Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Ranjan Gogoi, CJI., Deepak Gupta, Sanjiv Khanna, JJ.
ABDUL KUDDUS – Appellant(s)
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS – Respondent(s)
Civil Appeal No. 5012 of 2019 (Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 23127 of 2018 with Civil Appeal No. 5025 of 2019 (Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 13011 of 2019 Arising Out of Diary No. 25095 of 2017), Civil Appeal No. 5026 of 2019(Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 13012 of 2019 Arising Out of Diary No. 25101 of 2017), Civil Appeal No. 5013 of 2019 (Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 25052 of 2017), Civil Appeal No. 5014 of 2019 (Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 2512 of 2018), Civil Appeal No. 5015 of 2019 (Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 5342 of 2018), Civil Appeal No. 5024 of 2019(Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 13010 of 2019 Arising Out of Diary No. 26459 of 2018), Civil Appeal No. 5016 of 2019 (Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 26935 of 2018), Civil Appeal No. 5017 of 2019 (Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 3774 of 2019), Civil Appeal No. 5021 of 2019 (Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 13007 of 2019 Arising Out of Diary No. 1191 of 2019), Civil Appeal No. 5023 of 2019(Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 13009 of 2019 Arising Out of Diary No. 4112 of 2019), Civil Appeal No. 5018 of 2019 (Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 4704 of 2019), Civil Appeal No. 5022 of 2019 (Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 13008 of 2019 Arising Out of Diary No. 5071 of 2019) Criminal Appeal No. 910 of 2019 (Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 2058 of 2019), Civil Appeal No. 5019 of 2019 (Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 5367 of 2019), Civil Appeal No. 5020 of 2019 (Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 6570 of 2019)
Decided on : 17-05-2019
(b) Interpretation of statute - Foreigners Act, 1946 and the Citizenship Act, 1955 - Inter connected and sister legislations - Therefore the two Acts including the Rules framed under the two Acts have to be read harmoniously - Rules framed under Act 1955 are subordinate legislation - Competent Authority under the Rules refer to duly constituted authority under Act, 1946 and Foreigners (Tribunals) Order 1964 (the Tribunal) - Decision of the tribunal is final - Order 1964 mandates compliance with natural justice - a
(2005) 5 SCC 665; (2007) 1 SCC 174 - Referred
(c) Administration of justice - Quasi judicial order and administrative order - Expression `quasi-judicial order' means a verdict determining and deciding contesting issues and question having civil consequences - When a body has a legal authority to determine questions affecting the rights of subjects and a duty to act judicially, such body constitute a quasi-judicial body - Decision given by such a body is a quasi-judicial decision - A quasi judicial body unlike an administrative body is required to make an enquiry before arriving at a conclusion - An administrative authority is dictated by policy and expediency whereas a quasi-judicial authority is required to act according to the rules - Held, opinion by the Foreigners Tribunal is a quasi-judicial order and not an administrative order. (Para 19)
(2002) 5 SCC 685 - Relied upon
(d) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 11 - Res judicata - Order passed by registering Authority under Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003 - Based on opinion of the Tribunal - Both the opinion of Tribunal and the Order of Registering Authority result in determination of rights/status under the statute - Therefore order passed by either body after contest would operate as bar to subsequent proceedings before the same authority for re-determination of the same issue/question - The person aggrieved can challenge the orders by way of writ proceedings. (Para 20, 21, 22)
(2002) 6 SCC 635 - Relied upon
(e) Administration of justice - Summary trial - When exhaustive procedure conforming to natural justice is provided, a trial cannot be said to be unjust or unfair merely because the trial is a summary trial. (Para 20)
(2007) 2 SCC 181 - Relied upon
(f) Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003 - Rules 2003 - Paragraph 8 of the Schedule - Remedy of appeal - Issue and question of nationality already determined by Tribunal under the 1964 Order - Appeal would not be maintainable. (Para 24)
(g) Constitution of India - Separation of powers - Court cannot direct creation of an appellate forum - It is prerogative of the legislature. (Para 25)
(2002) 4 SCC 578; (2014) 11 SCC 477 - Relied upon
Facts of the case:
The Court is required to decide perceived conflict between sub-paragraph (2) to paragraph 3 and paragraph 8 of the Schedule to the Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003.
An ancillary prayer is to provide and create an appellate forum for deciding disputes regarding the citizenship status of persons residing in the State of Assam.
Finding of the Court:
Contention of the appellants on the perceived conflict pertaining to the adjudication on the citizenship status of persons rejected. Contention that Supreme Court should direct the creation of an appellate forum also rejected.
Result: Appeals disposed of.
ORDER :
Sanjiv Khanna, J.
Delay condoned. Leave granted.
2. This order decides perceived conflict between sub-paragraph (2) to paragraph 3 and paragraph 8 of the Schedule to the Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003 ("the 2003 Rules" for short). We shall also examine the alternative argument and suggestion of the appellants that this court should by way of a judicial pronouncement and in exercise of power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India provide and create an appellate forum for deciding disputes regarding the citizenship status of persons residing in the State of Assam.
3. Articles 5 to 9 of the Constitution delineate and determine persons who are citizens of India on commencement of the Constitution. Article 10 provides for their continuance as citizens subject to the provisions of any law that may be made by the Parliament. Article 11 of the Constitution, expressly confers power on the Parliament to make laws with respect to acquisition and termination of citizenship and all matters relating to citizenship. To achieve and with this objective, the Parliament has enacted the Citizenship Act, 1955 ("the Citizenship Act" for short) which provides for acquisition of citizenship after the commencement of the Constitution by birth, registration, naturalisation and incorporation of territory.
4. Section 14A of the Citizenship Act-states that the Central Government may compulsorily register every citizen of India and issue national identity card to him/her. The Central Government may maintain a National Register of Indian Citizens and can establish a National Registration Authority for this purpose. Procedure to be followed for compulsory registration of citizens shall be such as may be prescribed.
5. Section 6A of the Citizenship Act incorporates special provisions as to the citizenship of persons covered by the Assam Accord. For the purpose of the present order, we would like to reproduce sub-section (3) to Section 6A of the Citizenship Act which reads as under:
"6A. Special provisions as to citizenship of persons covered by the Assam Accord. -
(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 (hereafter in this subsection 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 therefrom.
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 subsection and if any question arises as to whether such person complies with any other requirement under this subsection, 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 having 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."
Sub-Section (3) to Section 6A states that subject to the provisions of sub-section (6) and (7), all persons who have come to Assam on or after the 1st day of January, 196
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
