Disposed

Johirul Islam v. the Union of India and 7 Ors.

Gauhati HC8 Feb 2024WP(C)/629/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition sought removal of the 'D' doubtful-voter tag against the petitioner's name in the voters list. The Court held D-voter status is for the Foreigners Tribunal to determine and directed the Superintendent of Police (Border) to verify or refer the matter to a competent Foreigners Tribunal within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to SP (Border) Goalpara to refer petitioner's case to Foreigners Tribunal if not already referred, within two months.

Johirul Islam Vs the Union of India and 7 Ors. — Election Law | Gauhati HC (2024)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010016332024

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/629/2024

¶5

JOHIRUL ISLAM

¶6

S/O- LATE TALEBUR RAHMAN @ TALEBAR RAHMAN @ ABU TALEB MOLLA, R/O- VILL- HOLDIBARI, P.O. DHUMERGHAT, P.S. LAKHIPUR, DISTRICT- GOALPARA, ASSAM, PIN- 783330

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE UNION OF INDIA AND 7 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVT. OF INDIA, SHASTRI BHAWAN, TILOK MARG, NEW DELHI01

¶9

2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE HOME DEPARTMENT DISPUR GUWAHATI-06

¶10

3:THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA NEW DELHI- 110001

¶11

4:THE CHIEF ELECTION OFFICER ASSAM HOUSEFED COMPLEX BELTOLA ROAD GUWAHATI-06

¶12

5:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER GOALPARA P.O. AND DISTRICT- GOALPARA ASSAM PIN- 783101

¶13

Page No.# 2/4

¶14

6:THE ELECTION OFFICER GOALPARA P.O. AND DIST.- GOALPARA ASSAM PIN- 783101

¶15

7:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (B) GOALPARA P.O. AND DIST.- GOALPARA ASSAM PIN- 783101

¶16

8:THE ELECTORAL REGISTRATION OFFICER 39 JALESWAR LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY O/O THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER LAKHIPUR DEVELOPMENT BLOCK P.O. LAKHIPUR DIST.- GOALPARA ASSAM PIN- 78312

¶17

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M H TALUKDAR

¶18

Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I.

¶19

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA

¶20

ORDER

¶21

09.02.2024

¶22

Heard Mr. M.H. Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Gogoi, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 5, Mr. A.I. Ali, learned counsel for respondent Nos.3, 4, 6 & 8 and Mr. J. Payeng, learned counsel for the respondent No.7.

¶23

The case of the petitioner is that in the voters list of 1997, the name of the petitioner was marked with the letter “D” and thereupon the petitioner has approached the concerned respondent authorities for removal of the tag “D” in

¶24

Page No.# 3/4

¶25

his name from the voters list.

¶26

As the concerned respondent authorities had failed to do so, the petitioner is before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for an appropriate direction that the letter “D” tagged with the name of the petitioner in the voters list be removed.

¶27

Whether a person is a D voter or not is a matter of factual determination and the appropriate forum to do the same is the concerned Foreigners Tribunal. This Court in exercise of its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India would not have the competence to decide such a question which depends on the evidence that may be produced.

¶28

In the circumstances, this Court therefore directs the respondent No.7 i.e., the Superintendent of Police (Border), Goalpara to verify as to whether the petitioner has already been referred to the concerned Foreigners Tribunal and if upon verification it is found that the petitioner has not been referred to the concerned Foreigners Tribunal, this Court further directs the said respondent No.7 to refer the case of the petitioner as regards the mark “D” in the voters list in respect to 39 Jaleswar LAC to a competent Foreigners Tribunal, Goalpara district for an appropriate adjudication as regards the status of the petitioner as “D” voter in the concerned voters list.

¶29

Reference be made within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Upon such reference being made, the petitioner may participate in such proceedings and establish her case.

¶30

Page No.# 4/4

¶31

If the case of the petitioner as per the records had already been referred to the relevant Foreigners Tribunal there would be no requirement to make any further reference and the detailed information of the earlier reference be communicated to the petitioner.

¶32

With the above directions and observations, the instant writ petition stands disposed of.

¶33

JUDGE

¶34

Comparing Assistant

Johirul Islam v. the Union of India and 7 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Johirul Islam v. the Union of India and 7 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nasir Ali Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

The Assam Tea Employees Provident Fund Organization and 3 Ors. Vs M/S. Bogidhola Tea and Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. 2 Ors.

Prabhat Fertilizer and Chemical Works Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Nurun Nessa @ Narun Nessa Vs the Union of India and 5 Ors.

M/S Air Transport Corporation Assam Private Limited Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

MD Achaduz Zaman Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.