Gauhati High Court
Indira Newar vs Union Of India And 5 Ors on 29 November, 2019
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2019 GAU 637
Author: Manojit Bhuyan
Bench: Manojit Bhuyan, Soumitra Saikia
Page No.# 1/52
GAHC010271842018
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C) 8490/2018
1:INDIRA NEWAR
W/O- LT CHABID PRADHAN @ SABIT NEWAR, VILL- ROWMARI, P.S.
MAZBAT, DIST- UDALGURI
VERSUS
1:UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS.
REP. BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME
AFFAIRS, SHASTRI BHAWAN, TILOK MARG, NEW DELHI-1
2:ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA
NEW DELHI-1
3:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
MINISTRY OF HOME DEPTT.
DISPUR
GHY-6
4:THE STATE CO-ORDINATOR
NRC
ASSAM
BHANGAGARH
GHY-5
5:THE DY. COMMISSIONER
UDALGURI
6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B)
UDALGUR
Page No.# 2/52
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M P SARMA
Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.
Linked Case : WP(C) 6168/2016 1:SURAMANI OZA S/O LT. RAGHUNATH OZA R/O VILL. NO.1 JAISIDHI P.S. SOOTEA DIST- BISWANATH ASSAM PIN-784182 VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER and SECY.
GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPT.
DISPUR GHY-6 2:THE DY. COMMISSIONER BISWANATH DIST- BISWANATH BISWANATH CHARIALI ASSAM PIN-784176 3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SONITPUR TEZPUR DIST- SONITPUR ASSAM PIN-784001 4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BISWANATH DIST- BISWANATH BISWANATH CHARIALI Page No.# 3/52 ASSAM PIN-784176 5:THE ELECTORATE REGISTRATION OFFICER DIST- BISWANATH BISWANATH CHARIALI ASSAM PIN-784176 6:THE UNION OF INDIA REP. BY THE SECY.
MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI-1 Advocate for the Petitioner : MS.N DAIMARI Advocate for the Respondent : GA ASSAM Linked Case : WP(C) 4272/2016 1:THAGENDRA BOJGAI S/O- LT. PADMALAL BOJGAI PERMANENT R/O VILL.- PANPUR PURANIBHETI P.O. and P.S.- JAMUGURI DIST.- SONITPUR ASSAM.
VERSUS 1:THE UNION OF INDIA and 3 ORS REP. BY COMMISSIONER and SECY.
HOME AFFAIRS GOVT. OF INDIA NEW DELHI.
2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY COMMISSIONER and SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME POLITICAL DEPTT.
DISPUR GHY- 6.
3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE B SONITPUR TEZPUR Page No.# 4/52 ASSAM.
4:THE DY. COMMISSIONER SONITPUR TEZPUR ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.K K SHARMA Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Linked Case : WP(C) 4317/2016 1:SMTI BIMALA DEVI W/O SRI PREM PRASAD UPADHYAY R/O VILL - NO. 1 JAISIDHI P.S. SOOTEA DIST. BISWANATH ASSAM PIN- 784182 VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER and SECRETARY GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPT. DISPUR GUWAHATI - 781006.
2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BISWANATH DIST. BISWANATH BISWANATH CHARIALI ASSAM PIN - 784176.
3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE TEZPUR DIST. SONITPUR ASSAM PIN - 784001.
4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BISWANATH DIST. BISWANATH BISWANATH CHARIALI ASSAM PIN - 784176.
5:THE ELECTORATE REGISTRTION OFFICER DIST. BISWANATH BISWANATH CHARIALI Page No.# 5/52 ASSAM PIN -784176.
6:THE UNION OF INDIA REP. BY THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF HOME AFFIARS NEW DELHI-110001.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.P N SHARMA Advocate for the Respondent : SC C.G.C. Linked Case : WP(C) 959/2017 1:SMT. BEDA MAYA DEVI W/O SRI SIBA PRASAD PARAJULI R/O NO.2 JAISIDHI P.S. SOOTEA DIST- BISWANATH ASSAM PIN-784182 VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF ASSAM and 5 ORS.
REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECY.
GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPTT.
DISPUR GHY-6 2:THE DY. COMMISSIONER BISWANATH DIST- BISWANATH BISWANATH CHARIALI ASSAM PIN-784176 3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SONITPUR TEZPUR DIST- SONITPUR ASSAM PIN-784001 Page No.# 6/52 4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BISWANATH DIST- BISWANATH BISWANATH CHARIALI ASSAM PIN-784176 5:THE ELECTORATE REGISTRATION OFFICER DIST- BISWANATH BISWANATH CHARIALI ASSAM PIN-784176 6:THE UNION OF INDIA REP. BY THE SECY.
MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI-1 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.A R TAHBILDAR Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Linked Case : WP(C) 4983/2018 1:SMT. TARA DEVI D/O- LT DHAN BAHADUR CHETRY W/O- SRI SANKAR CHETRY R/O- VILL- AMGURI GAON P.O. BERIGAON P.S. BAPATHAR DIST- GOLAGHAT ASSAM VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS.
REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY.
GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPTT.
DISPUR GHY-6 2:THE DY. COMMISSIONER GOLAGHAT DIST- GOLAGHAT ASSAM Page No.# 7/52 PIN- 785702 3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE GOLAGHAT DIST- GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN- 785702 4:THE ELECTORATE REGISTRATION OFFICER GOLAGHAT LAC DIST- GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN- 785702 5:THE UNION OF INDIA REP. BY THE SECY.
MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI-1 6:THE STATE CO-ORDINATOR OF NRC PO AND PS BHANGAGARH DIST- KAMRUP (M) GHY-5 ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P N SARMA Advocate for the Respondent : SC F.T Linked Case : WP(C) 7520/2018 1:KARNA BAHADUR DARJEE @ KARNA LABUR S/O. LT. HARKA BAHADUR LABUR @ DARJEE PRESENTLY RESIDING AT VILL. NO.1 NALBARI P.O. SOOTEA PIN-784175 P.S. SOOTEA DIST. BISWANATH ASSAM PERMANENT R/O. TEWARIPAL MOUZA AND P.S. SOOTEA DIST. BISWANATH ASSAM.
Page No.# 8/52 VERSUS 1:THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS.
REP. BY THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI-110001.
2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPTT.
DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006.
3:THE DY. COMMISSIONER BISWANATH DIST. BISWANATH ASSAM-784176.
4:THE SUPDT. OF POLICE (B) BISWANATH DIST. BISWANATH ASSAM-784176.
5:THE STATE COORDINATOR NATIONAL REGISTER OF CITIZENS G.S. ROAD LACHIT NAGAR GUWAHATI ASSAM-781003.
6:THE ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA REP. BY CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA NIRVACHAN SADAN ASHOKA ROAD NEW DELHI-110001.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K BORUAH Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Linked Case : WP(C) 5641/2018 1:AMBIKA DEVI @ AMBIKA DEVI DIMAL WIFE OF DILLIRAM DULAL DAUGHTER OF LATE GANGADHAR DIMAL @ GANGADHAR @ GODADAR VILL. SHYAMJULI P.S. SILAPATHAR DIST. DHEMAJI Page No.# 9/52 ASSAM PIN-
VERSUS 1:THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS.
REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS SHASTRI BHAWAN TILOK MARG NEW DELHI-1.
2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPTT.
DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006.
3:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA NIRVACHAN SADAN ASOKA ROAD NEW DELHI. PIN-
4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DHEMAJI DIST. DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN-
5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (BORDER) DHEMAJI DIST. DHEMAJI ASSAM. PIN-
6:THE STATE CO-ORDINATOR NATIONAL REGISTRATION OF CITIZEN ASSAM BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI- 871005 PIN- 784001.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. L R MAZUMDER Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Linked Case : WP(C) 2970/2017 Page No.# 10/52 1:TANKA UPADHYAY @ TANKA PRASAD S/O- SRI MAHESWAR UPADHYAY PRESENTLY RESIDING AT VILL NO.1 BORDIKARAI P.O- RANGACHAKUA DIST- SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 784001 VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF ASSAM and 4 ORS.
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER and SECRETARY GOVT OF ASSAM HOME DEPT DISPUR GUWAHATI PIN- 781006 2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DIST- SONITPUR TEZPUR ASSAM PIN- 784001 3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SONITPUR TEZPUR DIST- SONITPUR ASSAM PIN- 784001 4:THE ELECTORATE REGISTRATION OFFICER DIST- SONITPUR TEZPUR ASSAM PIN- 784001 5:THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI-110001 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.D DOLEY Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Page No.# 11/52 Linked Case : WP(C) 7014/2017 1:JIBAN SARMAH S/O LT. SHYAMLAL SARMAH R/O VILL- PURANIBHETI CHENGELIMORA P.O. PANPUR P.S. JAMUGURI DIST. SONITPUR ASSAM PIN - 784180.
VERSUS 1:THE UNION OF INDIA and 4 ORS.
REP. BY THE SECRETARY GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI-1.
2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI -6.
3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SONITPUR P.O. TEZPUR DIST. SONITPUR ASSAM 4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE B SONITPUR P.O. TEZPUR DIST. SONITPUR ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.A ADHIKARY Advocate for the Respondent :
Linked Case : WP(C) 5015/2018 1:TANKA BAHADUR NEWAR S/O. LATE SIV RAJ NEWAR R/O. VILL. GERUA NEPALI PARA P.O. SIMLITOLA Page No.# 12/52 P.S. RANGJULI DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM PIN 783130.
VERSUS 1:THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS. REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI-1.
2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DEPTT. OF HOME DISPUR GUWAHATI-06.
3:ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA INDIA 4:STATE COORDINATOR NRC.
5:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GOALPARA ASSAM.
6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B) GOALPARA ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR N N UPADHYAYA Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Linked Case : WP(C) 614/2018 1:PURNA CHAPGAI S/O. LATE SHYAMLAL CHAPGAI R/O. VILLAGE NO. 1 JOISIDHI P.S. SOOTEA DIST. SONITPUR (ASSAM) PIN-784001.
Page No.# 13/52 VERSUS 1:THE UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI.
2:THE STATE OF ASSAM THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOME GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SONITPUR SONITPUR TEZPUR-784001 4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SONITPUR TEZPUR-784001.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P UPADHYAY Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Linked Case : WP(C) 5016/2018 1:PABITRI UPADHYAY@ PABITRA UPADHYAY W/O- SRI DAMBARU UPADHYAY R/O- VILL- MINGMANG TARAJAN P.S- GOGAMUKH DIST- DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN- 787057 VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY GOVT OF ASSAM HOME DEPTT DISPUR GUWAHATI- 06 2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER Page No.# 14/52 DHEMAJI DIST- DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN- 787057 3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE(B) DHEMAJI DIST- DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN- 787057 4:THE ELECTORATE REGISTRATION OFFICER DIST- DHEMAJI ASSAM PIN- 787057 5:THE UNION OF INDIA REP. BY THE SECRETARY MIN OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI- 110001 6:THE STATE COORDINATOR NRC P.O AND P.S- BHANGAGARH DIST- KAMRUP(M) GUWAHATI- 781005 ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B CHETRI Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Linked Case : WP(C) 6232/2018 1:RAM PRAKASH PAKKREL @ RAM PRASAD UPADHYA S/O LATE SINTAMONI UPADHYA @ DANDHIRAM PAKEREN R.O VILLAGE SHYAMJULI DINOW PS SILAPATHAR DIST DHEMAJI ASSAM VERSUS 1:THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS.
Page No.# 15/52 REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS SHASTRI BHAWAN TILOK MARG NEW DELHI-01 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 3:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA NIRVACHAN SADAN ASOKA ROAD NEW DELHI 4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DHEMAJI DIST DHEMAJI ASSAM 5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE(BORDER) DHEMAJI DIST DHEMAJI ASSAM 6:THE STATE CO ORDINATOR NATIONAL REGISTRATION OF CITIZEN ASSAM BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI-781005 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. L R MAZUMDER Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Linked Case : WP(C) 6875/2016 1:SMT. MITHU CHETRI D/O. LT. NARBAHADUR CHETRI W/O. LOK BAHADUR CHETRI R/O. DURGA SAROVAR P.O. and P.S. BHARALUMUKH DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM PIN-
Page No.# 16/52 VERSUS 1:THE UNION OF INDIA and 3 ORS THROUGH THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS GRIHA MANTRALAYA NEW DELHI PIN 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM THROUGH THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPTT.
DISPUR GHY.-06.
3:THE SUPDT. OF POLICE B CITY KAMRUP PIN-781001.
4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KAMRUP M ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.K K SHARMA Advocate for the Respondent : GA ASSAMR-2-4 Linked Case : WP(C) 572/2018 1:KUSUM CHIKTAL @ KUSUM DEVI W/O TULSI PRASAD POWREL R/O VILL- BALIJURI P.S. SOOTEA PIN - 784001 DIST. SONITPUR ASSAM VERSUS 1:THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS Page No.# 17/52 NEW DELHI.
2:THE STATE OF ASSAM THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOME GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-6.
3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SONITPUR TEZPUR- 784001.
4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SONITPUR TEZPUR- 784001.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P UPADHYAY Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Linked Case : WP(C) 7153/2016 1:HEM PRASAD SARMA @ HEM PRASAD POUREL S/O. SRI DEO NARAYAN SARMA @ SRI DEO NARAYAN POUREL VILL. NO.2 BALIJURI P.S. SOOTEA P.O. RANGACHAKO DIST. BISHWANATH CHARALI ASSAM.
VERSUS 1:UNION OF INDIA and 2 ORS MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI.
2:THE STATE OF ASSAM THROUGH THE COMM. and SECY. DEPTT. OF HOME GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR GHY.-06.
3:THE SUPDT. OF POLICE Page No.# 18/52 SONITPUR TEZPUR.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.D SARMA Advocate for the Respondent :
Linked Case : WP(C) 7228/2018 1:BIJOY LABUR @ BIJOY DARJEE S/O- LT HARKA BAHADUR LABUR @ DARJEE R/O- TEWARIPAL MOUZA AND P.S. SOOTEA DIST- BISWANATH (ASSAM) PRESENTLY RESIDING AT VILL- BANGALI SILANIGAON 18TH MILE MOUZA- BALIPARA P.S. CHARIDUAR P.O. 18TH MILE PIN-
DIST- SONITPUR ASSAM VERSUS 1:THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS. REP. BY THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI-110001 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPTT.
DISPUR GHY-6 3:THE DY. COMMISSIONER BISWANATH DIST- BISWANATH ASSAM PIN- 784176 4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B) BISWANATH DIST- BISWANATH ASSAM PIN- 784176 Page No.# 19/52 5:THE STATE COORDINATOR NATIONAL REGISTER OF CITIZENS G.S.ROAD LACHIT NAGAR GHY ASSAM PIN- 781003 6:THE ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA REP. BY CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA NIRVACHAN SADAN ASHOKA ROAD NEW DELHI- 110001 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K BORUAH Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Linked Case : WP(C) 650/2018 1:GITA DEVI ALIAS GITA NEWAR W/O. SRI PURNA BAHADUR NEWAR R/O. VILLAGE PITHAGURI DOUL P.S. JAMUGURIHAT DISTRICT- SONITPUR ASSAM PIN-784001 VERSUS 1:THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS. MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI.
2:THE STATE OF ASSAM THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOME GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-6.
3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SONITPUR TEZPUR-784001.
Page No.# 20/52 4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SONITPUR TEZPUR-784001 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P UPADHYAY Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Linked Case : WP(C) 7934/2016 1:SMTI. NETRA MAYA CHETRI W/O TILK BAHADUR CHETRI R/O NEPALI PARA P.S. DUDHNOI DIST. GOLPARA ASSAM.
VERSUS 1:UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS DELHI.
2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI -06.
3:DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ADMN GOVT. OF ASSAM ULUBARI GUWAHATI-07.
4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GOALPARA P.O. and DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM.
5:SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE B GOALPARA P.O. and DIST. GOALPARA ASSAM.
6:ELECTORAL REGISTRATION OFFICER GOALPARA DIST. GOLPARA Page No.# 21/52 ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.R DHAR Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Linked Case : WP(C) 7346/2016 1:DAL BAHADUR CHETRY S/O LT. CHANDRA BAHADUR CHETRY R/O VILL. NO.2 BALIJURI P.S. SOOTEA DIST- BISWANATH ASSAM PIN-784182 VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF ASSAM and 5 ORS. REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER and SECY. GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPTT.
DISPUR GHY-6 2:THE DY. COMMISSIONER BISWANATH BISWANATH CHARIALI ASSAM PIN-784176 3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SONITPUR TEZPUR DIST- SONITPUR ASSAM PIN-784001 4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BISWANATH BISWANATH CHARIALI ASSAM PIN-784176 5:THE ELECTORATE REGISTRATION OFFICER Page No.# 22/52 BISWANATH BISWANATH CHARIALI ASSAM PIN-784176 6:THE UNION OF INDIA REP. BY THE SECY.
MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI-1 Advocate for the Petitioner : MS.N DAIMARI Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Linked Case : WP(C) 1175/2017 1:GANESH BAHADUR POWREL @ GANESH POWREL @ GANESH CHETRY @ GANESH KHARKA S/O SRI RATNA BAHADUR POWREL R/O VILL- NADIDHAR MUNDABASTI P.S. JAMUGURIHAT DIST. SONITPUR ASSAM PIN - 784001.
VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF ASSAM and 4 ORS. REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPT. DISPUR GUWAHATI PIN - 781006.
2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SONITPUR TEZPUR DIST.SONITPUR TEZPUR ASSAM PIN - 784001.
3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE B SONITPUR TEZPUR DIST. SONITPUR ASSAM PIN - 784001.
4:THE ELECTORATE REGISTRATION OFFICER Page No.# 23/52 DIST. SONITPUR TEZPUR ASSAM PIN - 784001.
5:THE UNION OF INDIA REP. BY THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI- 11001.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.A R TAHBILDAR Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Linked Case : WP(C) 6211/2016 1:KEDAR ADHIKARI S/O KASHINATH ADHIKARI R/O TEZALPATTY P.S. SOOTEA DIST- BISWANATH ASSAM PIN-784182 VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER and SECY. GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPTT.
DISPUR GHY-6 2:THE DY. COMMISSIONER BISWANATH DIST- BISWANATH BISWANTH CHARIALI ASSAM PIN-784176 3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SONITPUR TEZPUR DIST- SONITPUR ASSAM PIN-784001 Page No.# 24/52 4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BISWANATH DIST- BISWANATH BISWANTH CHARIALI ASSAM PIN-784176 5:THE ELECTORATE REGISTRATION OFFICER DIST- BISWANATH BISWANTH CHARIALI ASSAM PIN-784176 6:THE UNION OF INDIA REP. BY THE SECY.
MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI-1 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.P N SHARMA Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Linked Case : WP(C) 8413/2018 1:PREMA @ PROMA LIMBU W/O- PRODIP LIMBU D/O- LT PURNA KANTA LIMBU @ PURNAKANTA BAHADUR LIMBU R/O- VILL- CHALANG PATHER GHILADHARI MOUZA P.S. MERAPANUI DIST- GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN- 785621 VERSUS 1:THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS. REP. BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI-1 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM DEPTT. OF HOME DISPUR Page No.# 25/52 GHY-6 3:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA NEW DELHI-01 4:THE NRC COORDINATOR NATIONAL REGISTER OF CITIZEN (NRC) ASSAM BHANGAGARH GHY-05 5:THE DY. COMMISSIONER GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN- 785621 6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B) GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN- 785621 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR N N UPADHYAYA Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Linked Case : WP(C) 6710/2018 1:KAMAL KUMAR TAMANG S/O- LT BAL BAHADUR TAMANG (LIMBU) R/O- NO. 1 UTTAR DIMAKUCHI P.O. AND P.S. DIMAKUCHI DIST- UDALGURI (ASSAM) PIN- 784526 VERSUS 1:THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS. REP. BY THE SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI PIN- 110011 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. GOVT. OF ASSAM Page No.# 26/52 HOME AND POLITICAL DEPTT. DISPUR GHY-6 PIN- 781006 3:THE STATE COORDINATOR OF NATIONAL REGISTRAR OF CITIZENSHIP (NRC) ASSAM BHANGAGARH GHY-5 DIST- KAMRUP (ASSAM) PIN- 781005 4:THE DY. COMMISSIONER UDALGURI P.O. AND P.S. UDALGURI (ASSAM) PIN- 784509 5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B) UDALGURI P.O. AND P.S. UDALGURI (ASSAM) PIN- 784509 6:THE ELECTORATE REGISTRATION OFFICER DIST- UDALGURI ASSAM PIN- 784509 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D SARMAH Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Linked Case : WP(C) 3014/2019 1:TANGKAMAYA DEVI W/O SRI SOMNATH CHETRY D/O SRI KHARGA BAHA @ KHARGA BAHADUR CHETRY R/O PANPUR HAKAMA GAON MOUZA- CHILABANDHA P.O.- PANPUR P.S.JAMUGURI DIST.- SONITPUR (ASSAM) PIN-784180 VERSUS Page No.# 27/52 1:THE UNION OF INDIA AND 7 ORS. REP. BY THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI-110001 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPTT. DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SONITPUR DIST.-SONITPUR TEZPUR ASSAM PIN-784001 4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BISWANATH DIST.-BISWANATH ASSAM PIN-784176 5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B) SONITPUR DIST.-SONITPUR TEZPUR ASSAM PIN-784001 6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B) BISWANATH DIST.-BISWANATH ASSAM PIN-784176 7:THE STATE COORDINATOR NATIONAL REGISTER OF CITIZENS G.S.ROAD LACHIT NAGAR GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN-781003 8:THE ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA REP. BY CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA NIRVACHAN SADAN ASHOKA ROAD NEW DELHI Page No.# 28/52 PIN-110001 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P J SAIKIA Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Linked Case : WP(C) 761/2018 1:SADA KUMARI LIMBU ALIAS SADA KUMARI RAI W/O. SRI BUDHA BAHADUR LIMBU R/O. VILLAGE TEZALPATTY P.S. SOOTEA PIN-784001 DISTRICT-SONITPUR (ASSAM) VERSUS 1:THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOME GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-6.
3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SONITPUR TEZPUR-784001 4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SONITPUR TEZPUR-784001 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P UPADHYAY Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Linked Case : WP(C) 4013/2018 1:SMT. MOSTIMAYA LIMBU W/O- SRI LAKHAN BAHADUR RAI D/O- SRI JAGOT LIMBU @ JAGOT BAHADUR LIMBU Page No.# 29/52 R/O- VILL- RAMPUR MERAPANI PS MERAPANI PIN-785705 PO MERAPANI DIST- GOLAGHAT ASSAM VERSUS 1:UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS. REP. BY THE SECRETARY DEPTT. OF HOME NEW DELHI-110001 2:STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. DEPTT. OF HOME DISPUR GHY-6 3:THE ELECTORAL REGISTRATION OFFICER GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN-785621 4:THE DY. COMMISSIONER GOLAGHAT PIN-785621 5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (BORDER) GOLAGHAT PIN-785621 6:THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE MERAPANI PS PIN-785705 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B K BHATTACHARJEE Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. Linked Case : WP(C) 623/2018 1:LILA DEVI W/O. SRI PURNA CHAPGAI Page No.# 30/52 R/O. VILLAGE NO. 1 JOISIDHI P.S. SOOTEA DISTRICT-SONITPUR (ASSAM) PIN-784001 VERSUS 1:THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI.
2:THE STATE OF ASSAM THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOME GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-6.
3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SONITPUR TEZPUR-784001 4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SONITPUR TEZPUR-784001.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P UPADHYAY Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I. :: BEFORE ::
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJIT BHUYAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA JUDGMENT AND ORDER 29.11.2019 (Manojit Bhuyan, J) On behalf of the respective writ petitioners in the present bunch of cases, being 29 writ petitions, which are being taken up together for final disposal by a common order, we Page No.# 31/52 have heard Mr. R.P. Sarmah, learned senior counsel; Mr. P.N. Sharma, Advocate; Mr. N.N. Upadhyay, Advocate; Mr. D. Sarma, Advocate; Mr. P. Sharmah, Advocate; Mr. A. Upadhyay, Advocate; Mr. N. Upadhyay; Mr. B. Chetri, Advocate; Mr. L.R. Mazumder, Advocate; Mr. D. Sarmah; Mr. K. Boruah, Advocate and Mr. P.J. Saikia, Advocate. We have also heard Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Assistant S.G.I., representing the Union of India; Mr. D. Baruah, learned counsel for the Election Commission of India; Mr. J. Payeng, learned counsel for the State of Assam and the other State respondents, and Ms. A. Verma, learned counsel representing the State Co-ordinator, NRC, Assam.
Before adverting to the individual facts as emerging from each of the writ petitions, we may first lay down the broad issue for determination involved in this bunch of cases. We are made to determine as to (i) whether from the Investigation/Verification Reports and that of the findings of the Tribunal concerned, conclusion could be derived that the proceedee hails from the 'specified territory', within the meaning of Section 6-A (1) (c) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, (ii) whether reference by the Referral Authority could at all be made in the first place and/or whether the Tribunal concerned had jurisdiction to try the references if the proceedee concerned was not suspected or found to have come into Assam from the 'specified territory'. In this respect, we may put a note at the very outset that in so far as the Tribunals constituted under the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964 in the State of Assam are concerned, such Tribunals, in terms of Rule 21 of the Citizenship Rules, 2009, has jurisdiction to decide references received from the Registering Authority made under sub-section (3) of Section 6-A of the Citizenship Act, 1955. Further, as defined in the Citizenship Act, 1955, 'specified territory' means the territories included in Bangladesh immediately before the commencement of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 1985.
The writ petitioners claim to belong to the Gorkha community of Nepali origin and hailing from Nepal, having entered and settled in India on and from various dates, as mentioned in the respective writ petitions. To ascertain this crucial aspect by taking strict recourse to the case records received in original from the Tribunal concerned and/or from relevant materials as available in the records, we undertake the following exercise that Page No.# 32/52 would enable us to reach a conclusion :
(1) WP(C)/8490/2018 (Indira Newar vs. Union of India) puts a challenge to the opinion of the Foreigners' Tribunal (2 nd), Mangaldai in Case No.FT(2) 53/2007, which was rendered ex- parte on account of absence of the petitioner to appear and contest despite due receipt of notice. The petitioner was declared as a foreigner vide the opinion dated 31.03.2008. In the records of the reference proceedings, particularly in the Report dated 25.08.1997 of the Local Verification Officer, the petitioner is shown as the wife of one Chabid Pradhan and her year of birth and place is recorded as 1971 at Rowmari, which is under district Udalguri, Assam. In the said Report, particularly at columns 12 and 13, the mother tongue of the petitioner and the dialect spoken, in the assessment of the Inquiry Officer, is shown as 'Nepali'. Further, at column 16 thereof, no assessment/endorsement is made as regards the place i.e. state/country from where the petitioner is suspected to have migrated from. Even in the impugned opinion dated 31.03.2008 there are no findings with regard to the petitioner of having come to Assam from the 'specified territory'. Neither in the reference made by the Referral Authority there is any indication of the petitioner having come from the 'specified territory'.
(2) WP(C)/4272/2016 (Thagendra Bojgai vs. Union of India) is a challenge to the opinion of the Foreigners' Tribunal-6, Tezpur in Case No. FTC (6) 94/2015, declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner, having illegally entered into India after 25.03.1971 vide opinion dated 07.01.2016. From the Report dated 30.09.1997 of the Local Verification Officer, as available in the case records, describes the petitioner as the son of one Padma Prasad Bojgai, with both year and place of birth recorded as 1969 at village Panpur, Jamuguri, which is in the district of Sonitpur, Assam. In the said Report, particularly at columns 12 and 13, the mother tongue of the petitioner and the dialect spoken, in the assessment of the Inquiry Officer, is shown as 'Nepali'. At column 16 thereof, no assessment/endorsement is made as regards the place i.e. state/country from where the petitioner is suspected to have migrated from. In the opinion dated 07.01.2016 the Tribunal recorded that from Page No.# 33/52 the evidence on record and the documents available the petitioner appeared to have been born and brought up at village Panpur under Jamuguri Police Station.
The Tribunal also recorded that it was not cleared from the Verification Report as to from which place the petitioner had migrated from. Neither in the reference made by the Referral Authority there is any indication of the petitioner having come from the 'specified territory'.
(3) WP(C)/4317/2016 (Smti Bimala Devi vs. Union of India) is a challenge to the opinion of the Foreigners' Tribunal-6, Tezpur in Case No. FTC (6) 118/2015, declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner, having illegally entered into India after 25.03.1971 vide opinion dated 23.06.2016. On a perusal of the Report dated 30.09.1997 of the Local Verification Officer, as available in the case records, it is seen that the petitioner is described as the wife of one Prem Prasad Upadhyay, with both year and place of birth recorded as 1975 at village Tinikhuti, Biswanath Chariali. On her marriage, her address is shown as village No.1 Jaisidhi, P.S. Sootea, in the district of Sonitpur, Assam. It is also seen from the said Report, particularly at columns 12 and 13, the mother tongue of the petitioner and the dialect spoken, in the assessment of the Inquiry Officer, is recorded as 'Nepali'. At column 16 thereof, no assessment/endorsement is made as regards the place i.e. state/country from where the petitioner is suspected to have migrated from. In the opinion dated 23.06.2016 the Tribunal recorded that from the evidence on record and the documents available there was dispute as regards the place of birth of the petitioner between village Uriabasti under Jinjia P.S. of Sonitpur district and village Gorbhitor under Police Station Biswanath Chariali of district Sonitpur. Be that as it may, the Tribunal recorded that as per the Report of the Verification Officer, the mother tongue of the petitioner is 'Nepali' and it was not clear from where she migrated. Neither in the reference made by the Referral Authority there is any indication of the petitioner having come from the 'specified territory'.
(4) WP(C)/6168/2016 (Suramani Oza vs. Union of India) puts a challenge to the opinion of the Foreigners' Tribunal-6, Tezpur in Case No. FTC (6) 95/2015, Page No.# 34/52 declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner of post 25.03.1971 stream for having entered into India without authority, vide opinion dated 15.07.2016. From the Report dated 30.09.1997 of the Local Verification Officer, as available in the case records, the address and name of the father of the petitioner are shown as 1 No. Jaisidhi and late Raghunath Oza, with both year and place of birth shown as 1945 at village Kuhiarbari (Bargang), which is under Sonitpur district. It is also seen from the said Report, particularly at columns 12 and 13, the mother tongue of the petitioner and the dialect spoken, in the assessment of the Inquiry Officer, is recorded as 'Nepali'. At column 16 thereof, no assessment/endorsement is made as regards the place i.e. state/country from where the petitioner is suspected to have migrated from. From the reference made by the Referral Authority, there is nothing to disclose that the petitioner came into India (Assam) from the 'specified territory'. In the opinion dated 15.07.2016 the Tribunal recorded that it appeared from the evidence on record and the documents available that the petitioner is permanently residing at village Jaisidhi under P.S. Sootea, in the district of Sonitpur, Assam. By referring to the Report of the Verification Officer, the Tribunal recorded that the mother tongue of the petitioner is 'Nepali'. However, it was not clear as to from which place the petitioner had migrated.
(5) WP(C)/6211/2016 (Kedar Adhikari vs. Union of India) is a challenge to the opinion of the Foreigners' Tribunal-6, Tezpur in Case No. FTC (6) 114/2015, declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner of post 25.03.1971 stream for having entered into India without authority, vide opinion dated 23.06.2016. From the Report dated 27.09.1997 of the Local Verification Officer, as available in the case records, the address and name of the father of the petitioner are shown as Tejalpatty and Sri Kashinath Adhikari. Said village Tejalpatty is under P.S. Sootea in the district of Sonitpur, Assam. The year and place of birth of the petitioner are shown as 1958 at Udalguri. It is seen from the said Report, particularly at columns 12 and 13, the mother tongue of the petitioner and the dialect spoken, in the assessment of the Inquiry Officer, is recorded as 'Nepali'. Also, at column 16 Page No.# 35/52 thereof, no assessment/endorsement is made as regards the place i.e. state/country from where the petitioner is suspected to have migrated from. From the reference made by the Referral Authority, there is also nothing to disclose that the petitioner came into India (Assam) from the 'specified territory'. Turning to the opinion dated 23.06.2016, the Tribunal recorded that the Report of the Verification Officer disclosed that the mother tongue of the petitioner is 'Nepali'. Further, the Verification Officer have not stated from where the petitioner has migrated.
(6) WP(C)/6875/2016 (Smt. Mithu Chetri vs. Union of India) puts a challenge to the opinion of the Foreigners' Tribunal, Kamrup, (Metro), Guwahati in F.T. Kamrup (Metro) D.V Case No.9075/2011, which was rendered ex- parte on account of absence of the petitioner to appear and contest despite due receipt of notice. The petitioner was declared as a foreigner vide opinion dated 11.02.2015 of post 1971 stream. In the records of the reference proceedings, particularly in the Report of the Local Verification Officer, the petitioner is shown as the wife of one Lok Bahadur Chetri of village Dhrgasarovar. Her date and place of birth are shown as 01.01.1971 at Guwahati. In the said Report, particularly at columns 12 and 13, the mother tongue of the petitioner and the dialect spoken, in the assessment of the Inquiry Officer, are shown as 'Nepali' and 'Assamese' respectively. At column 16 thereof, which pertains to recording the place i.e. state/country from where migrated, only an endorsement is made as 'Does not arise'. Even in the impugned opinion dated 11.02.2015, there are no findings with regard to the petitioner of having come to Assam from the 'specified territory'. Neither in the reference made by the Referral Authority there is any indication of the petitioner having come from the 'specified territory'.
