Gauhati High Court
Rusna Begum @ Rasna Begum vs The Union Of India And 5 Ors on 25 January, 2021
Author: Manojit Bhuyan
Bench: Manojit Bhuyan, Parthivjyoti Saikia
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010171732020
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2074/2020
RUSNA BEGUM @ RASNA BEGUM
D/O. ABDUL ALI, W/O. NUR MOHAMMOD, VILL. MODERTOLI MIKIR
GAON, P.O. MODERTOLI, P.S. DOBOKA, DIST. HOJAI, ASSAM, PIN-782440
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS.
REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME
AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI-01.
2:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA
NIRVACHAN SADAN
ASOKA ROAD
NEW DELHI
PIN-110001.
3:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP. BY THE COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM
HOME DEPTT.
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-781006.
4:THE STATE CO-ORDINATOR OF NATIONAL REGISTRATION (NRC)
ASSAM 1ST FLOOR
ACHYUT PLAZA
GUWAHATI SHILLONG ROAD
BHANGAGARH
GUWAHATI
ASSAM
Page No.# 2/3
PIN-781005.
5:THE DY. COMMISSIONER
HOJAI
DIST. HOJAI
ASSAM.
6:THE SUPDT. OF POLICE (B)
HOJAI
DIST. HOJAI
ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR J C GOGOI
Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJIT BHUYAN
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA
ORDER
25.01.2021 (Manojit Bhuyan, J) Heard Mr. J.C. Gogoi learned counsel for the applicant as well as Ms. J. Sarma, learned counsel representing opposite party no.1. Ms. N. Upadhyay, learned counsel represents opposite party no.2 whereas Mr. J. Payeng, learned counsel appears for opposite party nos.3, 5 and 6. Ms. L. Devi, learned counsel accepts notice for opposite party no.4.
This is an application seeking extension of time to make appearance before the Superintendent of Police (B), Hojai. It is seen that by order dated 17.12.2019 passed in WP(C) 6693/2019, arising out of F.T.(D) Case No.357/2015 of the Foreigner's Tribunal (10 th), Nagaon at Sankardev Nagar, Hojai, the applicant/writ petitioner was directed to appear before the Superintendent of Police (B), Hojai within 15 (fifteen) days for the purpose of availing the interim protection so granted. It is now stated that for reasons stated in the application, the applicant/writ petitioner could not appear before the said authority within the period specified.
Page No.# 3/3 It is seen that interim protection was granted way back on 17.12.2019, which is more than a year ago. It is also seen from the connected writ petition that the writ petition itself was listed thereafter on 13.03.2020 and, on that day, no submission was made as regards non-appearance of the applicant/writ petitioner before the said authority. This is an application which demonstrates utter negligence on the part of the applicant despite getting an interim protection.
On the above, we find no justification to grant the prayer made in the application and, accordingly, the same stands dismissed, without any order as to cost.
JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant