The central legal point established in the judgment is that under Section 6A(3) of the Citizenship Act, a person must continuously reside in Assam since the date of their entry to fulfill the requirement of law.

ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA, J.

1. Heard Mr. M Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. AI Ali, learned counsel for the Election Commission of India and Mr. J Payeng, learned counsel for the State of Assam appearing for the Foreigners' Tribunal and Border Areas as well as Ms. G Sarma, learned counsel for the authorities under the Union of India.

2. On being referred by the Superintendent of Police(Border), Kokrajhar, FT Case No. 3865/K/87 was registered in the Foreigners Tribunal (Dhubri, Kokrajhar, & Goalpara past) Kokrajhar for a determination as to whether the petitioner is a foreigner, who had entered India/Assam between 01.01.1996 and 25.03.1971 and since then has been residing in the village Aminkata, Police Station Gossaigaon, Kokrajhar.

3. The Tribunal by its order dated 03.10.1997 had declared that the petitioner is a foreigner who came to India between the year 01.01.1966 and 25.03.1971.

4. Although upon being declared to be a person, who came into the territory of India between 01.01.1966 and 25.03.1971, a person is required to register himself/herself with the Regional Foreigners Registration Office of the concerned district, but in the instant case, the petitioner had not done so. As the petitioner was not registered, the authorities sought to deport her from the territory of India and in the said circumstances, this writ petition has been preferred.

5. In this writ petition, the petitioner pray for a direction that she be allowed to register herself before the Regional Foreigners Registration Office as provided under Section 6A(3) of the Citizenship Act of 1955.

6. We have perused the provisions of Section 6A(3) which is as follows:

(3) Subject to the provisions of sub-sections (6) and (7), every person of Indian origin who-

(a) came to Assam on or after the 1st day of January, 1966 but before the 25th day of March, 1971 from the specified territory; and

(b) has, since the date of his entry into Assam, been ordinarily resident in Assam; and

(c) has been detected to be a foreigner, shall register himself in accordance with the rules made by the Central Government in this behalf under section 18 with such authority (thereafter in this sub-section referred to as the registering authority) as may be specified in such rules and if his name is included in any electoral roll for any Assembly or Parliamentary constituency in force on the date of such detection, his name shall be deleted there from.

Explanation.-In the case of every person seeking registration under this sub-section, the opinion of the Tribunal constituted under the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964 holding such person to be a foreigner, shall be deemed to be sufficient proof of the requirement under clause (c) of this sub-section and if any question arises as to whether such person complies with any other requirement under this sub-section, the registering authority shall,-

(i) if such opinion contains a finding with respect to such other requirement, decide the question in conformity with such finding;

(ii) if such opinion does not contain a finding with respect to such other requirement, refer the question to a Tribunal constituted under the said Order hang jurisdiction in accordance with such rules as the Central Government may make in this behalf under section 18 and decide the question in conformity with the opinion received on such reference.

7. The requirement of registering with the Foreigners Registration Authority under Section 6A(3) of the Citizenship Act is subject to the following condition precedent:

(i) that the proceedee came to Assam after 01.01.1966 but before 25.03.1971;

(ii) and since the date of his entry into Assam, been ordinarily resident in Assam; and

(iii) has been detected to be a foreigner.

8. We find that in the order of the Tribunal dated 03.10.1997 there is no finding of a fact that since the date of her entry into Assam, the petitioner had continuously been residing in Assam. The only finding arrived is that the pet