This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 3.11.2015 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P(C) No. 1025/2010 dismissing the petition preferred by the appellant for setting aside the judgment and order dated 22.10.2009 passed by the learned Member, Foreigner's Tribunal, Goalpara, Assam in F.T. Case No. 58/G/06/2007 (Reference ERO's Case No. 79-37/36) whereby the appellant has been declared as illegal migrant of post 1971 stream.

2. We have heard Mr. MU Mahmud, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Also heard Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Asstt. Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondent No.1, Union of India and Mr. M. Bhagawati, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

3. The case of the appellant is that though she is a bona fide Indian citizen having sufficient documents in favour of her citizenship, yet a case was registered against the appellant in the Foreigner's Tribunal, Goalpara being F.T. Case No. 58/G/06/2007 (Reference ERO's Case No. 79-37/36). After receiving notice, the appellant appeared before the learned Tribunal and submitted her written statement, but the learned Advocate failed to instruct her to adduce any evidence, which may be due to lack of communication between them. On last two occasions, i.e. on 16.9.2009 and 22.10.2009, her engaged Advocate did not take any steps. As such, on 22.10.2009, the learned Foreigner's Tribunal declared the appellant as illegal migrant of post 1971 stream vide ex-parte order dated 22.10.2009. On being aggrieved by the said ex-parte order, the appellant filed a writ petition before the High Court being W.P.(C)No. 1025/2010 challenging the order dated 22.10.2009 passed by the learned Tribunal, which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide the impugned judgment and order dated 3.11.2015. As the appellant did not find any favourable order from the Court of the learned Single Judge and the order of the Tribunal was not interfered with by the learned Single Judge, hence present appeal has been preferred with a prayer to set aside and quash the order dated 3.11.2015 passed in W.P(C) No. 1025/2010. Alternatively, the appellant prayed for setting aside of the orders of the learned Tribunal, as mentioned above.

4. After going through the matters on record, we have found that the appellant has raised certain grievances alleging the infirmities in the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge, that the learned Single Judge has failed to appreciate the documents annexed. It is contended that the learned Single Judge failed to appreciate the fact that the appellant is the daughter of Late Songser Ali, whose name was incorporated in the voter list of 1966 so filed in the case. Further, the learned Single Judge also failed to appreciate the fact that the engaged Advocate of the appellant failed to instruct her to adduce evidence and later on abstained himself from appearing and taking steps, as a result of which the ex-parte order was passed by the learned Tribunal. On the next, it is contended that the learned Single Judge failed to appreciate the documents annexed to the written statement, which were produced before the learned Tribunal to prove her 'Indian Nationality'. According to the appellant, the learned Single Judge did not consider the case of the appellant and the writ petition was dismissed in a routine manner by the impugned judgment and order dated 3.11.2015.

5. For better appreciation of the matter, the relevant portions of the observations of the learned Single Judge are re-produced here-in-below:

"6. That the petitioner begs to state that beside having all these favourable documents to prove Indian Nationality of the petitioner, the Superintendent of Police, Goalpara brought an allegation against her stating that the petitioner is a Foreign National. In this regard, the Foreigners Tribunal, Goalpara issued a notice dated 29.3.2005 to the petitioner stating to appear before the Ld. Tribunal on