GAHC010288152025

2026:GAU-AS:2776-DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WP(C)/889/2026 MD AIOB ALI ALIAS AYUB ALI S/O-LATE LOKMAN ALI, R/O- VILL- NEGERIBILL, P.O AND P.S- MERAPANI, DIST-GOLAGHAT, ASSAM, PIN- 785705 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI-110001

2:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA NEW DELHI

3:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-781006

4:THE ASSAM STATE COORDINATOR OF NRC BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI-781005

5:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER GOLAGHAT DISTRICT-GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN-7834121.

6:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B)

GOLAGHAT DISTRICT-GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN7834121 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S A AHMED, MR. F A AHMED,MS. K DAS Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., SC, F.T,GA, ASSAM,SC, ECI,SC, NRC BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KALYAN RAI SURANA HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND

ORDER

24.02.2026 Date :

(K.R. Surana, J)

Heard Mr. S.A. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. A. Gayan, learned CGC for respondent no.1; Mr. A.I. Ali, learned standing counsel for respondent no.2; Mr. G. Sarma, learned standing counsel for the respondent nos. 3, 4 and 6; Mr. P. Sarmah, learned Addl. Senior Govt.

Advocate for respondent no.5.

2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, namely, Md. Aiob Ali @ Ayub Ali, has assailed the impugned ex parte opinion dated 26.02.2021, passed by the learned Member, Foreigners Tribunal, Jorhat, in Case No. FTG.341/2011, arising out of Enquiry No. 209/2007, by which he was declared to be a foreigner who had entered into India illegally from Bangladesh after 25.03.1971.

3. This writ petition was filed on 20.12.2025 to assail the ex parte opinion dated 26.02.2021, i.e. after there has been an extraordinary delay of 4 years, 9 months, 24 days (or 1758 days). Hence, the learned counsel for the petitioner was heard on delay and laches on part of the petitioner to assail the ex parte opinion.

4. The learned counsel had submitted that in paragraph 4 of the writ petition, the petitioner has taken a stand that the notice was served on his son, but his son, who is a daily wage earner, went to Kerala after receiving the notice on 15.02.2020 for earning livelihood. Accordingly, without any knowledge of the proceeding, the petitioner did not appear and take steps, which resulted in the ex parte opinion against him. The petitioner came to know about the said ex parte opinion only on 25.05.2025, when the police came to his house and took him into custody. It has been submitted that as the whereabouts of the petitioner was not known, his son had filed W.P.(Crl.) No. 47/2025, and as the State had disclosed the whereabouts of the petitioner, the said writ petition was closed by order dated 18.08.2025, giving liberty to the petitioner to assail the said opinion. It was submitted that in the meanwhile the family members of the petitioner had collected certified copies of relevant documents on 02.06.2025. It was also submitted that the petitioner had filed W.P.(C) No. 6175/2025, to assail the said opinion, but the same had to be withdrawn due to technical mistakes, which was allowed by order dated 12.12.2025, with liberty to approach again. Accordingly, this writ petition was filed on 20.12.2025. It was submitted that the petitioner has all the documents to prove that he is a citizen of India. Accordingly, it has been submitted that the matter be remanded back to the learned Tribunal to enable the petitioner to contest the proceeding, which, if not allowed, would take away his citizenship right. It may be stated that the learned counsel for the petitioner had submitted that due to Covid-19 pandemic, the limitation has to be excluded from 15.03.2020 to 01.03.2022, owing to orders passed from time to time by the Supreme Court of India, extending the period of limitation.

5. Per