Pursuing Online Courses On Employment Visa Not A Visa Violation Unless Prohibited: Bombay High Court Grants Relief To Taiwanese Law Student
The Court held that FRRO acted arbitrarily in demanding ₹50,000 penalty and issuing an Exit Permit without reasons; allows student to continue LL.B. at Government Law College, Mumbai.
The Bombay High Court has quashed an Exit Permit issued by the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) to a 34-year-old Taiwanese national pursuing an LL.B. degree at Government Law College, Mumbai, holding that pursuing online educational courses while on an employment visa does not violate visa conditions in the absence of an explicit prohibition.
The Bench held that ordering the foreign student to leave India despite holding a valid Student Visa issued after due verification by the Indian Embassy in Taiwan was arbitrary and would cause severe disruption to his legal education.
A Division Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge and Justice Gautam A. Ankhad observed, “We are unable to accept the Respondent’s contention that the Exit Permit was justified as the Petitioner violated the conditions of his earlier Employment Visa by pursuing educational courses while employed in India…”.
“…The Employment Visa stipulated only two conditions, (i) that it was not valid for prohibited/restricted/cantonment areas; and (ii) that FRRO registration was required within fourteen days of arrival in India. The Petitioner was in employment till 1st July, 2025 and simultaneously pursued online academic programmes. There is no prohibition in the conditions of Employment Visa from doing so. After resigning from employment and whilst studying at the Government Law College, the Petitioner left India and returned to Taiwan. The Petitioner applied afresh for a Student Visa before the Indian Embassy in Taiwan. Upon due verification, the competent authorities granted him a Student Visa valid till 13th August, 2028”, the Bench noted.
Senior Advocate Mihir Desai appeared for the petitioner and Advocate Leena Patil appeared for respondent.
The petitioner, Wu Jyun Lin, originally arrived in India on an Employment (E-2) Visa to work with a tire manufacturing firm in Gujarat. While employed, he pursued online certificate and law courses. In 2024, he secured admission to the three-year LL.B. program at Government Law College, Mumbai. He subsequently resigned from his job, returned to Taiwan, and successfully applied for a fresh Student Visa valid until August 2028.
Upon re-entering India in August 2025, the petitioner applied for a Registration Certificate within the prescribed 14-day window under Rule 6 of the Registration of Foreigners Rules, 1992. However, the FRRO closed his application without providing reasons, demanded a penalty of ₹50,000 for alleged delay/violation, and subsequently issued an Exit Permit on February 21, 2026, directing him to depart the country. The FRRO defended its action under Section 7(2)(f) of the Immigration and Foreigners Act, 2025, claiming that studying while on an employment visa constituted a fundamental breach of visa conditions.
Rejecting the FRRO's contention, the Court observed that the employment visa contained only two express conditions, restriction from entering prohibited/cantonment areas and mandatory registration within 14 days. Since there was no explicit bar against pursuing online study while working, and the petitioner had legally obtained a fresh student visa before returning to India, the court found no violation.
Distinguishing the Delhi High Court precedent in Kasha Elizabeth Vande v. MHA (where a foreign national engaged in illegal NGO work and made false statements), the Bench directed the FRRO to process and grant the Registration Certificate within six weeks, allowing the petitioner to remain in India and continue his law degree.
Cause Title: Wu Jyun Lin v. Foreigners Regional Registration Office & Ors. (Writ Petition (L) No. 8223 of 2026).
Appearances:
Petitioner: Mihir Desai, Prithviraj S. Gole, Advocates.
Respondents: Leena Patil, Rahul Tiwari, Akanksha A. Mishra, Prashant Kamble, AGP, Advocates.