LexABDUL KUDDUS versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B C D E F G H 669 ABDUL KUDDUS v. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS (Civil Appeal No. 5012 of 2019) MAY 17, 2019 [RANJAN GOGOI, CJI, DEEPAK GUPTA AND SANJIV KHANNA, JJ.] Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003: Schedule, Paragraph 3(2) and Paragraph 8 – Conflict between – Citizenship status of persons in the State of Assam – Adjudication of – Held: Paragraph 3(2) deals with separate class of persons who have been declared as illegal migrant or foreigners by the Competent Authority – Such persons cannot be included in the National Register of Citizens – Such persons cannot claim citizenship of India on the basis that he/she has been residing in the State of Assam – Whereas Paragraph 8 provides for a right of appeal to the person who had filed objections and is not satisfied with the outcome of the decision under the final list published under paragraph 7 – Such persons may prefer an appeal before the designated Tribunal constituted under the 1964 Order within a period of sixty days and on disposal of appeal by the Tribunal, such persons can accordingly be included or deleted from the NRC in the State of Assam – Thus, the provisions of paragraph 8 would apply when there has not been an earlier adjudication and decision by the Foreigners Tribunal – Furthermore, paragraph 8 does not envisage and provide for a second round of litigation before the same authority-Foreigners Tribunal on and after preparation of the final list – Opinion/order of the Tribunal, or the order passed by the Registering Authority based upon the opinion of the Foreigners Tribunal, can be challenged by way of writ proceedings – Opinion of the Foreigners Tribunal and/or the consequential order passed by the Registering Authority would operate as res judicata – Citizenship Act, 1955 – Foreigners Act, 1946 – Foreigners (Tribunal) Order, 1964. [2019] 8 S.C.R. 669 669 A B C D E F G H 670 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2019] 8 S.C.R. Constitution of India: Art. 142 – Exercise of power under – Creation of an appellate forum for deciding disputes regarding the citizenship status of persons residing in the State of Assam – Held: No such direction can be given for creation of an appellate forum and entrench upon the field of legislation reserved for legislature. Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India & Anr. (2005) 5 SCC 665 : [2005] 1 Suppl. SCR 472 ; Sarbananda Sonowal (11) v. Union of India & Anr. (2007) 1 SCC 174 : [2006] 10 Suppl. SCR 167 ; Indian National Congress (1) v. Institute of Social Welfare & Ors. (2002) 5 SCC 685 : [2002] 3 SCR 1040 ; Shrimati Ujjambai v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. AIR 1962 SC 1621 ; Dr. J.J. Merchant & Ors. v. Shrinath Chaturvedi (2002) 6 SCC 635 : [2002] 1 Suppl. SCR 469 ; Rajesh Kumar & Ors. v. DY. CIT & Ors. (2007) 2 SCC 181 : [2006] 8 Suppl. SCR 284 ; P. Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka (2002) 4 SCC 578 ; Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan v. Union of India (2014) 11 SCC 477 : [2014] 4 SCR 446 – referred to. Case Law Reference [2005] 1 Suppl. SCR 472 referred to Para 13 [2006] 10 Suppl. SCR 167 referred to Para 14 [2002] 3 SCR 1040 referred to Para 19 AIR 1962 SC 1621 referred to Para 20 [2002] 1 Suppl. SCR 469 referred to Para 20 [2006] 8 Suppl. SCR 284 referred to Para 20 (2002) 4 SCC 578 referred to Para 25 [2014] 4 SCR 446 referred to Para 25 CIVIL/CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 5012 of 2019. From the Judgment and Order dated 07.05.2018 of the Gauhati High Court at Guwahati in Writ Petition (C) No. 1073 of 2016. With C. A. Nos. 5025, 5026, 5013, 5014, 5015, 5024, 5016, 5017, 5021, 5023, 5018, 5022, 5019 and 5020 of 2019 A B C D E F G H 671 Crl A. No. 910 of 2019 Kapil Sibal, Salman Khurshid, Sanjay R. Hegde, Sr. Advs., Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi, Nizam Pasha, Ibad Mushtaq, Ms. Aditi Gupta, Ms. Tehsheena Z. Hussain, Ms. Lubna Naz, Ms. Kunika, Ms. Lalrotluangi, Abhishek Sarkar, Ms. Heena Khana, Avijit Roy, Anas Tanwir, Ms. Pranjal Kishore, Ms. Kamakshi S. Mehlwal, Mrigank Prabhakar, A. S. Tapadar, Ms. Sakshi Banga, Pijush K. Roy, Mrs. Kakali Roy, Rajan K. Chourasia, Kaushik Choudhury, Advs. for the Appellants. Tushar Mehta, SG, Ms. Madhavi Divan, A. N. S. Nadkarni, ASG, Shuvodeep Roy, Rajat Nair, Rijuk Sarkar, Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Rajat Nair, S. Deshmukh, B. V. Balaram Das, Avijit Roy, Advs. for the Respondents. The following Order of the Court was passed O R D E R SANJIV KHANNA, J. 1. Delay condoned. Leave granted. 2. This order decides perceived conflict between sub-parag
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.