Asir Ali @ Asir Uddin vs The Union Of India And Ors

Page No.# 1/7
GAHC010102112026

2026:GAU-AS:16240-DB
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2845/2026
ASIR ALI @ ASIR UDDIN
S/O-LATE NUR ALI,
R/O-SALMARA, P.O-SALMARA, P.S.-CHAPARMUKH, DIST-NAGAON,
ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA,
DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI-110001
2:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA
NIRVACHAN SADAN
ASHOKA ROAD
NEW DELHI-11001.
3:THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.
OF ASSAM
DEPARTMENT OF HOME
DISPUR
GUWAHATI-06.
4:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER
GOLAGHAT
P.O. P.S-GOLAGHAT
ASSAM.
5:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B)
GOLAGHAT
GOLAGHAT
ASSAM.

Page No.# 2/7
6:THE STATE CO ORDINATOR
NRC
HOUSEFED COMPLEX
BANPHOOL NAGAR
GUWAHATI-06.
7:MD. NAZRUL ISLAM CHOUDHURY
S/O-HUSSAIN AHMED CHOUDHURY

R/O-BASKANDI
P.O-BASKANDI
P.S.-SILCHAR
DIST-CACHAR
ASSAM. PIN-788101
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND

For the petitioner : Mr. N. Hoque, Advocate.
For respondents : Mr. N. Upadhyay, CGC.
: Ms. A. Verma, SC, FT & Border.
: Mr. P. Sarmah, Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate.
: Ms. S. Katakey, SC, ECI.
Date on which judgment is reserved : 06.08.2026
Date of pronouncement of judgment : 05.11.2026
Whether the pronouncement is of
the operative part of the judgment? : No
Whether the full judgment has been
Pronounced? : Yes


JUDGMENT AND ORDER
(CAV)
(K.R. Surana, J.)
Heard Mr. N. Hoque, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard
Ms. A. Verma, learned standing counsel for FT and Border matters; Ms. S.

Page No.# 3/7
Katakey, learned standing counsel for ECI; Mr. N. Upadhyay, learned CGC for the
Union of India; and Mr. P. Sarmah, learned Addl. Senior Government Advocate
for the State.
2) By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India, the petitioner, namely, Asir Ali @ Asir Uddin, has assailed the ex parte
opinion dated 04.07.2022, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal,
Jorhat, in Case No. F.T.G. 1891/2011, corresponding to S.P.’s Enquiry No.
22/2011, whereby he was declared to be a foreigner of post-25.03.1971 stream.
3) Assailing the impugned ex parte opinion, the learned counsel
for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is an illiterate person and his
wife has studied only up to Class-III. It has been submitted that neither the
petitioner nor his wife was ever served with any notice issued by the learned
Tribunal. The petitioner has specifically disputed the signatures appearing in the
acknowledgement of receipt of notice in the Tribunal's record and has asserted
that the same are neither his signatures nor those of his wife. It has been
further submitted that pursuant to the said ex parte opinion, the petitioner was
arrested on 25.05.2025, at about 3:00 AM by the Border Police, Golaghat, and is
presently lodged at the Transit Camp/Holding Centre at Matia, Goalpara. The
learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has a good
defence to establish that he is not a foreigner. Hence, he has prayed for one
opportunity to the petitioner to contest the proceeding and prove his defence.
In support of his submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner has relied
upon the case of Savitri Dey @ Swasthi Dey v. Union of India & Ors., 2026 INSC
694: 2026 Supreme (SC) 786: 2026(4) GLT (SC) 1.
4) Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel for the FT and Border
matters has submitted in support of the impugned opinion. It has been

Page No.# 4/7
submitted that upon perusal of the records of the learned Tribunal, it would
appear that the notice was personally served on the petitioner on 12.05.2022
and the petitioner had acknowledged receipt thereof by affixing his signature. It
has been further submitted that the service report was also identified by the
Gaonburah of Village Bidyapur, namely, Nazrul Islam Choudhury. Accordingly,
the notice was duly served upon the petitioner in terms of Paragraph 3(5)(a) of
the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964. It has also been submitted that despite
being afforded several opportunities to appear before the learned Tribunal and
file his written statement, the petitioner had failed to do so, as a result of which
the learned Tribunal had proceeded ex parte and delivered its opinion in
accordance with law. It has been contended that the impugned opinion does not
warrant any interference.
5) Considered the submissions and perused the records of the
learned Tribunal, which were called for and received.
6) On perusal of the records of the learned Tribunal, it appears
that the notice was issued on 13.05.2022, fixing 26.05.2022 for service report
and appearance. The order sheet reflects that the notice was served on
12.05.2022 and the service report was placed before the learned Tribunal on
26.05.2022. Upon examination of the service report, it appears that the notice
was personally received by the petitioner, who is stated to have affixed his
signature towards acknowledgement of receipt thereof. The service report was
also identified by the Gaonburah of Village Bidyapur, namely, Nazrul Islam
Choudhury. Thus, the records of the learned Tribunal reflect that the notice was
served upon the petitioner in the manner prescribed under Paragraph 3(5)(a) of
the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964.
7) However, the petitioner has specifically disputed the signature

Page No.# 5/7
appearing on the acknowledgement of receipt of notice and has asserted that
the same is not his signature. The petitioner has also taken the stand that he is
an illiterate person and that his wife has studied only up to Class-III, and that
neither of them had received any notice from the learned Tribunal.
8) A perusal of the order sheets further reveals that despite the
alleged service of notice, the petitioner remained absent before the learned
Tribunal on 26.05.2022, 02.06.2022, 08.06.2022, 16.06.2022 and 23.06.2022,
on which dates the matter was fixed for service report, appearance and filing of
written statement. Consequently, the learned Tribunal proceeded ex parte
against the petitioner and delivered its opinion on 04.07.2022, passed
purportedly in accordance with Paragraphs 3(8) and 3(14) of the Foreigners
(Tribunals) Order, 1964.
9) Under the circumstances, taking into consideration the specific
stand taken by the petitioner disputing the genuineness of the signature
appearing on the acknowledgement of receipt of notice, as well as his assertion
regarding his inability to read and understand the notice, the Court is of the
considered opinion that in the interest of justice, the petitioner deserves one
opportunity to contest the proceeding and establish his defence before the
learned Tribunal.
10) Resultantly, without expressing any opinion on the correctness or
otherwise of the service of notice reflected in the records of the learned
Tribunal, or finding any fault in the impugned opinion, but solely on the
consideration that the petitioner has raised a specific dispute regarding the
genuineness of the signature appearing on the acknowledgement of receipt of
notice and has prayed for an opportunity to establish his defence, the impugned
ex parte opinion dated 04.07.2022, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners’

Page No.# 6/7
Tribunal, Jorhat, in Case No. F.T.G. 1891/2011, corresponding to S.P.’s Enquiry
No. 22/2011, whereby the petitioner was declared to be a foreigner of post-
25.03.1971 stream, is set aside at the motion stage, without issuing notice upon
the respondents.
11) The aforesaid proceeding is restored back to the file of the
learned Foreigners’ Tribunal, Jorhat.
12) The family members of the petitioner shall approach the Office
of the Superintendent of Police (Border), Golaghat, and furnish bail of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) with one surety of like amount to the
satisfaction of the Superintendent of Police (Border), Golaghat, and shall take
steps to have the petitioner, namely, Asir Ali @ Asir Uddin, released from the
Transit Camp/Holding Centre at Matia, Goalpara, within 3 (three) days from the
date of acceptance of the bail bond.
13) The petitioner, who is duly represented by his learned counsel, is
directed to appear before the said learned Tribunal on or before the outer time
limit of 15.12.2026, without requirement of any fresh notice to be served on him
for appearance.
14) The petitioner is also directed that on the date of his
appearance, he shall produce the certified copy of this order before the learned
Tribunal and shall also file his written statement of defence and produce all the
documents on which he intends to rely upon. Thereafter, the learned Tribunal
shall give opportunity to the petitioner to take steps for securing the presence of
witnesses and for production of documents, if so advised.
15) It is clarified that in the event the petitioner fails to appear and
file his written statement within the time allowed, it would be permissible for the

Page No.# 7/7
learned Tribunal to treat the petitioner to have defaulted in appearing and/or to
take steps and pass a fresh opinion in accordance with law. The learned Tribunal
shall take into consideration the mandate of Paragraph 3(14) of the Foreigners
(Tribunals) Order, 1964 and Paragraph 17(14) of the Immigration and Foreigners
Order, 2025 and, as far as practicable, make an attempt to dispose of the
reference within a period of 60 (sixty) days from the date of appearance of the
petitioner.
16) Thus, the writ petition is conditionally allowed on terms as
indicated above by remanding the matter back to the learned Tribunal.
17) The learned Standing Counsel for Home Department and FT
matters shall transmit a downloaded copy of this order to the concerned
respondent authorities for information.
18) The Registry shall return the learned Tribunal's record, together
with a copy of this order, to be made a part of the record by the said learned
Tribunal for future reference.
19) Under the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs.

JUDGE JUDGE
Munna Kumar
Digitally signed by Munna Kumar
Date: 2026.11.05 11:43:56 +05'30'
Comparing Assistant Private Secretary