(7) WP(C)/7153/2016 (Hem Prasad Sarma vs. Union of India) is a challenge to the opinion of the Foreigners' Tribunal-6, Tezpur in Case No. FTC (6) 182/2015, declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner of post 25.03.1971 stream for having entered into India without authority, vide opinion dated 10.08.2016. Although the case records from the Tribunal have not been received, however, the Report dated Page No.# 36/52 27.09.1997 of the Local Verification Officer have been enclosed to the writ petition at Annexure-4. From a perusal of the said Report it is seen that the petitioner is described as the son of one Sri Deo Narayan Sarma of village No.2 Balijuri, which is under Sootea Police Station, in the district of Sonitpur. His year of birth in the said Report is recorded as 1971. It is also seen from the said Report, particularly at columns 12 and 13, the mother tongue of the petitioner and the dialect spoken, in the assessment of the Inquiry Officer, is recorded as 'Nepali'. At column 16 thereof, no assessment/endorsement is made as regards the place i.e. state/country from where the petitioner is suspected to have migrated from. From the reference made by the Referral Authority, there is also nothing to disclose that the petitioner came into India (Assam) from the 'specified territory'. Turning to the opinion dated 10.08.2016, the Tribunal recorded that it appeared from the evidence on record and the documents available that the petitioner was born and brought up at village Balijuri. The Tribunal have further recorded, by making reference to the Report of the Verification Officer, that the mother tongue of the petitioner is 'Nepali' and it was also not clear from where the petitioner migrated.
(8) WP(C)/7346/2016 (Dal Bahadur Chetry vs. Union of India) is a challenge to the opinion dated 28.09.2016 of the Foreigners' Tribunal-6, Tezpur in Case No. FTC (6) 176/2015, declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner of post 25.03.1971 stream for having entered into India without authority. From the case records received in original from the Tribunal, it is seen from the Report dated 13.10.1997 of the Local Verification Officer describing the petitioner as hailing from village No.2 Balijuri and being the son of one Chandra Bahadur Chetry. His date of birth is recorded as 1952 at Gogamukh. The said village No.2 Balijuri is shown as falling within the district of Sonitpur, Assam in the Referral Order. Turning to the Report of the Verification Officer it is seen at columns 12 and 13 that the mother tongue of the petitioner and the dialect spoken is 'Nepali', in the assessment of the Inquiry Officer. At column 16 thereof, no assessment/endorsement is made as regards the place i.e. state/country from where the petitioner is suspected to have migrated Page No.# 37/52 from. Also, from the reference made by the Referral Authority, there is nothing to disclose that the petitioner came to India (Assam) from the 'specified territory'. As regards the opinion dated 28.09.2016, the Tribunal recorded that it appeared from the evidence on record and the documents available that the petitioner is a resident of village No.2 Balijuri under Sootea P.S. The Tribunal further recorded, by making reference to the Report of the Verification Officer, that the mother tongue of the petitioner is 'Nepali' and it was not clear from where the petitioner migrated.
(9) WP(C)/7934/2016 (Smti. Netra Maya Chetri vs. Union of India) puts a challenge to the opinion dated 01.02.2011 of the Foreigners' Tribunal, Goalpara in F.T. Case No.1377/G/2008, which was rendered ex- parte on account of default on the part of the petitioner to appear and contest the reference case despite several opportunities being granted after the petitioner had made his first and last appearance in the case on 23.09.2010. An adverse view was taken and the impugned opinion was passed. From the case records as received in original from the Tribunal, it is seen from the Report of the Local Verification Officer that the petitioner is described as the wife of Tilok Bahadur Chetri and place of residence is shown as Simlitola (Nepalipara). Her date and place of birth are shown as 1963 at Simlitola (Nepalipara). In the said Report, particularly in respect of column 16 thereof, which pertains to indicating the place i.e. state/country from where migrated, the same was left blank. It is also seen from the Referral Order of the Superintendent of Police (Border), Goalpara that there is no mention of the petitioner of having come from the 'specified territory'. Even in the impugned opinion dated 01.02.2011, there are no findings with regard to the petitioner or any of her predecessor having come to Assam from the 'specified territory'.
(10) WP(C)/959/2017 (Smt. Beda Maya Devi vs. Union of India) is a challenge to the opinion dated 14.09.2016 of the Foreigners' Tribunal-6, Tezpur in Case No. FTC (6) 104/2015, declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner of post 25.03.1971 stream for having entered into India without authority. From the Report dated 26.09.1997 of the Local Verification Officer, as available in the case records, the Page No.# 38/52 address and name of the father of the petitioner are shown as Jaisidhi and Siba Prasad Parajuli, with both year and place of birth shown as 1968 at Biswanath Chariali, which is presently district Biswanath. It is also seen from the said Report, particularly at columns 12 and 13, the mother tongue of the petitioner and the dialect spoken, in the assessment of the Inquiry Officer, is recorded as 'Nepali'. At column 16 thereof, no assessment/endorsement is made as regards the place i.e. state/country from where the petitioner is suspected to have migrated from. From the reference made by the Referral Authority, there is nothing to disclose that the petitioner came into India (Assam) from the 'specified territory'. In the opinion dated 14.09.2016 the Tribunal recorded that as per the Report of the Verification Officer, the mother tongue of the petitioner is 'Nepali'. There are no findings whatsoever that the petitioner or any of her predecessors came to India (Assam) from the 'specified territory'.
(11) WP(C)/1175/2017 (Ganesh Bahadur Powrel vs. Union of India) is directed against the opinion dated 23.11.2016 of the Foreigners' Tribunal-6, Tezpur in Case No. FTC (6) 97/2015, declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner of post 25.03.1971 stream for having entered into India without authority. From the Report of the Local Verification Officer, as available in the case records, the address and name of the father of the petitioner are shown as Bhanupur and 'Ratna Bdr' with both year and place of birth shown as 1978 at Nagsangker (Sootea). Column 16 of the Report, which pertains to indicating the place i.e. state/country from where migrated, the same was left blank. Even in the Referral Order of the Superintendent of Police (Border), Sonitpur, Tezpur, save and except mentioning the particulars of the petitioner, there is nothing to indicate that the petitioner came to India (Assam) from the 'specified territory'. In the opinion dated 23.11.2016 the Tribunal recorded that as per the Report of the Verification Officer, the mother tongue of the petitioner is 'Nepali' and it is not clear from where the petitioner migrated from.
(12) WP(C)/2970/2017 (Tanka Upadhyay vs. Union of India) is directed Page No.# 39/52 against the opinion dated 06.12.2016 of the Foreigners' Tribunal-6, Tezpur in Case No. FTC (6) 258/2015, declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner of post 25.03.1971 stream for having entered into India without authority. From the Report dated 13.09.1997of the Local Verification Officer, as available in the case records, the address of the petitioner is shown as Gorbil, P.O. Rangachakua, P.S. Jamugurighat, which is in the district of Sonitpur, and the name of his father is described as Moheswar Upadhyaya. The place of birth is also shown as Gorbil. At columns 12 and 13, the mother tongue of the petitioner and the dialect spoken are recorded as 'Nepali' and 'Assamese' respectively. At column 16 thereof, no assessment/endorsement is made as regards the place i.e. state/country from where the petitioner is suspected to have migrated from. The same has been left blank. Turning to the opinion dated 06.12.2016, the Tribunal recorded that from the evidence on record and documents available, it appeared that the petitioner and his family members are permanently residing at village Gorbil under Jamugurighat Police Station. Further, taking note of the Report of the Verification Officer, the Tribunal recorded that the mother tongue of the petitioner is 'Nepali' and that the Verification Officer have not stated from where the petitioner have migrated from.
(13) WP(C)/7014/2017 (Jiban Sarmah vs. Union of India) is directed against the opinion dated 09.08.2017 of the Foreigners' Tribunal-6, Tezpur in Case No. FTC (6) 62/2015, declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner of post 25.03.1971 stream for having entered into India without authority. From the Report dated 30.09.1997of the Local Verification Officer, as available in the case records, the address of the petitioner is shown as No.1 Jaisidhi and the name of his father is shown as late Shyamlal Chapagai which, however, is shown as late Shyamlal Sarmah in the Referral Order. The year and place of birth of the petitioner is shown as 1967 at Panpur Puranibheti. At columns 12 and 13 of the Report, the mother tongue of the petitioner and the dialect spoken are recorded as 'Nepali'. At column 16 thereof, no assessment/endorsement is made as regards the place i.e. Page No.# 40/52 state/country from where the petitioner is suspected to have migrated from. The same has been left blank. Turning to the opinion dated 09.08.2017, the Tribunal recorded that from the evidence on record and documents available, it appeared that the petitioner is permanently residing at village Puranibheti under Jamugurighat Police Station, in the district of Sonitpur, Assam. Further, taking note of the Report of the Verification Officer, the Tribunal recorded that the mother tongue of the petitioner is 'Nepali' and it is not clear from where the petitioner have migrated. There are no findings of the Tribunal with regard to the petitioner having come to Assam from the 'specified territory'. Neither in the reference made by the Referral Authority there is any indication of the petitioner having come from the 'specified territory'.
(14) WP(C)/572/2018 (Kusum Chiktal vs. Union of India) is directed against the opinion dated 22.02.2017 of the Foreigners' Tribunal-6, Tezpur in Case No. FTC (6) 72/2015, declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner of post 25.03.1971 stream for having entered into India without authority. From the Report dated 26.09.1997of the Local Verification Officer, as available in the case records, the address of the petitioner is shown as Tajalpatty, with husband's name as Tulshi Prasad Chiktal. The year and place of birth of the petitioner is shown as 1960 at Behali, in the State of Assam. At columns 12 and 13 of the Report, the mother tongue of the petitioner and the dialect spoken are recorded as 'Nepali'. At column 16 thereof, no assessment/endorsement is made as regards the place i.e. state/country from where the petitioner is suspected to have migrated from. The particulars of the petitioner, as above, also finds place in the Referral Order of the Superintendent of Police (B), Sonitpur, Tezpur, however, without any indication that the petitioner has come from the 'specified territory'. Turning to the opinion dated 22.02.2017, the Tribunal recorded that the mother tongue of the petitioner is 'Nepali'. There are no findings of the Tribunal with regard to any fact that the petitioner had come to Assam from the 'specified territory'.
(15) WP(C)/614/2018 (Purna Chapgai vs. Union of India) is a challenge to the Page No.# 41/52 opinion dated 29.03.2017 of the Foreigners' Tribunal-6, Tezpur in Case No. FTC (6) 116/2015, whereby the petitioner was declared to be a foreigner, having entered into India without authority subsequent to 25.03.1971. From the Report dated 30.09.1997of the Local Verification Officer, as available in the case records, the address of the petitioner is shown as No.1 Jaisidhi and the name of his father is shown as late Shyamlal Chapagai. The year and place of birth of the petitioner is shown as 1953 at Panpur Puranibheti. At columns 12 and 13 of the Report, the mother tongue of the petitioner and the dialect spoken are recorded as 'Nepali'. At column 16 thereof, no assessment/endorsement is made as regards the place i.e. state/country from where the petitioner is suspected to have migrated from. The same has been left blank. Turning to the opinion dated 29.03.2017, the Tribunal recorded that the mother tongue of the petitioner is 'Nepali' and that there is no disclosure of the Verification Officer as to from which place the petitioner has migrated. There are no findings of the Tribunal with regard to the petitioner having come to Assam from the 'specified territory'. Neither in the reference made by the Referral Authority there is any indication of the petitioner having come from the 'specified territory'.
(16) WP(C)/623/2018 (Lila Devi vs. Union of India) is a challenge to the opinion dated 14.02.2017 of the Foreigners' Tribunal-6, Tezpur in Case No. FTC (6) 115/2015, whereby the petitioner was declared to be a foreigner, having entered into India without authority subsequent to 25.03.1971. From the Report dated 30.09.1997of the Local Verification Officer, as available in the case records, the address of the petitioner is shown as No.1 Jaisidhi and the name of her husband is shown as Purna Chapagai. The year and place of birth of the petitioner is shown as 1964 at Garuduba, which is under Thelamara Police Station, in the district of Sonitpur, Assam. At columns 12 and 13 of the Report, the mother tongue of the petitioner and the dialect spoken are recorded as 'Nepali'. At column 16 thereof, no assessment/endorsement is made as regards the place i.e. state/country from where the petitioner is suspected to have migrated from. The same has been left Page No.# 42/52 blank. Turning to the opinion dated 14.02.2017, the Tribunal recorded that the mother tongue of the petitioner is 'Nepali' and it is not clear from where she migrated. There are no findings of the Tribunal nor any suspicion had been recorded by the Referral Authority with regard to the petitioner having come to Assam from the 'specified territory'.
(17) WP(C)/650/2018 (Gita Devi vs. Union of India) is a challenge to the opinion dated 12.08.2016 of the Foreigners' Tribunal-6, Tezpur in Case No. FTC (6) 233/2015, whereby the petitioner was declared to be a foreigner, having entered into India without authority subsequent to 25.03.1971. From the Report of the Local Verification Officer, as available in the case records, the address of the petitioner is shown as village Pithaguri Doul and the year of birth is shown as 1970 at the same place. Column 16 of the Report, which pertains to indicating the place i.e. state/country from where migrated, the same was left blank. Even in the Referral Order of the Superintendent of Police (B), Sonitpur, Tezpur, there is no mention of the petitioner having come from the 'specified territory'. Also, in the opinion dated 12.08.2016, the Tribunal have recorded that as per Verification Report the petitioner was born in the year 1970 at Pithaguri Doul and, as submitted by the petitioner, she belongs to 'Nepali' community. Significant to note, there are no findings of the Tribunal with regard to the petitioner having migrated into India (Assam) from the 'specified territory'.
(18) WP(C)/761/2018 (Sada Kumari Limbu vs. Union of India) is a challenge to the opinion dated 06.12.2016 of the Foreigners' Tribunal-6, Tezpur in Case No. FTC (6) 199/2015, whereby the petitioner was declared to be a foreigner, having entered into India without authority subsequent to 25.03.1971. From the Report dated 27.09.1997of the Local Verification Officer, as available in the case records, the address of the petitioner is shown as Tejalpatty, which is in the district of Sonitpur, Assam and the name of her husband is recorded as Budha Bahadur Limbu. The year and place of birth of the petitioner is shown as 1962 at Balijur, which is under Sootea Police Station, in the district of Sonitpur, Assam. At columns Page No.# 43/52 12 and 13 of the Report, the mother tongue of the petitioner and the dialect spoken are recorded as 'Nepali'. At column 16 thereof, no assessment/endorsement is made as regards the place i.e. state/country from where the petitioner is suspected to have migrated from. The same has been left blank. Turning to the opinion dated 06.12.2016, the Tribunal recorded that the mother tongue of the petitioner is 'Nepali' and it is not clear from where she migrated. There are no findings of the Tribunal nor had any suspicion been recorded by the Referral Authority with regard to the petitioner having come to Assam from the 'specified territory'.
(19) WP(C)/4013/2018 (Smt. Mostimaya Limbu vs. Union of India) is a challenge to the opinion dated 21.05.2018 of the Foreigners' Tribunal, Jorhat, Assam in Case No. FTG (D) 432/2010, whereby the petitioner was declared to be a foreigner, in terms of Section 2(a) of the Foreigners' Act, 1946. Pertinent to mention that although the petitioner has projected herself as Mostimaya Limbu, the description of the proceedee in the reference case was by the name of Muktimaya Rai, however, without any change in the name of the husband and place of residence. From the Report dated 04.04.2005 of the Local Verification Officer, as available in the case records, the address of the petitioner is shown as village Rampur and place of birth as Merapani. In the said Report, particularly at columns 12 and 13, the mother tongue of the petitioner and the dialect spoken, in the assessment of the Inquiry Officer, are shown as 'Nepali'. At column 16 thereof, which pertains to recording the place i.e. state/country from where migrated, only an endorsement is made as 'Does not arise'. Relevant to notice, neither in the impugned opinion dated 21.05.2018 nor in the Referral Order of the Superintendent of Police (B), Golaghat, there are findings or suspicion recorded of the petitioner having come to Assam from the 'specified territory'.
(20) WP(C)/4983/2018 (Smt. Tara Devi vs. Union of India) is a challenge to the opinion dated 18.06.2018 of the Foreigners' Tribunal, Jorhat in Case No. FTG (D) 494/2011, whereby the petitioner was declared to be a foreigner, in terms of Page No.# 44/52 Section 2(a) of the Foreigners' Act, 1946. From the Report dated 20.09.1997 of the Local Verification Officer, as available in the case records, the address of the petitioner is shown as village Amguri, Mouza Borpathar, which is in the district of Golaghat, Assam. Her year and place of birth is recorded as 1970 at Lakhimpur and the name of her father is shown as Amar Bahadur Chetri. In the said Report, particularly at columns 12 and 13, the mother tongue of the petitioner and the dialect spoken, in the assessment of the Inquiry Officer, are shown as 'Nepali' and 'Assamese' respectively. At column 16 thereof, which pertains to recording the place i.e. state/country from where migrated, no endorsement was made and the same was left blank. Relevant to notice, neither in the impugned opinion dated 18.06.2018 nor in the Referral Order of the Superintendent of Police (B), Golaghat, there are findings or suspicion recorded of the petitioner having come to Assam from the 'specified territory'.
(21) WP(C)/5015/2018 (Tanka Bahadur Newar vs. Union of India) puts a challenge to the opinion dated 04.04.2013 of the Foreigners' Tribunal No.1, Goalpara, Assam in F.T. Case No.229/G/2006, whereby the petitioner was declared to be an illegal migrant. From the Report of the Local Verification Officer, as available in the case records, the address of the petitioner is shown as village Geruwa, Nepalipara, which is under Dudhnoi Police Station, in the district of Goalpara, Assam. The year of birth is recorded as 1950 and his father's name is recorded as Sivaraj Newar. In the said Report, particularly at columns 12 and 13, the mother tongue of the petitioner and the dialect spoken, in the assessment of the Inquiry Officer, are shown as 'Nepali' and 'Assamese' respectively. At column 16 thereof, which pertains to recording the place i.e. state/country from where migrated, no endorsement was made and the same was left blank. Most pertinent to note is that the Tribunal in the opinion dated 04.04.2013 clearly recorded that the petitioner is a Nepali person and is liable to be pushed back to his own country Nepal within an early date. Under any circumstances, no finding was made by the Tribunal nor any suspicion was recorded by the Referral Authority of the petitioner Page No.# 45/52 having come to Assam from the 'specified territory'.
(22) WP(C)/5016/2018 (Pabitri Upadhyay vs. Union of India) puts a challenge to the opinion dated 10.11.2017 of the Foreigners' Tribunal, Dhemaji in Case No.FT/DMJ-248/2009 (corresponding to Memo No.FT/DMJ. 96/1387 dated 16.10.2006), which was rendered ex- parte on account of default on the part of the petitioner to appear and contest the reference case despite several opportunities being granted after the petitioner had taken steps on 15.06.2017 consequent service of notice. An adverse view was taken and the impugned opinion was passed, declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner, having come to Assam on or after 25.03.1971. From the case records as received in original from the Tribunal, it is seen from the Report of the Local Verification Officer 09.03.2005 that the petitioner is described as the wife of one Damburu Upadhyay and place of residence is shown as Mingmang Tarajan, which is in the district of Dhemaji, Assam. In the said Report, particularly at column 12, the mother tongue of the petitioner is recorded as 'Nepali' and, in the assessment of the Inquiry Officer, the dialect spoken is clear and fluent. In column 16 thereof, which pertains to indicating the place i.e. state/country from where migrated, the same was left blank. It is also seen from the Referral Order of the Superintendent of Police (Border), Dhemaji that there is no mention of the petitioner of having come from the 'specified territory'.
(23) WP(C)/5641/2018 (Ambika Devi Dimal vs. Union of India) is directed against the opinion dated 29.03.2018 of the Foreigners' Tribunal 2 nd Dhemaji at Silapathar in FT (D) Case No.2 nd Dhemaji-62/2017, whereby the petitioner was declared to be a foreigner of post 25.03.1971 stream. From the Report of the Local Verification Officer dated 27.03.2005, as available in the case records, it is seen that the petitioner is from 114 (ST) Jonai Assembly Constituency and the name of her father is Godador and her year of birth is 1980. In the said Report, particularly at columns 12 and 13, the mother tongue of the petitioner and the dialect spoken, in the assessment of the Inquiry Officer, are shown as 'Nepali' and 'Assamese' Page No.# 46/52 respectively. At column 16 thereof, which pertains to recording the place i.e. state/country from where migrated, no endorsement was made as to the country of origin, save and except, that she migrated into Assam. In the reference made by the Superintendent of Police (B), Dhemaji, only her particulars were given with the name of the village as Dimowpala, without recording any suspicion of having migrated into Assam from the 'specified territory'. Contrary to the terms of reference, which is based on the Report of the Local Verification Officer, the Tribunal recorded that the petitioner be kept in the detention camp until she is pushed back to the country of origin i.e. Bangladesh.
(24) WP(C)/6232/2018 (Ram Prakash Pakkrel vs. Union of India) puts a challenge to the opinion dated 03.04.2018 of the Foreigners' Tribunal 2 nd Dhemaji at Silapathar in FT (D) Case No.2 nd Dhemaji-97/2017, whereby the petitioner was declared to be a foreigner of post 25.03.1971 stream. From the Report of the Local Verification Officer dated 27.03.2005, as available in the case records, it is seen that the petitioner is from 114 (ST) Jonai Assembly Constituency and the name of his father is Dandhiram and his year of birth is shown as 1968. In the said Report, particularly at columns 12 and 13, the mother tongue of the petitioner and the dialect spoken, in the assessment of the Inquiry Officer, are shown as 'Nepali' and 'Assamese' respectively. At column 16 thereof, which pertains to recording the place i.e. state/country from where migrated, no endorsement was made as to the country of origin, save and except, that he migrated into Assam. In the reference made by the Superintendent of Police (B), Dhemaji, only his particulars were given with the name of the village as Dimowpala, without recording any suspicion of having migrated into Assam from the 'specified territory'. Contrary to the terms of reference, which is based on the Report of the Local Verification Officer, the Tribunal recorded that the petitioner be kept in the detention camp until he is pushed back to the country of origin i.e. Bangladesh.
(25) WP(C)/6710/2018 (Kamal Kumar Tamang vs. Union of India) is directed Page No.# 47/52 against the opinion dated 05.09.2008 of the Foreigners' Tribunal (2 nd), Mangaldai in Case No.FT(2) 536/2008, which was rendered ex-parte on account of absence of the petitioner to appear and contest despite due receipt of notice. In such a situation an adverse view was taken and the petitioner was declared as a foreigner. From the case records received in original from the Tribunal, it is seen that in the Report dated 29.08.1997 of the Local Verification Officer, the address of the petitioner is shown as No.1 Sonajuli, which is under Paneri Police Station of district Mangaldai, Assam. The name of his father is shown as late Bal Bahadur Tamang, with the petitioner's date and place of birth recorded as 01.03.1968 at Dimakuchi. In the said Report, particularly at column 13, the dialect spoken, in the assessment of the Inquiry Officer, is shown as 'Nepali'. Further, at column 16 thereof, no assessment/endorsement is made as regards the place i.e. state/country from where the petitioner is suspected to have migrated from. The entire column 16 was left blank. Even in the impugned opinion dated 05.09.2008 there are no findings with regard to the petitioner of having come to Assam from the 'specified territory'. Neither in the reference made by the Referral Authority there is any indication of the petitioner as hailing from the 'specified territory'.
(26) WP(C)/7228/2018 (Bijoy Labur @ Bijoy Darjee vs. Union of India) is directed against the opinion dated 05.07.2018 of the Foreigners' Tribunal-6, Tezpur in Case No. FTC (6) 54/2018, whereby the petitioner was declared to be a foreigner, having entered into India without authority subsequent to 25.03.1971. Although the case records from the Tribunal are not received, the impugned opinion itself gives sufficient indication as to the Report of the Local Verification Officer with regard to the status of the petitioner. The Tribunal have recorded that the Verification Report discloses that the mother tongue of the petitioner is 'Nepali' and it is not clear from where the petitioner has migrated into Assam. There is also no indication in the opinion as to any doubt expressed by the Referral Authority i.e. the Superintendent of Police (B), Sonitpur, Tezpur to any fact that the petitioner have come into Assam from the 'specified territory'. From the impugned opinion it Page No.# 48/52 can be seen that the father of the petitioner is late Harka Bahadur Darjee of village Tewaripal, under Sootea Police Station, presently within the district of Biswanath (erstwhile Sonitpur).
