Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Kalyan Rai Surana, Malasri Nandi
Thandu Miya, S/O- Late Tahuruddin Miya – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India Rep By The Secy To The Govt Of India, Min Of Home Affairs, Shastri Bhawan, Trilok Marg, New Delhi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. multiple chances provided to the petitioner to present his case. (Para 1) |
| 2. petition challenging ex parte order. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. petitioner's arguments against tribunal's order. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. government's stance and tribunal's proceedings detailed. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. principles of exercising jurisdiction under article 226. (Para 14 , 15) |
| 6. court's critical observations on burden of proof. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 7. court's final dismissal and orders. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
JUDGMENT :
M. Nandi, J.
Heard Mr. R. Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S.K. Medhi, learned CGC; Mr. G. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, FT matters; Mr. H. Kuli, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. A.I. Ali, learned Standing Counsel, ECI; and Mr. P. Sarmah, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate.
2. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assailing the order of the Foreigners Tribunal dated 09.03.2022, passed in F.T. Case No.606(III)/2013 [Ref: IM(D)T Case No.269/10], declaring the petitioner to be a foreigner under the provisions of Foreigners Act, 1946.
3. The case of the petitioner is th
The burden of proof for citizenship lies with the petitioner, and failure to present evidence results in the Tribunal's decision being upheld unless jurisdictional errors or violations of natural jus....
The burden of proof regarding citizenship lies with the petitioner, and failure to appear at the Tribunal results in a valid ex parte decision if due process is followed.
The burden of proving citizenship rests upon the proceedee, and the court's jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is limited to examining the decision-making process.
The burden of proof for citizenship lies with the proceedee, and failure to contest leads to the presumption of foreign nationality.
The burden of proving citizenship rests on the proceedee, and the court's jurisdiction under Article 226 is limited to examining the decision-making process.
The burden of proving citizenship lies with the proceedee under Section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946, and failure to participate in proceedings results in the declaration of foreigner status.
The burden of proving citizenship under the Foreigners Act remains with the individual, regardless of representation, and failure to provide evidence justifies a tribunal's determination of foreign n....
In citizenship determination proceedings, courts may exercise discretion to set aside ex parte orders despite significant delay and laches, provided the petitioner presents a credible claim and adher....
The burden of proving citizenship lies with the proceedee, and the Writ Court's jurisdiction is limited to reviewing the decision-making process.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
