Page No.# 1/7 GAHC010296722019 2026:GAU-AS:14452 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/9315/2019 ABU TALEB AND ANR. S/O- LATE ABUL KASHEM @ ABDUL KASHEM, R/O- VILL- BHEHAGURI, P.S- MIKIRBHETA, DIST- MORIGAON, ASSAM 2: MUSTT RAMISHA KHATUN @ SAHARA BEGUM @ SURA BANU @ SAHERA W/O- MD. ABU TALEB R/O- VILL- BHEHAGURI P.S- MIKIRBHETA DIST- MORIGAON ASSA VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF INDIA, MIN OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI- 110001 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM HOME DEPTT DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006 3:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA NIRVACHAN SADAN ASHOKA ROAD NEW DELHI- 110001 4:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM DEPTT OF HOME OF COORDINATOR NRC ASSAM Page No.# 2/7 DISPUR GUWAHATI- 781006 5:THE NRC REP. BY THE STATE COORDINATOR ACHYUT PLAZA BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI- 781005 DIST- KAMRUP(M) ASSAM 6:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER MORIGAON DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM PIN- 782105 7:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B) MORIGAON P.O AND P.S- BHURAGAON DIST- MORIGAON ASSAM PIN- 78212 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR J C BORAH, MR I AHMED,MR A SHARMA Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I., SC, F.T,SC, ELECTION COMMISSION.,SC, NRC BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER Date : 28.09.2026 (K.R. Surana, J) Heard Mr. A. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. L. Devi, learned CGC; Mr. G. Sarma, learned standing counsel for the FT and Border matters; Mr. A.I. Ali, learned standing counsel for the ECI; and Mr. P. Sarmah, learned Additional Senior Govt. Advocate for the State respondent. Page No.# 3/7 2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have claimed for two distinct reliefs. The petitioner has challenged (a) opinion dated 06.06.2018, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal No.3rd, Morigaon, in Case No. FT 208/2016, arising out of Ref. F.T. Case No. 111/02 dated 30.09.2022, by which the two petitioners herein were declared to be foreigners of post 25.03.1971 stream; and (b) order dated 06.06.2018, passed by the same learned Tribunal in Misc. Case No. 09/2016, arising out of F.T. Case No. 149/2012, by which the two petitioners herein were declared ex parte to be foreigners of 1966-71 stream. 3. The petitioners were declared to be foreigners of the post 1966-71 stream by an opinion dated 10.12.2014, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal (2nd), Morigaon, in Case No. F.T. 149/12, arising out of Police Reference F.T. Case No. 23/2003 dated 03.05.2003. 4. On a perusal of Annexure-19 to the writ petition, it appears that the petitioners, on the premise that the opinion dated 10.12.2014 was passed ex parte, had prayed for vacating the said opinion under Order IX Rule 13 read with Section 151 of the CPC. In the order dated 06.06.2018, passed in the said Misc. Case No. 09/2016, arising out of FT Case No. 149/2012, the learned Tribunal had recorded that the petitioners had not registered their names before the FRRO, Nagaon pursuant to the opinion dated 10.12.2014. 5. Be that as it may, the learned Tribunal, conscious of the fact that the petitioners were given a chance to enroll themselves before the FRRO, Nagaon, without proving their case, held that if the order dated 10.12.2014 is set aside, the same would go against the Citizenship Act. Accordingly, the said Misc. Case Page No.# 4/7 No. 09/2016 was found to be devoid of any merit and the same was dismissed by order dated 06.06.2018 by the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal 3rd, Morigaon. 6. In the meanwhile, another proceeding was registered against the petitioners before the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal 3rd, Morigaon, being Case No. FT 208/2016, alleging them to be foreigners. The petitioners contested the said proceedings and the learned Tribunal, by an order dated 06.06.2018, passed in the said case, had declared the petitioners to be foreigners of the post-25.03.1971 stream. 7. Instead of filing two separate writ petitions to challenge the order dated 06.06.2018, passed in Misc. Case No. 09/2016, which arose out of FT Case No. 149/2012, a common challenge has been made to the said order dated 06.06.2018 referred to above, as well as the opinion dated 06.06.2018, passed by the said learned Tribunal in Case No. FT 208/2016, which is a separate and distinct proceeding from the proceedings of Misc. Case No. 09/2016, which arose out of FT Case No. 149/2012. 8. Be that as it may, insofar as the opinion rendered on 06.06.2018, passed in Case No. FT 208/2016 is concerned, on a conjoint reading of the said opinion dated 06.06.2018, and the order dated 06.06.2018, passed in Misc. Case No. 09/2016, it appears that the learned Tribunal had taken note of the fact that the petitioners were already declared as foreigners of the 1966-71 stream in FT Case No. 149/2012. 9. As the subsequent opinion dated 06.06.2018, passed in Case No. FT Page No.# 5/7 208/2016 is hit by the principles of res judicata, as decided by the Supreme Court of India in the case of Abdul Kuddus v. Union of India & Ors., (2019) 6 SCC 604, the said subsequent opinion is liable to be set aside and quashed. 10. The Court would have otherwise insisted on filing a separate challenge to the order dated 06.06.2018, passed in Misc. Case No. 09/2016. However, as almost 8 (eight) years have lapsed from the date of the said order dated 06.06.2018, with the consent from all the appearing learned counsel for the parties, the Court has proceeded to examine the matter on merit after hearing all sides. 11. The learned Tribunal, on examining the materials available on record and the order dated 06.06.2018, rejected the prayer for setting aside the impugned opinion dated 10.12.2014, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal (2nd), Morigaon in FT Case No. 149/2012. 12. The learned Tribunal had recorded in the said order that the only allegation made by the petitioners before the learned Tribunal was that their engaged counsel did not give the petitioners proper advice. The said ground did not find favour with the learned Tribunal. Moreover, the learned Tribunal had recorded that the petitioners did not disclose before the learned Tribunal that a case registered as Case No. FT 208/2016 was pending before the said learned Tribunal. 13. Accordingly, for the reasons assigned in the said order to the effect that petitioner no.2, in the course of the proceedings of FT Case No. 208/2016, had filed an additional written statement and corrected her name from Sahara Page No.# 6/7 Begum to Ramisha Khatun, took a view that the petitioners were trying to mislead the learned Tribunal by making misrepresentation and concealing the real facts to obtain a favourable order. 14. The learned Tribunal also took note of the fact that the petitioners were given a chance to enroll themselves before the FRRO, Nagaon, but they had not registered their names, and accordingly, the application being Misc. Case No. 09/2016 was found to be devoid of any merit. 15. In order to repel the finding by the learned Tribunal that the petitioners were trying to mislead the learned Tribunal, the petitioners have not produced any material to counter the same. It is also noticed that even the application which was registered as Misc. Case No. 09/2016 in connection with FT Case No. 149/2012 is also not enclosed with this writ petition. 16. Therefore, in this case, the petitioners have failed to show any reason as to why the petitioners did not contest FT Case No. 149/2012 despite filing a written statement. 17. Accordingly, the challenge to the order dated 06.06.2018, passed in Misc. Case No. 09/2016 fails and, accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed insofar as the challenge to the order dated 06.06.2018, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal No.3rd, Morigaon, in Misc. Case No. 09/2016 is concerned. 18. Be it stated that from the statements made in this writ petition and from the enclosures to this writ petition, there is no material to show that any challenge has been made against the opinion dated 10.12.2014, passed by the Page No.# 7/7 learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal (2nd), Morigaon in Case No. FT 149/2012. Therefore, the said opinion has attained finality. 19. Therefore, the effect of the opinion dated 10.12.2014, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal (2nd), Morigaon, in Case No. FT 149/2012 will follow. 20. The Registry shall return the Tribunal records along with a copy of this order to be made a part of the record of (i) Case No. FT 149/2012 of Foreigners Tribunal (2nd), Morigaon; and (ii) FT Case No. 208/2016 of Foreigners Tribunal No.3rd, Morigaon. 21. The learned Standing Counsel for the FT and Border matters shall also transmit another copy of this order to the Home & Political (B) Department to bring the order to the notice of the said authority. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant