Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010185262025 2025:GAU-AS:11474 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4903/2025 ROWSHANARA PARVIN W/O MATIUR RAHMAN, D/O LATE NIZAM UDDIN AHMED, VILL- SHARIOTPUR, P.O. AND P.S.- KALGACHIA, DIST- BARPETA, ASSAM VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 8 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, NEW DELHI, INDIA 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 3:THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA NIRVACHAN BHAWAN NEW DELHI 4:THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 5:THE STATE COORDINATOR NATIONAL REGISTRAR OF CITIZENS (NRC) ASSAM GUWAHATI 6:THE FOREIGNERS REGIONAL REGISTRATION AUTHORITY (FRRA) BARPETA Page No.# 2/4 ASSAM 7:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER CUM RETURNING OFFICER DIST- BARPETA ASSAM 8:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BARPETA ASSAM 9:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B) BARPETA DIST- BARPETA ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A M BARBHUIYA, MS A BEGUM,MS S R MAZARBHUIYA Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., SC, F.T,SC, NRC,SC, ECI,GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE ORDER Date : 27.08.2025 Heard Ms. A. Begum, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. P. Baruah, learned standing counsel, ECI appearing for the respondent No.3 2. Claiming to be wrongly marked as “D” voter in the voter-list of 1997 of village- Shariotpur of No.44, Jania LAC under District Barpeta, Assam, , this writ petition is filed. 3. Having considered that similar matter has been disposed of by this Court and as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of at the motion stage. 4. The petitioner claims that her father name Nizam Uddin Ahmed was serving as a Junior Engineer in Irrigation Department under the state government of Assam. He joined in service on 02/02/1955 and retired on 31/01/1990. After retirement he was receiving pension. 5. The petitioner’s date of birth is 30/12/1972. Accordingly, her name was recorded at Page No.# 3/4 serial No.247, holding No.125 of voter list of 1993 as Rowshanara Parvin, D/O Nizam Uddin of village: Bannaguri under No.39 Jaleswar LAC of Assam in Goalpara District. 6. The petitioner was married in the year 1991 to one Matiur Rahman, S/O Late Abdus Sattar Khan of village- Shariotpur, P.O. and P.S. Kalgachia of No.44 Jania LAC under District Barpeta, Assam. The petitioner never personally approached any electoral authority to record her name in the voter list of her husband's place/village. 7. The husband of petitioner was serving in the Forest Department of Assam which was a frequently transferrable service. The petitioner was living with her husband at different places of posting throughout Assam. Lastly her husband had been settled at Sijubari, Hatigaon, Guwahati. The husband of petitioner has retired from service in the year 2023 as a DFO. Thus, the petitioner has been residing with her husband at Sijubari, Hatigaon, Guwahati since last many years. 8. Recently, the petitioners could know from her personal reliable source that in the year 1997 her name was recorded in the voter list with marked "D" vide Serial No.602, Holding No.209 of village- Shariotpur of No.44 Jania LAC under District Barpeta, Assam. 9. It is contended that the petitioner never personally approached any electoral authority to record her name in the said voter list of her husband's place/village. The petitioner was never permanently residing at her husband's said village, therefore local Level Officer might have collected the name of petitioner and entered the same in the voter list of her husband's village as ‘D’ voter without any verification and consent from the petitioner. 10. It is further contended that since last few months the petitioner has been approaching the local district level electoral authorities to know as to how her name was entered with marked "D" in the voter list of her husband's village Shariotpur of No.44 Jania LAC under District Barpeta, Assam. The local electoral authorities failed to show any reason and/or basis for entering her name in the said voter list with marked "D". 11. Ms. A. Begum, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the name of the petitioner is found recorded in the voter list of 1997 and marked as “D” voter, without any spot verification and providing her an opportunity of being heard to demonstrate that she is not a foreigner, the action of the respondent authority is arbitrary and illegal. 12. The learned counsel for the respondents have fairly submitted that in the present case, it Page No.# 4/4 appears that the petitioner has not been provided any opportunity of being heard and no due procedure of law appears to have been followed. Therefore, it would be appropriate to refer the matter to the appropriate authority for verification as to whether the petitioner is a citizen of India or not. 13. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the materials available on record, it is noticed that the “D” mark has been put against the petitioner in the voter list of 1997 and subsequent lists without providing any opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. 14. In that view of the matter, I am of the considered view that it would be appropriate that the matter be referred to the appropriate authority. 15. Accordingly, it is directed that the Superintendent of Police (Border), Barpeta, i. e. the respondent No. 9, shall verify as to whether the petitioner has already been referred to the concerned Foreigners Tribunal for adjudication and upon verification, if it is found that the petitioner has not been referred to the Foreigners Tribunal, the respondent No. 9 shall refer the case to the concerned Foreigners Tribunal after proper verification, pertaining to the status of “D” voter in the voter-list of 1997 of village-Shariotpur of No.44, Jania LAC under District Barpeta, Assam, 16. It is directed that the above exercise shall be done within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. The petitioner is directed to participate in the adjudication as directed, hereinabove. 17. The writ petition is disposed of in terms of the above direction. JUDGE Comparing Assistant