Gauhati High Court
WP(C)/4620/2026 of MD ABDUL MALEK Vs THE UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS on 1 September 2026
GAHC010179632026 2026:GAU-AS:12647-DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/4620/2026 MD ABDUL MALEK SON OF - LATE HAMED ALI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-RANGRAI CHAPORI, P.O.- MOIRABARI, P.S.- MOIRABARI, DISTRICT- MORIGAON (ASSAM), PIN-
GAHC010179632026
2026:GAU-AS:12647-DB
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/4620/2026
MD ABDUL MALEK
SON OF- LATE HAMED ALI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-RANGRAI CHAPORI, P.O.- MOIRABARI, P.S.- MOIRABARI, DISTRICT- MORIGAON (ASSAM), PIN-
782126.
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA AND 6 ORS
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI-110001.
2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF
ASSAM
HOME DEPARTMENT
DISPUR
GUWAHATI- 781006.
3:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF MORIGAON
DISTRICT- MORIGAON (ASSAM). PIN-782105.
4:THE CHIEF ELECTION OFFICER OF THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF
INDIA
NIRVACHAN SADAN
ASHOKA ROAD
NEW DELHI
DELHI-110001.
5:THE OFFICE OF THE STATE COORDINATOR OF NATIONAL
REGISTRATION (NRC) ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY ITS COORDINATOR
1ST FLOOR ACHYUT PLAZA
BHANGAGARH
GUWAHATI
ASSAM- 781005.
6:THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE
MORIGAON
DISTRICT- MORIGAON (ASSAM). PIN-782105.
7:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (BORDER)
MORIGAON
DISTRICT- MORIGAON (ASSAM). PIN-782105
Advocate for the Petitioner : G UDDIN, MR A K AZAD,P ADHIKARI
Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., GA, ASSAM,SC, NRC,SC, ECI,SC, F.T
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Date : 02.09.2026 (K.R. Surana, J) Heard Mr. G. Uddin, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. L. Devi, learned CGC; Mr. Ms. A. Verma, learned standing counsel for the FT and Border matters; Ms. S. Katakey, learned standing counsel for the ECI; and Mr. P. Sarmah, learned Addl. Senior Govt. Advocate for the State respondent.
2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the ex parte impugned opinion dated 11.12.2020, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal- 5th, Morigaon, in M.F.T.(J).2020/1921; in Case No. F.T.(D) 1258/2017 (New Number); F.T.(D) 1049/2011 (New Old); and D/N Case No. 1844/98 dated 24.06.1998, by which the petitioner was declared as an illegal migrant.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the notice of the proceedings was hung near the Panchayat Office of the petitioner’s village, which is not in accordance with law. It is further submitted that as per the notice issued by the learned Tribunal and the impugned opinion, the name of the father of the petitioner is shown as Abdul Hamed, whereas the actual name of the father of the petitioner is Hamed Ali.
4. The learned standing Counsel for Border and FT matters has opposed the challenge to the said ex parte opinion on the ground of inordinate delay in assailing the opinion and further on the ground that the address of the petitioner as given in the notice and the impugned opinion is the same as the address given in the cause title of this application. Accordingly, it is submitted that the petitioner had been evading service.
5. Be that as it may, as service of notice of the proceedings by hanging the same near the Panchayat Office, as was done in the present case, is not the procedure prescribed under the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964, the impugned opinion dated 11.12.2020 stands vitiated.
6. Accordingly, the Court is inclined to set aside the impugned opinion dated 11.12.2020, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners’ Tribunal- 5th, Morigaon, in M.F.T.(J).2020/1921; Case No. F.T.(D) 1258/2017 (New Number); F.T.(D) 1049/2011 (Old Number); and D/N Case No. 1844/98 dated 24.06.1998. Hence, the matter is remanded back to the learned Tribunal for rendering a fresh opinion.
7. It is provided that the petitioner, namely, Md. Abdul Malek, who is duly represented by his learned counsel, shall appear before the learned Tribunal on or before 25.09.2026 and, on the date of appearance, shall also file his written statement and the documents on which he intends to rely upon. Thereafter, the learned Tribunal shall afford reasonable time to the petitioner to produce or to take steps to summon witnesses and to take steps for calling for the documents, if so advised.
8. It is made clear that if the petitioner fails to appear within the outer time limit indicated above, it would be open to the learned Tribunal to treat the petitioner as absent on call and pass a fresh opinion in accordance with law.
9. The learned Tribunal shall make an endeavour to dispose of the proceedings within the time permitted under paragraph 17(14) of the Immigration and Foreigners Order, 2025.
10. The writ petition is allowed at the motion stage without issuance of notice to the respondents.
11. The learned standing counsel for Border and FT matters shall transmit a downloaded copy of this order to the concerned authorities.
JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant