Ujjal Bhuyan, J.

1. Heard Mr. HRA Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. A. Matin, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. DK Saikia, learned Addl. Advocate General, Assam. This appeal is directed against the order dated 18.08.2015, passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition, being WP(C) No. 5553/2014 filed by the appellants as the writ petitioners assailing the legality and validity of the order dated 12.02.2014, passed by the Foreigners' Tribunal, (2nd), Morigaon in Case No. FT (C) 129/2009 declaring the appellants as illegal migrants who had entered into India (Assam) from Bangladesh after 25.03.1971.

2. From the materials placed on record, it is seen that initially the reference was made against the appellants under the Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act, 1983, suspecting the appellants to be illegal migrants as defined under the said Act. The reference was registered as IMDT Case No. 762/2001 before the Tribunal constituted under the said Act.

3. After the aforesaid Act was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Sarbananda Sonowal Vs. Union of India, reported in (2005) 5 SCC 665, the reference was re-registered under the Foreigners' Act, 1946 as Case No. FT(C) 129/2009 and was assigned to the Foreigners' Tribunal (2nd), Morigaon (Tribunal) for opinion.

4. Notice issued by the Tribunal was served upon the appellants whereafter, appellants entered appearance along with their engaged lawyer and filed written statement denying the allegation made by claiming to be citizens of India by birth. They also adduced evidence, both oral and documentary.

5. After hearing the matter and on due consideration, Tribunal answered the reference in favour of the State vide order dated 12.02.2014 in the above manner.

6. Aggrieved by the order dated 12.2.2014, appellants filed the related writ petition before this Court, which was registered as WP(C) No. 5553/2014. A Single Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.08.2015 dismissed the writ petition.

7. Hence, this appeal.

8. Submissions made by learned counsel for the parties have been considered.

9. Tribunal on due appreciation of evidence had answered the reference in favour of the State. Relevant portion of the order passed by the Tribunal is extracted hereunder:-

"10. The D.W. 4, Md. Habibur Rahman village Headman of Sagunbahl. He exhibited Ext. 'Jha' certificate in the name of Musstt. Sahera Khatun by village Headman but nowhere mentioned how many years resided in the said address. Ext. "Nia' school transfer certificate of Sahera Khatun, dated 07.04.2000. Ext. 'Ta' copy of voter list of 1965 of Nabi Hussain, A. Khaleque and Naibali. In cross-examination the D.W. 4 admitted that Ext. 'Jha' certificate was issued on 11.05.2013 but no issue number from Govt. register book. It is also stated that he mentioned in the certificate about her marriage but cannot say date of her marriage. Ext. 'Nia' school transfer certificate was not counter signed by the competent authority. The Ext. 'Nia' certificate was obtained on 07.04.2000 after cut off date. Though the D.W. 4 tried by exhibiting Ext. 'Ta' voter list of 1965 that A. Khaleque is father of Sahera Khatun (O.P. No. 2) but cannot substantiate nor duly prove the same.

11. On perusal of record it appear that though O.P's side exhibited some procured documents not duly prove the same Moreover no land document filed with the record. Therefore presumption may be drawn that O.Ps. are resided in Govt. land.

12. The general principle is that when a person claims to be a citizen of a particular country burden lies on him/her that he or she is citizen of that country. Under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act 1946 (as amended up-to-date) burden of proof lies upon the O.P. that he is a citizen of India. In the instant case O.Ps. failed to discharge its burden. Citizenship cannot be established by exhibiting extract copy of voter list and other documents without proving the originals as held by the Hon'b