Muslema Khatun @ Moslema Khatun v. The Union of India and 6 Ors

ORDER

22.11.2024 (K.R. Surana, J.) Heard Mr. M. U. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. A. Verma, learned Standing Counsel, FT and Home Department for the respondent Nos. 2, 5 and 7; Mr. H. Kuli, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. A. I. Ali, learned Standing Counsel, Election Commission of India, for the respondent No.3 and Mr. P. Sarmah, learned Additional government advocate appearing for the respondent No.6.

¶2There is no representation for the respondent Nos. 1 and 4.

¶3By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the ex parte order dated 30.08.2024, passed by the learned Member, Foreigner's Tribunal, South Salmara Mankachar in FT Case No. 318/2018, arising out of IM (D) T Case No. Page No.# 3/5 5523/D/1998.

¶4The learned counsel for the petitioner projects that initially due to petitioner's illness, she could not file a written statement and the matter was adjourned on 09.11.2023, and fixing the next of date of proceeding on

21.12.2023. It is submitted that on 08.02.2024, 07.03.2024 and

08.04.2024, without informing the petitioner her counsel took adjournment. Thereafter, on 18.05.2024, the learned counsel engaged by the petitioner had prayed for withdrawal of vakalatnama. However, the learned Tribunal had directed her said counsel to serve a notice to the petitioner and inform her about the next date of 17.08.2024, which was not done and therefore, the matter was fixed for ex parte hearing on 25.07.2024.

¶5It is projected that the learned counsel for the petitioner had issued a notice to the petitioner on 25.07.2024. However, on the same day, i.e.,

25.07.2024, the petitioner appeared before the learned Tribunal through the same learned counsel with a prayer to vacate the order dated

18.07.2024, to proceed ex parte against the petitioner and prayed for acceptance of her written statement. However, the said prayer was rejected. Thereafter, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing WP(C) 4242/24, and the matter was called on 02.09.2024. However, by that time, the ex parte opinion was pronounced for which the said writ petition was dismissed on withdrawal with liberty to the petitioner to assail the final opinion. Accordingly, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶6The learned Counsel for the FT and Home Department has opposed the prayer for interference with the ex parte opinion dated 30.08.2024, on the ground that the learned Tribunal is required to dispose of the references made before it in a time bound manner. Therefore, in non-Page No.# 4/5 appearance as well as non-participation of the petitioner in the proceedings were at her own risk and therefore, this is a case where there is no evidence at all for which the order of the Tribunal does not warrant any interference.

¶7We take note of the fact that as per order dated 18.05.2024, there was a direction to the learned counsel for the petitioner to serve her a notice about the next date of the matter being fixed on 18.07.2024. On

18.07.2024, the learned Tribunal has recorded that the engaged counsel was absent without steps. The petitioner has annexed copy of the notice dated 24.07.2024, issued by her counsel which is annexure-8 of the writ petition. Therefore, in this case, the order to proceed ex parte against the petitioner was passed on 25.07.2024. However, on the same date, the petitioner had appeared through the same learned counsel and prayed for setting aside the ex parte opinion which was rejected on the ground that the petitioner is bringing her counsel and thereby misleading the Tribunal and accordingly, the said petition was rejected.

¶8We also take notice of the fact that against the order to proceed ex parte and the rejection of her petition to participate in the proceedings by order dated 25.07.2024, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing this writ petition. By order dated 02.09.2024, this Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw the said writ petition with liberty to assail the opinion rendered in the proceedings of FT. Case No. 318/2018.

¶9Although there is a clear default of the petitioner to take steps on at least 4 dates, but the explanation tendered by the petitioner for non-taking of steps appears to be plausible and therefore, the Court is inclined to interfere with the orders dated 18.07.2024 and 25.07.2024, passed by the Page No.# 5/5 learned Member, Foreigner's Tribunal, South Salmara Mankachar in F.T. Case No. 318/2018, as well as the ex parte opinion dated 30.08.2024, passed by the said learned Tribunal in the said proceeding.

¶10As citizenship is a important right, the petitioner is entitled to get one last opportunity of contesting the reference.

¶11Resultantly, the proceedings of FT. Case No.318/2018 is restored back to the file of the Foreigner's Tribunal, South Salmara Mankachar.

¶12The petitioner shall physically appear and produce a certified copy of this order before the said learned Tribunal within 04.12.2024.

¶13On appearance of the petitioner, the learned Tribunal shall grant one reasonable opportunity to petitioner to file written statement along with all relevant documents. Thereafter, the learned Tribunal shall give a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to file her evidence and dispose of the matter in accordance with law.

¶14Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed and disposed of at the motion stage without issuance of notice upon the respondents.

JUDGE JUDGE

Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/5 GAHC010202222024 ooooooo undefined ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oWP(C)/5119/2024o MUSLEMAoKHATUNo@oMOSLEMAoKHATUNo D/O-oLATEoMOSADERoALIo@oMOSADARoALI,oW/O-oABDULLAHoSHEIKH,o R/O-oVILL.-oKAKRIPARAoPT-IIo(PUBERGAON),P.O.oKAKRIPARA,oP.S.o MANKACHAR,oDIST.oSOUTHoSALMARAoMANKACHAR,oASSAM VERSUSo THEoUNIONoOFoINDIAoANDo6oORS.o TOoBEoREPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVERNMENToOFo INDIA,oDEPARTMENToOFoHOMEoAFFAIRS,oNEWoDELHI. 2:THEoSTATEoOFoASSAM oTOoBEoREPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVERNMENToOFo ASSAM oDEPARTMENToOFoHOME oDISPUR oGHY-06. 3:THEoELECTIONoCOMMISSIONoOFoINDIA oTOoBEoREPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoCHIEFoELECTIONoCOMMISSIONERoOFo INDIA oNIRVACHANoASHOKAoROAD oNEWoDELHI. 4:THEoNATIONALoREGISTRARoOFoCITIZEN oTOoBEoREPRESENTEDoBYoTHEoSTATEoCO-ORDINATORo ASYUToPLAZA oBHANGAGARH oKAMRUP(M) oASSAM 5:THEoSUPERINTENDENToOFoPOLICEo(B) Page No.# 2/5 SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR DIST. SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM 6:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER SOUTH SALMARA MANKACHAR ASSAM 7:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE DHUBRI DIST. DHUBRI ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A R BHUYAN, MR N Z CHOUDHURY,MR S ABDULLAH Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., SC, ECI,SC, F.T,GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY