Law in
UK……………………………………………………………………………………
·
The ECO’s decision was a mere presumption
………………………………….
·
I cannot understand why the ECO could not see these
explanations and facts in my Cover Letter, unless one read in blind eyes.
·
That decision by ECO, completely out of the
Immigration Laws.
·
The ECO’s decision is completely Bad in Law.
·
It is obvious that a Tenant is not legally entitled to
sublease or sublet a room of the rented property but there’s no Rule,
Regulation or Law according to UK housing regulations or any other Laws to say
that ‘One must have the written permission from the Land Lord to let
your mother stay in a VACANT ROOM in your Leased property.’
·
It is unfair by the ECO to say in this way.
09. ECO’s
Decision is Purely a Mistake and BAD in LAW
·
Apart
from above mentioned facts to say that the ECO was wrong in his findings and
conclusions, there are more facts to say that the ECO was VERY POOR on
assessing my application.
·
10. VIOLATION
OF HUMAN RIGHTS of the Appellant
·
It
is regret …………………………………………
13. The
Appellant rely on further arguments such as ;
a. The ECO has made an error by ………………….
b. The
decision was otherwise not
accordance……………….
c. The
ECO should have called for further evidence
d. The
ECO’s decision is thereby “Bad in Law”
M.
RANJANI
APPEAL
WAS LODGED AFTER PAYING THE FEE
WITHIN FEW DAYS, RANJANI RECEIVED
A LETTER FROM CHENNAI APPEAL SECTON.
THEY OVERTURNED THEIR DECISION. VISIT VISA GRANTED
