Monday, March 23, 2015

VISA REVIEWS AND APPEALS - RANJANI'S FAMILY VISIT VISA APPEAL



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

No comments:

Post a Comment