(27) WP(C)/7520/2018 (Karna Labur @ Darjee vs. Union of India) is directed against the opinion dated 05.07.2018 of the Foreigners' Tribunal-6, Tezpur in Case No. FTC (6) 52/2018, whereby the petitioner was declared to be a foreigner, having entered into India without authority subsequent to 25.03.1971. Apparently, the case records from the Tribunal are not received. However, the impugned opinion itself gives sufficient indication as to the Report of the Local Verification Officer with regard to the status of the petitioner. The Tribunal have recorded that the Verification Report discloses that the mother tongue of the petitioner is 'Nepali' and it is not clear from where the petitioner has migrated into Assam. There is also no indication in the opinion as to any doubt expressed by the Referral Authority i.e. the Superintendent of Police (B), Sonitpur, Tezpur to any fact that the petitioner have come into Assam from the 'specified territory'. From the impugned opinion it can be seen that the father of the petitioner is late Harka Bahadur Darjee of village Tewaripal, under Sootea Police Station, presently within the district of Biswanath (erstwhile Sonitpur).
(28) WP(C)/8413/2018 (Smt. Prema Limbu vs. Union of India) is a challenge to the opinion dated 07.08.2018 of the Foreigners' Tribunal, Jorhat, Assam in Case No. FTG (D) 466/2010, whereby the petitioner was declared to be a foreigner, having illegally entered into thye territory of India (Assam). From the Report of the Local Verification Officer, as available in the case records, the address of the petitioner is shown as village Dhelonguri Merapani, which is under Merapani Police Station, in the district of Golaghat. Her father's name is recorded as late Purna Kanta Limbu. At column 16 of the Report, which pertains to recording the place i.e. state/country from where migrated, the same is left blank. Relevant to notice, neither in the impugned opinion dated 07.08.2018 nor in the Referral Order of the Superintendent of Police (B), Golaghat, there are any findings or suspicion recorded Page No.# 49/52 that the petitioner came to Assam from the 'specified territory'.
(29) WP(C)/3014/2019 (Tangkamaya Devi vs. Union of India) is directed against the opinion dated 03.04.2019 of the Foreigners' Tribunal-6, Tezpur in Case No. FTC (6) 106/2018, whereby the petitioner was declared to be a foreigner, having entered into India without authority subsequent to 25.03.1971. From the case records received from the Tribunal, it is seen from the Report of the Local Verification Officer that the area in question is of 75 Sootea Legislative Constituency, where the address of the petitioner is shown as Panpur Hakama, which is under Jamugurighat Police Station, in the district of Sonitpur. The husband's name is recorded as Khem Nath Chetri, which is corrected to Somnath Chetri in the Referral Order of the Superintendent of Police (B), Sonitpur, Tezpur. At column 16 of the Report, which pertains to recording the place i.e. state/country from where migrated, the same is left blank. Relevant to notice, neither in the impugned opinion dated 03.04.2019 nor in the Referral Order of the Superintendent of Police (B), Sonitpur, Tezpur, there are any findings or suspicion recorded that the petitioner came to Assam from the 'specified territory'.
We have undertaken the rigorous exercise to look into the facts appearing in each individual writ petition to find out whether in any way any of the writ petitioners are shown to have any connection or origin or traceable to any territories included in Bangladesh, within the meaning of 'specified territory' under Section 6-A (1) (c) of the Citizenship Act, 1955. In the case of each of the writ petitioners they are shown to belong to places within the State of Assam, as variously recorded in the Reports of the Local Verification Officer. The mother tongue of the writ petitioners is 'Nepali', which is the language spoken by the citizens of the neighbouring country Nepal, and which language is also specified in the Eighth Schedule to the Constitution of India. This is not to say that a Nepali speaking individual can only have his/her origin at Nepal and not at Bangladesh. However, for the purpose of initiating proceeding against a Nepali speaking person, for examination as to whether he/she is a foreigner or not, in respect of references made under sub-section (3) of Section 6-A of the Citizenship Act, 1955 to a Tribunal constituted Page No.# 50/52 under the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964 having jurisdiction over a district or part thereof in the State of Assam, in terms of Rule 21 of the Citizenship Rules, 2009, the primary and necessary ingredient or the condition precedent is that reference can only be in respect of persons who have come to Assam from the 'specified territory', meaning the territories included in Bangladesh immediately before the commencement of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 1985 , and also having regard to the cut-off date of migration into Assam as prescribed under the aforesaid Section 6-A of the Citizenship Act, 1955.
Law being clear, as above, there are neither any suspicion expressed by the Referral Authority nor any findings recorded by the concerned Tribunals that any of the writ petitioners are persons who have come into Assam from the 'specified territory'. In Section 6-A, particularly at sub-sections (2) and (3), the expression 'specified territory' is predominant.
It would be apposite to make reference to the Notification dated 23.08.1988 of the Government of India in the Ministry of Home Affairs, whereby the misconception noticed by the Central Government about the citizenship at the commencement of the Constitution of India, of certain classes of persons commonly known as Gorkhas, who had settled in India at such commencement, was clarified. Clarification made was that as from the commencement of the Constitution i.e. from 26.01.1950, every Gorkha who had his domicile in the territory of India and who was born in the territory of India or either of whose parents was born in the territory of India or who had been ordinarily been a resident in the territory of India for not less than five years before such commencement, shall be a citizen of India as provided in Article 5 of the Constitution of India. There is yet another Notification dated 24.09.2018 of the Government of India in the Ministry of Home Affairs (Foreigners Division), perhaps as a guidance while making future references in respect of individuals claiming to belong to the Gorkha community of Nepali origin, on the subject of a Memorandum dated 30.07.2018 submitted by the All Assam Gorkha Students' Union to the Hon'ble Home Minister. It is seen that the issues raised in the Memorandum had been examined by the Ministry of Home Affairs and decision thereof was also taken, Page No.# 51/52 with approval of the competent authority. While reiterating the conditions of citizenship of classes of persons known as Gorkhas, as specified in the earlier Notification dated 23.08.1988, the later Notification dated 24.09.2018 clearly laid down that " Since the members of the Gorkha community originally hail from Nepal, it may not be appropriate to declare all of them as from the 'specified territory' as defined under Section 6-A (1) (c) of the Citizenship Act, 1955. Only those who have come from Bangladesh and living in the State of Assam can be treated as from the 'specified territory' in accordance with Section 6-A of the Citizenship Act, 1955." Further, "Only cases of members of Gorkha community living in Assam who do not fall in any of the categories mentioned above may be referred to the Foreigners' Tribunal for its opinion as to whether the person is or is not a 'foreigner' within the meaning of the Foreigners Act, 1946." The categories are duly mentioned in the said Notification dated 24.09.2018.
We may also take notice of the provisions of Section 8 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, which relates to determination of nationality. A reading of said Section 8 in the context of the present bunch of cases, it is seen that where for any reason it is uncertain what nationality, if any is to be ascribed to a foreigner, in such cases that foreigner may be treated as the national of the country with which he appears to the prescribed authority to be most closely connected for the time being in interest or sympathy or if he is of uncertain nationality, of the country with which he was last so connected. This provision would be relevant to the extent that even if the most extreme view is taken that the petitioners can never claim to be citizens of India, however, having regard to the status of the petitioners as recorded in the Verification Reports to be persons having their mother tongue and spoken dialect as 'Nepali', they can only be treated as the national of the country to which they appear to be closely connected i.e. Nepal. Under no circumstances, that too, in the absence of any reports of being persons coming into Assam from the 'specified territory', the provisions of Section 6-A of the Citizenship Act, 1955 cannot be made applicable to the petitioners.
For all the aforesaid reasons, we have no hesitation but to allow all the 29 writ petitions by setting aside the impugned opinions in all the said 29 writ petitions. As a Page No.# 52/52 necessary corollary, reference made against each of the writ petitioners by the respective Referral Authority are also interfered with.
Office to send back the case records to the respective Tribunal forthwith.
Copy of this order be made available to Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Assistant S.G.I., representing the Union of India; Mr. D. Baruah, learned counsel for the Election Commission of India; Mr. J. Payeng, learned counsel for the State of Assam and Ms. A. Verma, learned counsel for the State Co-ordinator, NRC, Assam.
JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant