ORDER

Date : 04-08-2021 (N. Kotiswar Singh, J)

Heard Mr. P. C. Dey, learned counsel appears for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. L. Devi, learned standing counsel appears on behalf of Mr. R.K. Dev Choudhury, learned standing counsel for the respondent No. 1, Mr. N. Pathak, learned standing counsel for the respondent Nos. 2-6; Mr. A. Bhuyan, learned standing counsel for the respondent No. 7 and Ms. L. Devi, learned standing counsel for the respondent No. 8.

2. Considering the nature of this case, we are of the view that the present writ petition can be disposed of at this stage.

3. The petitioner was earlier proceeded in F.T(D) Case No. 252/2015 before the th F.T. 5 , Morigaon, Assam and vide opinion/order dated 31.10.2016, the petitioner was already declared to be a foreigner, but who had entered into India between 01.01.1966 to 25.03.1971. Accordingly, it was held that he was entitled to get himself registered with the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO), Nagaon within 30(thirty) days. The petitioner submits that, accordingly, he got himself registered with the FRRO, Nagaon and a copy of the said registration is also enclosed as Annexure-B to the writ petition.

4. However, subsequently, the authorities proceeded against him again in F.T. Case No. 24/2013 before the Foreigners Tribunal, Diphu, Karbi-Anglong where he submitted an application that he had already been declared a foreigner who entered India during the period of 01.01.1966 to 25.03.1971 and, as such, he may not be proceeded again. The Foreigners Tribunal, however, did not accede to the said request and proceeded ex-parte on 20.03.2018 by declaring him a foreigner of post 1971 stream.

5. The order dated 20.03.2018, passed by the Foreigners Tribunal, Diphu, Karbi Anglong in F.T. Case No. 24/13 records that though notice was served upon the proceedee, he did not appear before the Tribunal, and accordingly, the matter was proceeded ex-parte.

6. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner did not appear before the Tribunal on the bona fide belief that his application, filed before the Tribunal for closing the same on 07.02.2017 would be duly considered by the Tribunal as advised by his counsel and accordingly, the proceeding would be closed as he was already declared to be a foreigner within the aforesaid period of 01.01.1966 to 25.03.1971. As such, as advised by his counsel he did not appear before the Tribunal.

7. We are of the view that if the petitioner is indeed the same person who was declared to be a foreigner of the period 01.01.1966 to 25.03.1971 as claimed by him, and as mentioned in the order passed in F.T.(D) Case No. 252/2015 by the th Foreigners Tribunal, 5 , Morigaon, he may not be required to be proceeded again. However, as to whether, the present petitioner is the same person in whose favour certain orders was passed on 31.10.2016 in F.T.(D) Case No. 252/2015 is an aspect which the Foreigners Tribunal, Diphu is the appropriate authority to examine and if it is found that the present petitioner is the same person, the proceedings shall be closed by the Foreigners Tribunal, Diphu, Karbi Anglong with the opinion that he is a foreigner of 01.01.1966 to 25.03.1971 and as such there would be no need to proceed any further. On the other hand, in the event, the Tribunal finds that the petitioner is not the same person in the F.T.(D) Case No. 252/2015, who was th proceeded by the Foreigners Tribunal, 5 , Morigaon, the present proceeding can continue.

8. With the above observation, the present petition is allowed and the ex-parte order dated 20.03.2018 passed in Foreigners Tribunal Case No. 24/13 is set aside and will be re-considered by the Foreigners Tribunal in terms of the observation made above.

9. Consequently, the petitioner will appear before the Foreigners Tribunal, Diphu, st Karbi Anglong on or before 31 August, 2021 and thereafter, the Foreigners Tribunal will decide the preliminary issue as to whether the present petit