Gauhati High Court
Litan Aich vs The Union Of India And 6 Ors on 8 June, 2022
Author: Nani Tagia
Bench: Nani Tagia
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010095952022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/3421/2022
LITAN AICH
S/O- LATE SANTI AICH @ SANTI RANJAN AICH, R/O- VILL.- MONOJULI,
P.O. AND P.S. DHEKIAJULI, DIST. SONITPUR, ASSAM
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS.
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI-01.
2:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE
GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM
HOME DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-6.
3:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA
NEW DELHI-01.
4:THE SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR NRC
GOVT. OF ASSAM
GHY-01.
5:THE SPECIAL COUNSEL OF FOREIGNERS TRIBUNAL
GOVT. OF ASSAM
GHY-01.
6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B)
SONITPUR
ASSAM
PIN- 784001.
Page No.# 2/5
7:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
SONITPUR
DIST. SONITPUR
ASSAM
PIN- 784001
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S C DAS
Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.
BEFORE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING) MR. N. KOTISWAR SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA Order 08-06-2022 [N. Kotiswar Singh, CJ (Acting)] Heard Mr. S.C. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned CGC appearing for respondent no.1; Mr. G. Sarma, learned Special Counsel, F.T. appearing for respondent no. 5 & 6; Ms. U. Das, learned Government Advocate, Assam, appearing for respondent nos. 2 & 7, Mr. A. Bhuyan, learned Standing Counsel, ECI, appearing for respondent no.3 and Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned Standing Counsel, NRC, appearing for respondent no.4.
2. Considering the nature of the case and after hearing the submission made by learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that the matter can be disposed of at this stage without issuing any formal notice to the respondents.
3. In this petition the petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 20.04.2022 passed by Page No.# 3/5 the Foreigners Tribunal 9th, Sonitpur at Dhekiajuli passed in F.T. Case No.272/2017 whereby, his application for closing the present proceeding on the basis of res judicata, as the petitioner had already been declared an Indian by an earlier opinion dated 20.09.2014 passed by the Foreigners Tribunal (3rd), Sonitpur in F.T. Case No.23/2014 (Ref. Case No.350/2013), has been rejected. It has been submitted that the aforesaid rejection order is cryptic and without any application of mind and as such, the same is liable to be set aside.
4. As far as the applicability of the res judicata in a proceeding before the Foreigners Tribunal is concerned, the same is settled that if a proceedee has already been declared an Indian in a procceding before the Foreigners Tribunal, unless the same is interfered by the competent forum, the same will be binding on subsequent proceeding against the same person in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in Abdul Kuddus vs Union of India (2019) 6 SCC 604 and the decision rendered by this Court in WP(C) No.2099/2018 (Sital Mandal vs. Union of India and Ors.) on 28.04.2022 and other analogous matters and as such, if any such application is made by the applicant in the subsequent proceeding, the Tribunal is duty bound to examine the same to ascertain as to whether the proceedee is the same person who was proceeded earlier before the Tribunal and a favourable opinion was passed by the Tribunal declaring him/her to be an Indian.
5. In the present case, what we have noted is that though the present applicant filed an application under 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the Tribunal without assigning any reason for arriving at such a conclusion rejected the same only on the ground that the petition is incomplete and inadmissible. In our opinion, the order of the Tribunal itself is cryptic and a non-speaking. That apart, we have also noted that in the earlier proceeding i.e. Page No.# 4/5 in F.T. Case No.23/2014 one Litan Aich, son of Sri Santi Aich @ Santi Ranjan Aich, resident of Vill-Monjuli, P.S.-Dhekiajuli, Dist.-Sonitpur was declared an Indian citizen by the Foreigners Tribunal 3rd, Sonitpur, Tezpur vide its opinion dated 20.09.2014 and in the present proceeding also, as can be seen from the summon issued to the petitioner, the proceedee has been described as Litan Aich, son of Santi Aich, resident of Vill-Monjuli, P.S.-Dhekiajuli, Dist.- Sonitpur. Thus, apparently the present proceedee appears to be the same person who was earlier proceeded in F.T. Case No.23/2014 before the Foreigners Tribunal 3 rd, Sonitpur, Tezpur.
6. In view of the above, we direct to the Foreigners Tribunal 9 th, Sonitpur at Dhekiajuli to examine the same, as the Tribunal has not passed any speaking order as regards to the petition filed by the petitioner about applicability of res judicata, as mentioned above.
7. The petitioner will be at liberty to file a fresh application before the Tribunal praying for a closure of the proceeding in F.T. Case No.272/2017 and the petitioner shall adduce evidence that he is the same person who was earlier proceeded in F.T. Case No.23/2014 and if upon verification, the Tribunal comes to the conclusion that the present petitioner is the same person who was earlier proceeded in F.T. Case No.23/2014, the Tribunal shall immediately close the proceeding in F.T. Case No.272/2017 by declaring the petitioner an Indian in terms of the earlier opinion rendered on 20.09.2014 in F.T. Case No.23/2014 by the Foreigners Tribunal 3rd, Sonitpur, Tezpur and the Tribunal would not be required to examine any other issue. Only when the opinion or findings of the Tribunal is otherwise, the petitioner would be at liberty to approach this Court again against any such adverse order that may be passed.
8. The petitioner shall appear before the concerned Tribunal within a period of 1 (one) Page No.# 5/5 month from today or on the next date, fixed by the Tribunal.
9. With the above observations and directions, the present petition is allowed.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING) Comparing Assistant