Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010119012018 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/3610/2018 RAM BABU BARMAN S/O LATE RAM SUNDAR BARMAN, BY RELIGION HINDU, AND PERMANENT RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NAMALPUR, PO SIDLI, PS SIDLI, DIST. CHIRANG, ASSAM, 783373 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY OF THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, UNION OF INDIA, NEW DELHI-110001 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006 3:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA NIRVACHAN SADAN ASHOKA ROAD NEW DELHI-110001 4:THE STATE OF CO-ORDINATOR OF NATIONAL REGISTER OF CITIZENS ASSAM 1ST FLOOR ACHYUT PLAZA GUWAHATI SHILLONG ROAD BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI ASSAM Page No.# 2/3 PIN-781005 5:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHIRANG KAJALGAON PIN-783385 6:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM ULUBARI GUWAHTAI-781007 7:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (BORDER) CHIRANG 78337 Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. P BASFORE, MR B SARKAR,SC, ELECTION COMMISSION. Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I., SC, NRC,SC, F.T BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER 24.11.2025 (S. K. Medhi, J) We have heard Ms. P. Adhikary, learned counsel appearing on instruction of Shri B. Sarkar, learned counsel for the petitioner. We have also heard Ms. A. Verma, learned Standing Counsel, Home Deptt. and NRC; Shri R. K. D. Choudhury, learned Dy. SGI; Shri P. Sarma, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate, Assam as well as Shri A. I. Ali, learned Standing Counsel, ECI. This writ petition which was instituted in the year 2018 challenges an opinion dated 18.07.2017 passed by the Member, Foreigners Tribunal, Chirang in Case No. BNGN FT (CHR) 2409/2009 declaring the petitioner is an illegal Page No.# 3/3 migrant. The learned counsel has however submitted that after the enactment of CAA, the petitioner would like to explore her options to get the benefit and accordingly, she submits that the writ petition may be closed giving the petitioner the liberty. The aforesaid submission is not opposed by the learned counsel for the respondents. In view of the aforesaid position, while this writ petition is closed, liberty is granted to the petitioner to explore his option under the CAA to get the benefit. It is needless to say that if any such application is submitted, the same would be considered and disposed of in accordance with law. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant