Document Fragment View
Matching Fragments
23. In response, Mr. J. Payeng, learned Special Counsel, Foreigners Tribunal has vehemently objected to the contention made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that no proper enquiry was made nor proper reference was made by the Referral Authority.
Page No.# 8/30
24. Mr. Payeng submits that merely because the Verification Officer had made certain observation in the report that "inclusion allowed" does not necessarily mean that the report has to be accepted by the Referral Authority and in fact, the enquiry was initiated when the inclusion of name of the petitioner in the voters list became doubtful. He submits that, further, as can be seen from the records, the police authorities had made a clear observation that enquiry was conducted regarding the suspected illegal immigrant. However, since the proceeding was initiated before the IM(D)T when the IM(D)T Act was in vogue, the Local Verification Officer (LVO) and Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) had to prove the case before the Tribunal in the light of amendments made in the IMDT Act and guidelines issued by Election Commission and no detail enquiry was required at that stage. Accordingly, as directed by the Superintendent of Police, the matter was referred to the Tribunal. It has been submitted that there was no illegality on the part of the authorities in referring the case of the petitioner to the Foreigners Tribunal.