It's misnomer to term a piece of land as one's own. As history of countries has shown, lands continue to change hands even if successive generations are capable of possessing a landed plot for even over a hundred years. At a certain point, its ownership is bound to slip out of their grip. Even kingdoms and royal possessions have seen these changes in ownership through the passage of time. A king loses a battle and thus gets killed or is sent on exile. The victorious king overruns the kingdom, occupies the palace. In modern days, monarchies and autocracies have been overthrown by mass upsurges, and declared republics or democracies. It began, in earnest, with the success of the French Revolution in 1789. Except only a few, the monarchies which still survive symbolically are in fact relics of tradition. Peoples in many countries do not feel comfortable with the figureheads in the garb of kings and queens. History has been a living witness to the phenomenon that no familial dynasty or royal lineage can cling to landed properties permanently. Perhaps in line with this reality, the concept of a person's permanent address finds itself in the realm of illusion. As the ownership of a piece of land cannot be kept permanently, how long one can keep a permanent address throws many in a quandary.
The notion of the permanent address, as social thinkers view it, stems from the need of surveillance felt by those at the helm of states. Thus the colonial rulers throughout the world enforced the requirement of the ruled to have a permanent address, besides the present address. The objective was clear: keeping an eye on the people or tracking them. In the past, the spectre of mutinies organised by the rebellious subjects remained dormant in the oppressive rulers, no matter if they were indigenous or foreign. The provision of identifying neighbourhoods under the jurisdiction of a police station during the British rule is a case in point. According to the findings of studies relating to British colonial rule in the sub-continent, this administrative system had an express purpose --- keeping records about the crime or political suspects. Thus the requirements of permanent addresses in documents and the respective police stations' intelligence work served the similar purpose. Although the colonial British rulers had left the sub-continent in 1947, the legacy of the system stayed back in the independent countries in South Asia.
However, upon the demand of time some other information is required to be supplied to the government authorities on different occasions. The provision of the permanent address is in place. But with its population standing at 164.67 million, keeping the data on every citizen is a daunting task in Bangladesh. The National Identity Card issuing authorities have yet to cover every length and breadth of the country --- the vast rural areas in particular. A major problem in the issuance of these cards and passports arises from errors that creep into the addresses. Wrongly printed addresses may invite series of hassles and trouble for one. Owing to this, wrongly mentioned or numbered addresses in state documents are virtually a dread for a lot of people. In this country, most of the urban residents have two addresses, one permanent, one present. Around the world, a person's address is attached a remarkable importance during carrying out many formalities. A person without a reliable address is viewed with suspicion. As a consequence, he or she might be denied many a service. While playing the role of a party in a court case, everyone, including the witnesses, has to mention their residential addresses. Generally the services range from government's issuance of passports and visas, registration of cars, phones, enrolment on social security registers etc, mutation of landed plots, and a lot of other privileges. In the Western world the private utility services run parallel to the ones operated by the state. The intending clients' addresses are, thus, required by the private sector as well.
The scenario is different in the developing countries, especially the nations once ruled by colonial powers. In these countries the government authorities make it imperative that a service seeker supply both the permanent and present addresses. Although very much essential in the developing countries, the requirement of permanent addresses has long been on the decline in developed world. Instead of the 'permanent address' many countries require a 'fixed address', like in the UK. In the USA, they attach a lot of importance on the `correspondence address'. Thanks to the vast size of the land, Americans love to move from one state of residence to another intermittently. To corroborate this fact, one in every seven people in the country is said to change their addresses each year. This assumes the proportion of a massive task for the country's postal department, which is entrusted with the job of the people's address changes.
In the West, by seeking information on addresses a government agency or private employer wants to be assured of the legal residency status of the person concerned. In both the European and North American countries, --- the US in particular, the non-residents are required to inform the authorities concerned about their change of address at the earliest. In America, the time limit is 10 days. However, the US citizens in general do not have to undergo the ordeals which are related to address changes in the South Asian countries. US passports do not mention the bearers' addresses. As a result, they are spared the cumbersome paperwork in case they find a new home. Notifying the neighbourhood post offices is all which one is required to do after address changes in the USA. Police stations have little role in this job.
In a lot of developed countries, including the United States, few people have a sacrosanct permanent address in any of their normally shifting village-homes or towns. The practice of using the address of one's ancestral home has long become obsolete. In contrast, these types of addresses are highly valued in the countries with vast rural populations. They are also considered genuine, meaning authentic. Despite the socio-economic advancements, many people living in the cities of the developing countries keep a faint link with their generations-old village homes. When required, they mention their ancestral addresses as the permanent ones. However, this practice is slowly becoming less followed as people in significant numbers are found closing their village chapters as they start settling in cities. The younger generations prefer using the addresses of urban residences as their permanent ones. It's because even the members of many extended families are these days found migrating to the capital and other cities. Back in the village, their ancestral homes are left to decay. Many also sell out their 'original' homes and leave the village once and for all. Others keep those as tokens of the past.
When the very human lives are transient, hullabaloo over the permanence of residential addresses appears banal. Many nihilistic visionaries are not inclined to recognise even the territory or nation-based identities. On this earth which, essentially, is in a phase of constant changes, preoccupation with permanent addresses ends up being an obsession. Some might call it paranoia of sorts, too.