Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010252462025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6571/2025 MAHITAN NESSA D/O LATE MIYARUDDIN, W/O SAHIMUDDIN AKANDA, R/O VILL- GOSSAIBORI, P.S- MATIA, DISTRICT- GOALPARA, ASSAM VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVT. OF INDIA, NEW DELHI- 1 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HOME GOVT. OF ASSAM DISPUR GUWAHATI- 06 3:THE ELECTION COMMISSIONER OF INDIA NEW DELHI- 1 4:THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSIONER ASSAM PANJABARI SIXMILE GUWAHATI- 781037 5:THE ELECTION OFFICER GOALPARA P.O AND DISTRICT- GOALPARA ASSAM PIN- 783101 Page No.# 2/4 6:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER GOALPARA PO AND DISTRICT GOALPARA ASSAM PIN 783101 7:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (BORDER) GOALPARA P.O AND DISTRICT- GOALPARA ASSAM PIN- 78310 Advocate for the petitioner(s): Mr. AR Sikdar Advocate for the respondent(s): Mr. K Gogoi, CGC Mr. AI Ali Standing Counsel, Election Commission of India Mr. G Sarma for respondent Nos.2 and 6 B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER 21.11.2025 Heard Mr. AR Sikdar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K Gogoi, the learned CGC, who appears on behalf of respondent No.1; Mr. G Sarma, the learned counsel, who appears on behalf of the respondent Nos.2 and 6 and Mr. AI Ali, learned Standing Counsel, Election Commission of India, who appears on behalf of respondent Nos.3, 4 and 5. Page No.# 3/4 2. The case of the petitioner herein is that the petitioner’s parent’s names were duly shown in the voters list of 1966, 1970 and 1977. The petitioner’s name was inserted in the voters list for the year 1997, 2005 and 2010 along with her husband Shahimuddin Akand of village Gossaibori in the Goalpara district. 3. The petitioner’s case is that in the voters list of 2011, the name of the petitioner was marked with the letter “D” and thereupon the petitioner has approached the concerned respondent authorities for removal of the tag “D” in her name from the voters list. 4. The further case of the petitioner is that earlier in the proceedings being F.T Case No.F.T/5/19/MA/16 which was in connection with I.M.D.T Reference Case No.544/99, the petitioner was issued a notice. However, when it was pointed out that the petitioner is the daughter of Late Miyeruddin and not the daughter of Meyadus, the learned Foreigners Tribunal No.5, Goalpara, Assam vide opinion dated 15.03.2019 discharged the petitioner. 5. It is the further case of the petitioner that inspite of that against the name of the petitioner ‘D’ has been marked and as such, the petitioner has approached this Court 6. 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 question which depends on the evidence that may be produced. 7. In the circumstances, this Court, therefore, directs the respondent No.7 i.e., the Superintendent of Police (Border) Goalpara to verify as to whether the petitioner has already been referred to the concerned Foreigners Tribunal and if Page No.# 4/4 upon verification, it is found that the petitioner has not been referred to the concerned Foreigners Tribunal, this Court further directs the said respondent No.7 to refer the case of the petitioner as regards the mark “D” in the voters list in respect to LAC No.37, District Goalpara to a competent Foreigners Tribunal, in the Goalpara district for an appropriate adjudication as regards the status of the petitioner as “D” voter in the concerned voters list. 8. 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. 9. 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. 10. With the above directions and observations, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant