Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010292932019 2026:GAU-AS:9278 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/9017/2019 REKHA RANI SARKAR W/O GANESH SARKAR, A R/O- VILL. SILAPATHAR FOREST GATE, P.S. SILAPATHAR, DIST- DHEMAJI, ASSAM. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND 8 ORS. REP. BY THE SECY., MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI. 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECY MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS DISPUR ASSAM. 3:THE ELECTORAL REGISTRATION OFFICER ASSAM DISPUR GHY. ASSAM. 4:STATE CO-ORDINATOR NATIONAL REGISTRATION OF CITIZEN (NRC) BHANGARH GUWAHATI- 781005. 5:THE DY. COMMISSIONER DHEMAJI ASSAM. 6:THE SUPDT. OF POLICE (B) Page No.# 2/5 DHEMAJI ASSAM. 7:THE ELECTORAL REGISTRATION OFFICER DHEMAJI 8:THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE SILAPATHAR POLICE STATION DHEMAJI ASSAM. 9:THE FOREIGNERS TRIBUNAL NO. 2 DHEMAJI AT SILAPATHAR ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. H A SARKAR, Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I., SC, ECI,SC, F.T,SC, NRC BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 25.06.2026 (K.R. Surana, J) None appears for the petitioner on call. However, Mr. S.S. Roy, learned CGC; Ms. A. Verma, learned standing counsel for the FT and Border matters; Mr. N. Kalita, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. A.I. Ali, learned standing counsel for the ECI; and Mr. P. Sarmah, learned Additional Senior Govt. Advocate for the State respondent are present. 2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, namely, Smt. Rekha Rani Sarkar has assailed the impugned Page No.# 3/5 opinion dated 11.06.2019, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal No.2, Dhemaji, in F.T.(F) Case No. 103/2017, arising out of Dist IM(D)T Case No. 31/02 (Silapathar P.S. No. 11/02), by which the petitioner was declared as an illegal migrant of post 25.03.1971 stream. 3. In view of the order which is proposed to be passed, there is no requirement of burdening this order with pleadings and evidence on record. 4. It would suffice to mention that in the proceedings, the petitioner had exhibited a Citizenship Registration Certificate of one Sukumari Das as Ext.1, projecting her to be the grandmother of the petitioner. Based on the said Citizenship Registration Certificate, the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal, Dhemaji, by an opinion dated 10.06.2014, passed in Case No. FT/DMJ/705/2007, arising out of Dist. IM(D)T Case No. 81/98, referred to the said Certificate of Registration of Sukumari Das, wife of Mohindra Kr. Das (Ext.3 in that proceeding), and declared the proceedee therein, namely, Rekha Sarkar, to be a citizen of India by birth and not a foreigner. 5. The petitioner projects herself to be the daughter of Anath Das and to show her link with her projected father, she has exhibited a certificate by All Assam Other Backward Classes Association, issued on 29.06.2005 and the Voter Identity Card of Anath Das, showing father’s name as Mohindra. However, the learned Tribunal, though referred to Ext.1 to Ext.7 exhibited by the petitioner, there was no discussion on the Citizenship Registration Certificate (Ext.1), and the opinion passed in FT Case No. 705/2007 (Ext.3). 6. Therefore, in view of the fact that if a Citizenship Registration Page No.# 4/5 Certificate is produced, the person concerned in whose name the Citizenship Registration Certificate is issued is a citizen of India under Section 5(1)(a) and 5(1)(d) of the Citizenship Act. Moreover, if the opinion in FT Case No. 705/2007 (Ext.3) is in respect of the petitioner, the principle of res judicata would apply. 7. Accordingly, the Court has no hesitation to set aside the impugned opinion dated 11.06.2019, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal No.2, Dhemaji, in F.T.(F) Case No. 103/2017, thereby, remanding the matter back to the said learned Tribunal to pass a fresh opinion in accordance with law. 8. In the impugned opinion, it has been mentioned that Ext.7 was of a photocopy. Accordingly, the petitioner would be entitled to an opportunity to produce the original of Ext.7 for inspection of the said learned Tribunal. 9. On receipt of the records, the learned Tribunal shall issue notice to the respondent for appearance fixing a date for appearance. 10. As the petitioner is unrepresented today, the Court is inclined to provide that the police personnel effecting service of notice shall make an endeavour to serve notice on the petitioner in accordance with law. 11. The Registry shall send back the records of the Tribunal along with a copy of the order to be made a part of the record. 12. The learned standing counsel for the FT and Border matters shall transmit a downloaded copy of the order to the Superintendent of Police (Border), Dhemaji to bring the order to the notice of the said authority. 13. This writ petition stands allowed on terms as indicated above by setting Page No.# 5/5 aside the impugned opinion and by remanding the matter back to the learned Tribunal for a fresh opinion. 14. Writ petition stands allowed to the extent as indicated above. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant