S/L 27 20.07.2026 Court. No. 25 suvayan WPA 13504 of 2026 Sk. Shirin Shahad (Seunti) Vs. The Union of India & Ors. Mr. Amit Ranjan Pati Ms. Swastika Chowdhury Ms. Ilika Nag Mr. Avijit Chatterjee …for the petitioner. Mr. Kumar Jyoti Tewari, Sr. Adv. Mr. Arijit Majumdar Ms. Samriddhi Nayak Ms. Shreyashi Sarkar …for the respondents. 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ application challenging the demand made by the respondent authorities for depositing an amount of Rs. 4 lakhs for extension of Visa and overstaying of the petitioner in India. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Visa of the petitioner was extended till August 8, 2025 and registration of the petitioner was also till September 8, 2025. Inadvertently, the petitioner could not make an application for extension of the Visa and registration before August 8, 2025. The petitioner has made an application for extension of Visa and registration on September 3, 2025. On receipt of the application filed by petitioner on September 3, 2025, the respondent authorities have informed the petitioner that the Visa of the petitioner was expired on August 8, 2025 and as such Rs. 10,000/- for overstaying is required to be paid by the petitioner for further processing of the Visa extension. 2 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that subsequently the respondent authorities have demanded Rs. 2 lakhs instead of Rs. 4 lakhs. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that as per the notification dated September 1, 2025 a foreigner staying in India without the valid passport or other travel documents in contravention of Section 3 of the Act, if it is more than 181 days up to one year there should be a fine of Rs. 1 lakh and if a foreigner violating the provisions of Section 6 of the Act more than 180 days up to one year is Rs. 1 lakh. He submits that the petitioner had the valid Visa on August 8, 2025 and immediately on September 3, 2025, the petitioner has applied for the Visa as well as the registration and as such the respondent authorities cannot claim an amount of Rs. 1 lakh for registration in terms of the provisions of Section 6 of the Act. He submits that the petitioner has made an application for extension of the Visa and the registration within one month and as such the respondents have claimed Rs. 10,000/- but subsequently they have increased the amount of Rs. 1 lakh. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent authorities submits that inadvertently the respondent authorities have claimed Rs. 4 lakhs instead of Rs. 2 lakhs. He submits that as per Section 6 if the foreigners overstayed in India above 181 days up to one year fine of Rs. 1 lakh is to be paid. 5. In the present case, though the petitioner’s Visa and registration was August 8, 2025 but the petitioner has 3 made an application on September 3, 2025 and considering the application made by the petitioner, the authorities have informed the petitioner to pay the final fee of Rs. 10,000/- for overstaying for further process of Visa but the petitioner in spite of repeated request made by the authorities have not paid Rs. 10,000/- and as such the period of 181 days has been completed, thus the respondent authorities have claimed Rs. 1 lakh. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the month of December, 2025 the petitioner has made a detailed representation to the authorities and on receipt of the representation, the authorities have informed the petitioner that the case of the petitioner for extension of Visa and registration will be considered along with the case of the daughter and also consider the medical ground of the petitioner but subsequently, the respondents have directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 1 lakh for overstaying. 7. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties, perused the materials on record. 8. Admittedly till August 8, 2025, the petitioner was having the valid Visa and registration. It is also admitted that before August 8, 2025 the petitioner has neither made an application for extension of Visa or for registration. The petitioner has made an application before the authority for extension of Visa and registration only on September 3, 2025. On receipt of the application of the petitioner for extension of Visa and registration, the authorities have processed the matter and on December 26, 2025 4 the petitioner was informed to pay the amount but the petitioner in spite of receipt of the mail no amount has been paid. 9. Subsequently, on eight occasions till March 18, 2026, the respondents have requested the petitioner for deposit the amount of Rs. 10,000/- along with Rs. 1 lakh for extension of Visa and for registration but the petitioner failed to pay the said amount. Accordingly, on March 27, 2026 the application filed by the petitioner on September 3, 2025 for extension of Visa as well as registration was cancelled. Subsequently, the petitioner has made an application for extension of Visa and registration on April 12, 2026 by that time the period of 181 days is over but it was up to the one year. Accordingly, the respondent authorities have claimed Rs. 1 lakh instead of Rs. 10,000/- as claimed in the month of December, 2025. 10. The petitioner in spite of several opportunities within 181 days failed to deposit the fine of Rs. 10,000/- on completion of 180 days the application of the petitioner was cancelled on March 27, 2026. 11. This Court finds that the respondent authorities are not committed any illegality. Accordingly, the petitioner is liable to pay Rs. 1 lakh for extension of Visa as well as Rs. 1 lakh for the overstaying. The petitioner is directed to pay the amount as early as possible so that the respondent authorities can proceed with the matter for extension of Visa and for registration. If the petitioner 5 failed to pay the amount, the respondent authorities are liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with law. 12. WPA 13504 of 2026 is disposed of. 13. Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all the necessary formalities. (Krishna Rao, J.)