1. The petitioner who has been declared to be a Foreigner (illegal Bangladeshi migrant) by the Foreigners Tribunal-III, Barpeta (Assam) in F.T Case No.145(III)/2009 (Ref. IMDT Case No.1856/2001) (State of Assam vs Ismail Ali) has filed the instant writ petition challenging the said order.

2. According to the petitioner, he is a citizen of India. Referring to the voter list of 1965 and 1970, it is the case of the petitioner that the names of his parents appeared in the said two voter lists. He has also referred to the voter list of 1985 to claim that the name of his wife was recorded therein. The petitioner has also referred to the Annexure-6 school certificate dated 06.11.2013 to show that he was a student of Fingua Borhola M.E School and read up to Class-IV. As per the said certificate, he was born on 21.01.1961 and left the school on 31.03.1971 while in Class-IV. It will be pertinent to mention herein that the petitioner never contended before the Tribunal that he had studied in any school. The school certificate has been obtained after the impugned judgment was delivered on 30.09.2013.

3. Further case of the petitioner in the writ petition is that his name had appeared in the voter lists of 1997 and 2010 and that of his wife in the voter list of 2014. The petitioner has also referred to the Annexure-10 certificate of the Gaon Burah certifying that his name appeared in the voter list of 2011 and that he is a resident of the particular locality.

4. According to the petitioner, in view of the above documents, he is required to be declared as Indian National and accordingly the impugned judgment of the Tribunal declaring him to be an illegal migrant who entered into Assam after the cut off date i.e. 25.03.1971 is liable to be interfered with.

5. As to what are the documents the petitioner has referred to in the writ petition has been noted above. On receipt of notice from the Tribunal, the petitioner appeared and filed his written statement stating therein that he is an Indian citizen by birth and permanent resident of village Fingua, Mouza Paka in the district of Barpeta (Assam). In the written statement, the petitioner had contended that the name of his father appeared in the voter list of 1966 pertaining to village Fingua. He also stated that his father’s name also appeared in the voter list of 1965 pertaining to village Kayakuchi Pam in the district of Barpeta and that his name also appeared in the voter list of 1997.

6. The written statement was filed on 19.03.2010. On the basis of such statements in the written statement with the production of the Ext.A photocopy of the voter list of 1965 containing the name of his purported father Gopal Ali; Ext.B Photocopy of the voter list of 1970 containing the name of his said father; Ext.C photocopy of the voter list of 1997 purportedly containing the name of his father; Ext.D land document of 1981 containing the name of his purported father; Ext.E certificate of the Gaon Burah certifying that the petitioner is a resident of the particular locality; Ext.F photocopy of the voter list of 1985 containing the name of the petitioner and photocopy of 1997 voter list also containing the name of the petitioner, the petitioner wanted to prove his Indian citizenship that too by birth.

7. I have heard Mr. J. Abedin, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M. Bhagabati, learned CGC so also Ms. B. Dutta, learned State Counsel. I have also considered the entire materials on record including the records received from the Tribunal. Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner referring to the documents annexed to the writ petition submits that the tribunal took an erroneous view of the matter so as to answer the reference against the petitioner and in favour of the State. Referring to the documents annexed to the writ petition and also the documents produced before the Tribunal, he submits that on the basis of the said documents, the Tribunal ought to have declared the petitioner t