Archive · 28 Jan 2026
Madras High Court Allows Non-Citizen Writ Petition
A Sri Lankan Tamil refugee who worked for the State Bank of India (SBI) was fired in 2013 because she wasn't an Indian citizen.
She challenged this decision in court.
The Madras High Court said that even though she's not a citizen, she can still ask the court to review unfair decisions by the government.
The court decided that firing her just because she wasn't a citizen was unfair and against the rules of the Indian Constitution.
So, the court said SBI can't fire her for that reason.
The Madras High Court quashed the termination of a Sri Lankan Tamil refugee employed by SBI, ruling her removal was arbitrary and discriminatory.
The court held that non-citizens can file writ petitions under Article 226 against state actions violating Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
The refugee, appointed in 2008, was terminated in 2013 solely based on her non-citizen status.
Justice Hemant Chandangoudar rejected SBI's objection that a non-citizen lacks the right to file a writ petition.
The court's decision was based on the principle that non-citizens can challenge state actions that violate their rights under Article 14 and 21.
- Who
- A Sri Lankan Tamil refugee employed by the State Bank of India (SBI)
- What
- The Madras High Court quashed the SBI's termination of the refugee's employment, ruling that non-citizens can file writ petitions under certain conditions
- When
- The termination occurred in 2013, and the court ruling was recent
- Where
- Madras High Court, India
- Why
- The court found the termination arbitrary and discriminatory, violating Article 14 of the Constitution
- Petitioner
- Sri Lankan Tamil refugee
- Employer
- State Bank of India (SBI)
- Position
- Officer (Marketing and Recovery)
- Appointment Year
- 2008
- Termination Year
- 2013
- Court
- Madras High Court
- Judge
- Justice Hemant Chandangoudar
- Constitutional Articles Violated
- Article 14, Article 21