Page No.# 1/7 vs The Union Of India And 5 Ors
2025 Latest Caselaw 8035 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Page No.# 1/7 vs The Union Of India And 5 Ors on 27 October, 2025

Author: K.R. Surana

Bench: Kalyan Rai Surana

                                                                      Page No.# 1/7

GAHC010154992025




                                                           2025:GAU-AS:14353-DB

                      THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                        Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/2349/2025

         ALAL UDDIN
         S/O LT. ISOB ALI, R/O VILL. KHALIHAMARI, P.O. KHALIHAMARI, P.O.
         AMONI, P.S. SAMAGURI, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM FOR AND ON BEHALF OF
         ANOWARA KHATUN (BEGUM), D/O LT. ISOB ALI, W/O KASEM ALI, R/O
         LENGTEN, P.O. SHORIOBARI, P.S. SAMAGURI, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM.



         VERSUS

         THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS
         REPRESENTED BY THE SECY. OF THE GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF
         HOME AFFAIRS, SHASTRI BHAWAN, TILAK MARG, NEW DELHI.

         2:THE STATE OF ASSAM
          REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.
         OF ASSAM
          HOME DEPARTMENT
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI-781006

         3:THE ELECTION COMMISSIONER
          ELECTION DEPARTMENT
          4TH FLOOR
          BLOCK-C
         ASSAM SECRETARIAT
          DISPUR
          GUWAHATI-781006

         4:THE DISTRICT ELECTION OFFICER

          NAGAON
          DISTRICT- NAGAON
          ASSAM
                                                                      Page No.# 2/7


            5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B)

            NAGAON
            DISTRICT- NAGAON
            ASSAM
            PIN 782001.

            6:THE FOREIGNERS TRIBUNAL NO 2
             NAGAON
             DISTRICT- NAGAON
            ASSAM
             PIN- 782001

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N H MAZARBHUIYAN, N BRAHMA,MR R I BHUYAN,MR.
M H SAIKIA,MS. L WAJEEDA

Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I.,




                                  BEFORE
                 HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA
               HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND

                                           ORDER

Date : 27.10.2025 (K.R. Surana, J)

Heard Ms. L. Wajeeda, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. K. Phukan, learned CGC; Ms. S. Katakey, learned standing counsel for the ECI; Mr. G. Sharma, learned standing counsel for the FT matters and NRC; and Mr. P. Sarma, learned Additional Senior Govt. Advocate for respondent.

2. The learned counsel for the applicant had prayed for an adjournment. However, in view projection made in this interlocutory application and the prayer made, the prayer for adjournment is disallowed and the matter has been taken up as the respondents nos. 1 to 5 are represented.

Page No.# 3/7

3. The respondent no. 6 in this interlocutory application is the Foreigners Tribunal No. 2, Nagaon, the said respondent, being a Tribunal is not a necessary or a proper party in this interlocutory application. Accordingly, the name of respondent no. 6 is struck off.

4. This interlocutory application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, seeking condonation of delay of 4446 (four thousand four hundred forty six) days beyond the period of limitation in filing the connected intra-court appeal against judgment and order dated 11.04.2013, passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 256/2013.

5. The case of the applicant is that he is the brother of Anowara Begum, daughter of Late Isob Ali of Vill-Khalihamari under P.O-Amoni, P.S- Samaguri in the district of Nagaon. It is further projected despite due service of notice of the proceedings in F.T. Case No. 640/07, issued by the learned

Member, Foreigners Tribunal (2nd), Nagaon, the proceedee i.e., sister of the applicant had failed to contest the proceedings. Accordingly, by ex parte opinion dated 19.07.2008, the said proceedee was declared as a foreigner entering from Bangladesh on or after 25.03.1971, and accordingly, the proceedings was disposed of as ex parte.

6. The records appended to the intra-court appeal reveals that the said ex parte opinion dated 19.07.2008 was assailed by the concerned proceedee before this Court by filing WP(C) 6497/2015. However, by an order dated 06.11.2015, the said writ petition was dismissed without interfering with the ex parte opinion rendered by the learned Tribunal. The said order dated 06.11.2015, passed in WP(C) 6497/2015, was assailed by the proceedee by filing W.A. No. 219/2016, and the Division Bench of this Court, by an order Page No.# 4/7

dated 21.06.2016, was pleased to dismiss the writ appeal by holding that there was no error or infirmity in the view taken by the learned Single Judge.

7. The present intra-court appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 11.04.2013, passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C)256/2013- Md. Bahaluddin Sheikh Vs. Union of India and Ors., whereby the proceedings initiated before the Foreigners Tribunal, Goalpara in FT Case No. 5368/G/12, was assailed. The present proceedee, namely, Anowara Begum is not a party in the said writ petition. As per the brief facts of the said writ petition, the proceedings of the said FT Case No. 5368/G/12, was questioned on the ground pendency of Title Suit No. 95/2012, by which the said writ petitioner had prayed for declaration that he is an Indian Citizen. By a very detailed and reasoned order the ouster of jurisdiction of Civil Court in view of the exclusive jurisdiction of the Foreigners Tribunals was accepted and the Civil Suit filed by the said writ petitioner was rejected as being not maintainable.

8. Accordingly, as the present applicant or his projected sister, Anowara Begum has no connection with WP(C) 256/2013, the present applicant or the proceedee i.e., his sister namely Anowara Begum would not have right to assail the judgment and order passed in the said writ petition as the petitioner and his projected sister are a stranger to the proceedings of WP(C) 256/2013, and they cannot said to be in any way aggrieved by the said judgment and order.

9. In the present case in hand, the proceedee namely, Anowara Begum, claimed to be the sister of the present applicant, having assailed the ex parte opinion before the learned Single Judge as well as in the intra-court Page No.# 5/7

appeal, as referred to above, would not have the right to assail the opinion of the learned Tribunal by filing a Civil Suit. Under such projection the present interlocutory application as well as the connected and un-numbered writ appeal filed vide filing No. 8869/2025, is wholly misconceived and frivolous. The filing of the connected writ appeal is an ingenious way to stall the effect of the said ex parte opinion dated 19.07.2008.

10. Though it is projected in this interlocutory application that the sister of the petitioner had been taken into custody on 25.05.2025, yet the applicant would have no locus standi to file the connected writ appeal. The applicant would have no locus standi to file a connected writ appeal in his own name as he cannot be said to be aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order dated 11.04.2013, passed in WP(C) 256/2013. Notwithstanding that the projected sister of the petitioner has been taken into custody, he would not have the power or authority to file this interlocutory application and the connected writ appeal in a representative capacity.

11. Accordingly, as the application is found to no locus standi to assail the judgment and order passed in WP(C) 256/2013, the explanation of the applicant for condonation delay is not sustainable as the application is a party to the proceedings.

12. Thus, no case is made out for interference for condonation of the long delay of 4446 days beyond the period of limitation as the opinion of the learned Foreigners Tribunal has attained finality pursuant to dismissal of WP(C) 6497/2015 as well as the dismissal of intra-court appeal, being WA No. 219/2016. Accordingly, it would impermissible to permit the applicant to file a Civil Suit to assail the opinion of the Foreigners Tribunal after the same has Page No.# 6/7

attained finality in the manner as indicated above.

13. The dismissal of WP(C) 6497/2015 and WA 219/2016, would mean that the opinion dated 19.07.2008, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners

Tribunal, 2nd, Nagaon in F.T. Case No. 640/07 would be enforceable proprio vigore.

14. It may also be mentioned that there is no statement made in this interlocutory application as to whether the applicant or the proceedee took any steps to assail the judgment and order dated 21.06.2016, passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No. 219/2016. Moreover, on a query of the Court, the learned counsel for the applicant could not inform as to whether any appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order passed in WA 219/2016. Accordingly, the order and judgment of the Division Bench of this Court cannot not be allowed to be negated by entertaining the connected intra-court appeal.

15. Accordingly, as the explanation for delay is not found justifiable, this interlocutory application for condoning delay of 4446 days, along with the connected un-numbered writ appeal vide filing No. WA/8869/2025 stands dismissed.

16. As the conduct of the learned counsel is otherwise found satisfactory, the Court has refrained from imposing exemplary cost.

17. The Registry as well as the learned standing counsel for FT and Border matters shall send a downloaded copy of this order to the concerned Foreigners Tribunal and to Home and Political (B) Department respectively through their e-mail addresses as to make it a part of record of F.T. Case No. Page No.# 7/7

640/2007 of Foreigners Tribunal (2nd), Nagaon.

JUDGE JUDGE

Comparing Assistant