Gauhati High Court
Uttam Saha vs The Union Of India And 5 Ors on 7 February, 2019
Bench: Achintya Malla Bujor Barua, Ajit Borthakur
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010013382017
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C) 989/2017
1:UTTAM SAHA
S/O LT. NARESH SAHA, R/O BASUGAON, CHIRANG, DIST- CHIRANG
VERSUS
1:THE UNION OF INDIA and 5 ORS.
REP. BY THE SECY., MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NORTH BLOCK, NEW
DELHI-1
2:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP. BY THE DY. COMMISSIONER
CHIRANG
KAJALGAON
3:THE ELECTORAL REGISTRATION OFFICER
31
SIDLI ST LAC
KAJALGAON
CHIRANG
4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE B
CHIRANG
P.O. KAJALGAON
AT CHIRANG
5:THE ASST. DIRECTOR
FOOD
CIVIL SUPPLIES and CONSUMER AFFAIRS
P.O. KAJALGAON
DIST- CHIRANG
6:THE PROJECT DIRECTOR
Page No.# 2/5
DRDA
KAJALGAON
P.O. KAJALGAON
DIST- CHIRAN
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.B J MUKHERJEE
Advocate for the Respondent :
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)
Date : 07-02-2019 (AM Bujor Barua, J) Heard Mr. SS Sharma, learned senior counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. AI Ali, learned counsel for the Election Commission of India and Mr. J Payeng, learned counsel for the State of Assam appearing for the Foreigners Tribunal and Border Areas, Ms. A Verma, learned standing counsel for the authorities under the NRC as well as Ms. G Sarma, learned counsel for the authorities under the Union of India.
2. On being referred by the authorities, vide PE No.153/99, Case No. BNGN/FT/CHR/1319/08 was registered in the Foreigners' Tribunal, Chirang against the present petitioner. Vide the order dated 12.12.2016, the Tribunal arrived at the conclusion that the father of the petitioner, Naresh Ch. Saha had migrated from the erstwhile East Pakistan in the year 1965 along with his family members and acquired Indian citizenship on 05.02.1979 by registration. It was also concluded in the order that the petitioner who was a minor at that relevant point of time had also migrated to India along with his father.
3. From the said findings arrived at by the Tribunal, logical conclusion should have been that the petitioner had migrated to India prior to 01.01.1966. But for reasons not specified, the petitioner was declared to be a migrant who entered the State of Assam between 01.01.1996 and 25.03.1971. By accepting the said declaration by the Tribunal, the petitioner was registered before the Regional Foreigners Registration Office at Bongaigaon, bearing Page No.# 3/5 registration No.48, dated 19.12.2016. Upon being registered, the right of the petitioner stood crystallized by the provision of Section 6 A (4) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, which is as under:
(4) A person registered under sub-section (3) shall have, as from the date on which he has been detected to be a foreigner and till the expiry of a period of ten years from that date, the same rights and obligations as a citizen of India [ including the right to obtain a passport under the Passports act, 1967 (15 of 1967) and the obligations connected therewith], but shall not be entitled to have his name included in any electoral roll for any Assembly or Parliamentary constituency at any time before the expiry of the said period of ten years.
4. A reading of Section 6-A (4) of the Citizenship Act, 1955 shows that a person upon being registered under Section 6A (3) of the Citizenship Act, 1955 , would have the same rights and obligations as a citizen of India, including the right to obtain a passport under the Passport Act of 1967, but shall not be entitled to have his name included in any electoral roll for any Assembly or Parliamentary Constituency at any time before expiry of a period of 10 years from the date of registration. In other words, other than being disentitled to be included in the voter list for a period of 10 years, all other rights and obligations which are available to a citizen of India shall also be available to a person who gets himself registered under Section 6 A (3) of the Citizenship Act, 1955.
5. From the aforesaid point of view, we are required to examine the validity and legality of an order dated 30.12.2016 of the Assistant Director, Food and Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs, Chirang, by which, upon being registered under Section 6 A (3) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, the trade licence which was earlier granted to the petitioner under the Assam Trade Articles ( L& C) Order, 1982, the ration card etc were taken back. Entitlement of a person for a licence under the Assam Trade Articles ( L& C) Order, 1982 and the issuance of a ration card are admittedly within the realm of a right that a citizen of India are entitled under the relevant laws. Consequently, under the provision of Sections 6 A (4) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, a person who had been registered under Section 6A (3) also has a legal right to have a Page No.# 4/5 licence under the Assam Trade Articles ( L& C) Order, 1982 as well as to have a ration card, if otherwise admissible.
6. In view of above, we are of the view that taking back of the licence issued in favour of the petitioner under the Assam Trade Articles ( L& C) Order, 1982 as well as the ration card, are unsustainable in law.
7. Accordingly, the order dated 30.12.2016 of the Assistant Director, Food and Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs, Chirang is hereby set aside, by observing that the petitioner shall be entitled to get back his license as well as the ration card which were taken away by the impugned order.
8. It is also taken note of that the order dated 30.12.2016 was made pursuant to a request by Superintendent of Police (B), Chirang in the communication dated 15.12.2016, cancelling the ration card, NREGA card, driving licence, vehicle registration certificate, voter ID card etc, amongst others of the petitioner as he was registered under Section 6A (3) of the Citizenship Act, 1955. As concluded above, the said communication except in respect of the voter ID Card is also contrary to the law being without any authority. Accordingly, the communication dated 15.12.2016 is declared to be null and void and not to be acted upon by any authority, other than for the purpose of cancelling the voter ID card.
9. Writ petition stands allowed to the extent indicated above.
JUDGE JUDGE
Page No.# 5/5
Comparing Assistant