Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010179642026 2026:GAU- AS:12648-DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4629/2026 MD. ABDUL JABBAR SON OF- LATE HAMED ALI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- RANGRAI CHAPORI, P.O.- MOIRABARI, P.S.- MOIRABARI, DISTRICT- MORIGAON, ASSAM, PIN- 782126. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI- 110001. 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006. 3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER MORIGAON DISTRICT- MORIGAON ASSAM PIN-782105. 4:THE CHIEF ELECTION OFFICER OF THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA NIRVACHAN SADAN ASHOKA ROAD NEW DELHI DELHI- 110001. 5:THE OFFICE OF THE STATE COORDINATOR OF NATIONAL Page No.# 2/5 REGISTRATION (NRC) ASSAM REPRESENTED BY ITS COORDINATOR 1ST FLOOR ACHYUT PLAZA BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI ASSAM- 781005. 6:THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE MORIGAON DISTRICT- MORIGAON ASSAM. PIN-782105. 7:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (BORDER) MORIGAON DISTRICT- MORIGAON ASSAM. PIN-782105 Advocate for the Petitioner : G UDDIN, P ADHIKARI,MR A K AZAD Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., SC, ECI,GA, ASSAM,SC, NRC,SC, F.T BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER 02.09.2026 (K.R. Surana, J) Heard Mr. G. Uddin, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. G. Pegu, learned CGC; Ms. A. Verma, learned standing counsel for the FT matters and NRC; Mr. A. I. Ali, learned standing counsel for the ECI; and Mr. P. Sarmah, learned Additional Senior Govt. Advocate for the State respondent. 2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner namely Md. Abdul Jabbar, has assailed the ex parte opinion dated Page No.# 3/5 22.11.2019, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal-5th, Morigaon, in No. M.F.T. (J).2019/1710, arising out of Case No. F.T. (D) 1489/2017 (New Number) corresponding to F.T. (D) 907/2012 (Old Number) and D/N Case No. 1861/98 dated 24.06.1998, by which the petitioner was declared to be a foreigner of Post 25.03.1971 stream. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the copy of the service report of the process server in respect of the petitioner wherein, the process server has made a remark in the service report that a person of the same name in which notice was found in the address but as his father's name did not match with the name mentioned in the notice, he had refused to accept the notice and accordingly, as per the process servers report, the notice could not be served and accordingly, the unserved notice was returned back. However, the learned Tribunal in the impugned ex parte opinion dated 22.11.2019, inadvertently recorded incorrect filling to the effect that notice was issued to the petitioner and finding him untraceable, the notice was hung in the nearby Panchayat Office of the petitioner's village in front of witnesses. Apparently, the said finding in the impugned opinion appears to be contrary to the process server's report. 4. Per contra, the learned standing counsel for the FT and Border matters has opposed the interference with the impugned ex parte opinion dated 22.11.2019, on the ground that reference was of the year 1998, and though the petitioner did not accept the notice, but after more than 6 years of the passing of the impugned ex parte opinion, has now challenged the impugned ex parte opinion. 5. Be that as it may, notwithstanding that the observation of the learned Page No.# 4/5 Tribunal as regards the service, which is made in the impugned ex parte opinion dated 22.11.2019, is found to be at variance with the report of the concerned S. P. (Border), but the acceptance of the service report by erroneously assuming that the process servers report was hung in the nearby Panchayat Office, the impugned opinion passed by said learned Tribunal is not found to be sustainable. 6. Accordingly, the Court is inclined to set aside the ex parte opinion dated 22.11.2019, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal-5th, Morigaon in No. M.F.T. (J).2019/1710, arising out of Case No. F.T. (D) 1489/2017 (New Number) corresponding to F.T. (D) 907/2012 (Old Number) and D/N Case No. 1861/98 dated 24.06.1998. hence, the matter is remanded back to the said learned Tribunal for rendering a fresh opinion. 7. The petitioner, namely, Md. Abdul Jabbar, who is duly represented by his learned counsel, is directed to appear before the said learned Tribunal within the outer time limit of 25.09.2026, and, on the date of appearance, he shall file the certified copy of this order and shall also file his written statement and the documents on which he intends to rely on. Thereafter, the learned Tribunal shall afford reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to produce his witnesses and to take steps for calling for the documents, or summoning the witnesses if so advised. 8. It is made clear that if the petitioner fails to appear within the outer time limit indicated above, it would be open to the learned Tribunal to treat the petitioner as absent on call and pass a fresh opinion in accordance with law. 9. The learned Tribunal shall make an endeavour to dispose of the proceedings within the time permitted under Page No.# 5/5 paragraph 17(14) of the Immigration and Foreigners Order, 2025. 10. The writ petition is allowed at the motion stage without issuance of notice to the respondents. 11. The learned standing counsel for Border and FT matters shall transmit a downloaded copy of this order to the concerned authorities. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant