Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010263902024 2025:GAU-AS:375- DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6933/2024 TAJ UDDIN S/O- LATE SIRAJ UDDIN, R/O- VILLAGE- OKSEK PATHER, P.O. AND P.S. MURAJHAR, DISTRICT- HOJAI, ASSAM, PIN- 782439 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI- 110001 2:THE ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA GOVERNMENT OF INDIA NEW DELHI- 110001 3:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-6 4:THE ASSAM STATE COORDINATORS OF NRC BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI-5 5:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HOJAI ASSAM PIN- 782435 6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLCE (B) Page No.# 2/6 HOJAI SANKARDEVNAGAR HOJAI ASSAM PIN- 78244 Advocate for the Petitioner : F K R AHMED, M U BARBHUYAN Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., GA, ASSAM,SC, ELECTION COMMISSION.,SC, F.T BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI ORDER 10.01.2025 (K.R. Surana, J) Heard Mr. F. K. R. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Gogoi, learned CGC for the respondent No.1; Ms. P. Barua, learned Standing Counsel, Election Commission of India, for the respondent No.2; Mr. J. Payeng, learned Standing Counsel, FT matters, for the respondent Nos. 3 and 6; Mr. G. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, for the respondent No.4 and Mr. P. Sarmah, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate appearing for the respondent No.5. 2. The issuance of notice to the petitioner by the Foreigners Tribunal, Hojai 1st, Sankardev Nagar, in F.T. Case No. FT/H-1/3549/2012, issued on 14.03.2024, is assailed in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as per his instructions, the enquiry against the petitioner being a foreigner was made in Page No.# 3/6 the village of Oksek Pather under Murajhar Police Station, but as per his instructions, the petitioner was residing at the village Debosthan, whereas, his parents were also permanent residents. Accordingly, it is submitted that fair investigation was not carried out by the concerned authorities. It is also submitted that as per instructions received by him, the proceedings of F.T. Case No. FT/H-1/3549/2012, was closed in the year 2016 and thereafter, the matter was reopened and the notice impugned in this writ petition was issued. 4. By referring to the statement made of paragraph-8 of the writ petition, it is also submitted that the petitioner, through his learned counsel, approached the Foreigners Tribunal, Hojai 1st, Sankardev Nagar to obtain certified copies of the relevant documents, however, the staff of the said Tribunal had refused to accept the application for certified copies. Therefore, the petitioner was unable to obtain copies of the records pertaining to the case against him. 5. Accordingly, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the proceedings of F.T. Case No. FT/H-1/3549/2012, which pending for disposal before the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal, Hojai 1st, Sankardev Nagar. 6. The prayer made in this writ petition is opposed by the learned standing counsel for the FT matters. 7. The Court has considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials available in this writ petition by which the petitioner is seeking to project that he is not a foreigner but an Indian national. The Court has also considered the submissions made Page No.# 4/6 by the learned counsel for the respondents. 8. The matter relates to the Foreigners Tribunal. However, this Court is exercising certiorari jurisdiction and therefore, the legality of the orders passed by the Tribunal is required to be examined. In exercise of said jurisdiction, this writ Court shall be slow in examining the legality of the notice/ summon issued by the learned Tribunal. 9. Moreover, the Court is of the considered opinion that the Foreigners Tribunal will not be powerless to deal with applications filed by the petitioner along with the written statement for discharging him of the burden of proving that he is not a foreigner. The Tribunal is also not powerless to examine as to whether the proceedings against the petitioner was closed in the year 2016 and thereafter, how the proceeding was revived and to pass an appropriate order. 10. Therefore, instead of calling for the records and to examine the issues raised in this writ petition, pursuant to which this Court would be compelled to exercise the original jurisdiction on the matters which are within the domain of the Foreigners Tribunal, the Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner be relegated to appear before the Foreigners Tribunal, Hojai 1st, Sankardev Nagar. 11. As the petitioner is alleging that the staff of Foreigners Tribunal Hojai 1st, Sankardev Nagar has not received his application for issuance of certified copy, the Court is inclined to direct the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal, Hojai 1st, Sankardev Nagar that in the event the petitioner or his learned counsel files an application for a certified copy of whatever Page No.# 5/6 documents petitioner may so require from his case record, the same shall be provided without any delay. 12. It is further provided that in the event the Superintendent of the Foreigners Tribunal concerned refuses to accept applications for certified copies, the petitioner shall be at liberty to make a representation before the Joint Secretary to the Government of Assam, Home and Political (B) Department. On such complaint being made, it is expected that the Home and Political (B) Department shall make enquiry into the matter and to ensure that the Foreigners Tribunal do not refuse to accept applications for certified copies once the same is applied either by the proceedee of his/ her learned counsel. 13. If an application for certified copy is made by the petitioner the sought for document shall be provided within 10 (ten) days of applying. Thereafter, the petitioner shall be granted a reasonable time by the learned Tribunal for filing his written statement. The petitioner shall also be at the liberty to file such interlocutory application, as the petitioner may be so advised. 14. It is also provided that in the event certified copies are not furnished to the petitioner, despite applying in spite of making complaint to the Joint Secretary, Home and Political (B) Department, the petitioner is at liberty to approach this Court again. 15. With the observations and directions as made above, this writ petition stands closed without entering into the merits of the questions raised by the petitioner and without issuing to the respondents. Therefore, the Page No.# 6/6 petitioner shall be at liberty to raise any defence he may be so advised, before the learned Tribunal. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant