LexCOMMITTEE FOR C.R. OF C.A.P. & ORS. versus STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2015) 9 S.C.R. 1020
A
COMMITTEE FOR C.R. OF C.A.P. & ORS.
B
v.
STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH & ORS.
(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 510 OF 2007)
SEPTEMBER 17, 2015
[ANIL R. DAVE AND ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, JJ.]
Citizenship Act, 1955 - s. 5(1)(a) - Citizenship rights
c on Chakmas and Hajongs - Conferment of - Writ petition
filed seeking grant of citizenship rights to Chaknias and
Hajongs - Chakmas and Hajongs had migrated to India in
1964-69 and settled in the State of Arunachal Pradesh -
Held: It is acknowledged on the basis of stand of the
D Government of India that the Chakmas have a right to be
granted citizenship subject to the procedure being followed
- There is recognition by judicial decisions that they cannot
be required to obtain any Inner Line permit as they are $ettled
in the State of Arunachal Pradesh - Thus, the Government
E of India and the State of Arunachal Pradesh directed to
finalise the conferment of citizenship rights on eligible
Chakmas and Hajongs and also to ensure compliance of
directions in judicial decisions for protection of their life and
liberty and against their discrimination in any manner -
F Constitution of India, 1950 -Art. 32.
G
H
National Human Rights Commission vs. State of
Arunachal Pradesh 1996 (1) SCR 278: (1996) 1
SCC 7 42; All Arunachal Pradesh Students Union
(AAPSU) vs. The Election Commission of India
PIL No. 52 of 2010 dated 191h March 2013 by
Gauhati High Court; Peoples Union for Civil
Liberties vs. Election Commission of India & Ors.
W.P. No. 886 of 2000 dated 28th September
2000 by Delhi High Court; State of Arunachal
1020
COMMITTEE FOR C.R. OF C.A.P. v. STATE OF
1021
ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Pradesh vs. Khudiram Chakma 1993 (3) SCR
A
401: (1994) Supp. 1SCC615- referred to.
1996 (1) SCR 278
1993 (3) SCR 401
Case Law Reference
referred to.
referred to.
Para 2
Para 17
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition (Civil) No.
510 of2007
B
Under Article 32 of the Consitution of India
c
Colin Gonsalves, Sanjay Kumar Visen, Nitesh Kumar
Singh, Neha, fortheAppellants.
P.S. Patwalia, ASG, Sadhana Sandhu, Tushar Bakshi,
(for Sushma Suri), Ariil Shrivastav, Rituraj Biswas, Anitha D
Shenoy for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. 1. This petition under E
Article 32 of the Constitution of India mainly seeks direction
against Union of India through Ministry of Home Affairs to grant
citizenship to the Chakma and Hajong Tribals who migrated
to India in 1964-1969 and were settled in the State of Arunachal
Pradesh.
F
2. Petitioner No.1 has described itself as "Committee
for Citizenship Rights of the Chakmas of Arunachal Pradesh"
("CCRC"). According to the averments in the petition,
representations were filed with the National Human Rights G
Commission ("NHRC") alleging persecution ofChakmas and
Hajongs in the State of Arunachal Pradesh. The NHRC
approached this Court by way of a Writ Petition (C) No. 720 of
1995 titled "National Human Rights Commission vs. State
of Arunacha/ Pradesh" seeking direction from this Court to H
1022
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2015] 9 S.C.R.
A ensure that the Chakmas and Hajongs are not forcibly ousted
from the State of Arunachal Pradesh, which was disposed of
on gih January, 19961• In the said case, the Union of India
appeared before this Court and stated that decision to settle
the Cha.kmas in the State of Arunachal Pradesh was taken
B after discussion between the Government of India and the
.North-East Frontier Agency ("NEFA") Administration
(Predecessor of the State of Arunachal Pradesh). The
Chakmas were residing in the State of Arunachal Pradesh for
more than three decades and had close social, religious and
C economic ties. As per joint statement issued by the Prime
Ministers of India and Bangladesh in February, 1972, the Union
Government took a decision to confer citizenship on the
Chakmas under Section 5(1)(a) of the Citizenship Act, 1955
0
but the State of Arunachal Pradesh had reservations on this
count. The Central Government was in favour of a dialogue
between the State Government, the Chakmas and all
concerned to resolve the issue of granting citizenship while
also redressing the genuine grievances of citizens of Arunachal
E
Pradesh. The stand of the State of Arunachal Pradesh was
that it had provided basic amenities to the Chakmas but the
State had a right to ask the Chakmas to quit the State. The
State could not permit outsExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.