Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 21712 (GAU)

HAMIDA KHATUN v. THE UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS.

WP(C)/8269/2018 · 2025-05-18

Arun Dev Choudhury

Writ Petition (Civil)body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010264992018 2025:GAU-AS:6235 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/8269/2018 HAMIDA KHATUN D/O LATE HASEN ALI W/O LATE ABDULKARIM R/O VILL AND P.O. BAJIA GAON, P.S. SAMAGURI, MOUZA- KHATOWAL, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN - 782140 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS. REP. BY THE SECRETARY- THE MINISTRY OF POLITICAL AND HOME AFFAIRS, SHASTRI BHAWAN, TILAK MARGM NEW DELHI-110001. 2:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA NIRVACHAN SADAN ASHOKA ROAD NEW DELHI- 110001. 3:THE STATE OF ASSAM THROUGH- THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME AND POLITICAL DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI - 781006. 4:THE CHIEF ELECTION OFFICER ASSAM Page No.# 2/4 HOUSEFED COMPLEX BELTOLA ROAD GUWAHATI - 781006 5:THE ELECTORAL REGISTRATION OFFICER KALIABOR SUB- DIVISION DIST. NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 782001. 6:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER -CUM- DISTRICT ELECTION OFFICER -CUM- ELECTORAL REGISTRATION OFFICER NAGAON P.O. AND DIST. NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 782001 7:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (BORDER) NAGAON P.O. NAGAON DIST. NAGAON ASSAM PIN - 78200 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. JUNM LASKAR, MS. A AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I., SC, F.T,MR J PAYENG,SC, ECI,MR. D BARUAH,SC, NRC,MS. A VERMA BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY ORDER 19-05-2025 1. None appears for the petitioner on call. 2.Heard Mr. S.S.Roy, learned CGC for the respondent No. 1 and Mr. A. Ali, learned Standing counsel, Election Commission for the respondent Nos. 2, 4 & 5. Also heard Mr. J. Page No.# 3/4 Payeng, learned Standing counsel, Home and Political Department, Assam for the respondent Nos. 3 & 7 and Mr. H. Sharma, learned State counsel for the respondent No. 6. 3.The case of the petitioner is that in the Voters List of 2015, the name of the petitioner was marked with letter ‘D’ and for that reason, the petitioner has approached the concerned respondent authority for removal of tag ‘D’ from her name in the Voters List of 2015. 4.As the concerned respondent authority had failed to do so, the petitioner by way of filing the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, prayed for an appropriate writ that the letter ‘D’ tagged with the name of the petitioner be removed from the Voter List of 2015. 5.Whether a person is a ‘D’ Voter or not is a matter of factual determination and the appropriate forum to do the same is the concerned Foreigners Tribunal. This Court in exercise of its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would not have the competence to decide such a dispute, which depends on the evidence that may be produced. 6.In view of the aforesaid, this Court is of the considered opinion that the respondent No.7 i.e., the Superintendent of Police (Border), Nagaon shall verify as to whether the petitioner has already been referred to the concerned Foreigners Tribunal and if, after verification, it is found that the petitioner has not been referred to the concerned Foreigners Tribunal, the aforesaid respondent No.7 shall refer the case of the petitioner as regards the tag of ‘D’ in the Voters List, 2015 in respect of 88 No. Samaguri LAC to a competent Foreigners Tribunal, Nagaon district for an appropriate adjudication as regards the status of the petitioner as ‘D’ voter in the concerned Voters List. 7.Reference be made within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Upon such reference being made, the petitioner may participate in such proceedings and establish her case. Page No.# 4/4 8. If the case of the petitioner as per the records had already been referred to the relevant Foreigners Tribunal, there would be no requirement to make any further reference and the detailed information of the earlier reference be communicated to the petitioner. 9. With the above directions and observations, the present writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant