BEFORE THE FOREIGNERS TRIBUNAL

(Designated) AT Barpeta

IN THE MATTER OF

An appeal under paragraph 8 of the schedule, under Rule- 4A(4) of the Citizenship(Registration
and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003 read with order 3A (5) of the Foreigners
(Tribunal) Amendment order 2019, for the inclusion in the updated NRC.

-AND-

IN THE MATTER OF:

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH

1. That the appellant is a resident of India being a permanent resident of the aforesaid
locality as mentioned in the cause title of this memo of appeal.
2. That the appellant was born and brought up there. He is a citizens of India and hence is
entitled to be included in the updated National Register of Citizens.
3. That the appellant begs to state that his father’s name is Kazi Mohammad son of Ram
Rahim Mohammad.
4. That the appellant begs to state that he applied for inclusion in the NRC enclosing the
registered copy of 1971 voter list, which contained the name of his father and
grandfather, as a List A document and his birth certificate and ration card as linkage
documents.
5. That the appellant was not included in the draft NRC and a draft rejection notice was
issued to him that mentioned that because the appellant’s father’s date of birth in the
ration card is not same as his date of birth mentioned in the 1971voter list, no linkage
could be established with the intended lineage.
6. That the appellant’s father’s date of birth in the voter list of 1971 is 8 th January, 1947 and
in the ration card as 8th January, 1949.
7. That the error in the ration card is a bona fide mistake that occurred due to appellant’s
father’s illiteracy and ignorance.
8. That the appellant begs to state that according to the list of admissible linkage documents
released by the Government of Assam, the birth certificate provided by a person is
enough to prove his/her relationship or linkage with his/her ascendants mentioned in List
A documents.
9. That the birth certificate, which carries the name of the appellant’s father, is sufficient
prove of his linkage with his father whose name is mentioned in the 1971 voter list.
10. That all other details in the ration card are exactly the same as the information in the
voter list and the birth certificate.
11. That according to the modalities set by the Central Government ration card of a person is
merely a supporting document and not the main document to prove citizenship.
12. That the details in the voter list of 1971 are to be given preference over the ration card
issued before 1971.
13. That the error in the date of birth of the appellant’s father in his ration card does not
vitiate the primary evidence of the linkage in List A and List B documents furnished by
the appellant.
14. That the appellant is ready to co-operate in a field investigation and produce witness to
prove his linkage with his alleged father whose name is mentioned in the voter list of
1971.
15. That being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned rejection order, the appellant
prefers this appeal on the following grounds:

GROUNDS:

A. For that the learned authority has committed grave errors in assessing the documentary
evidence adduced by the appellant.
B. For that the exclusion of the appellant is based on the wrong assessment of the
documentary evidence produced by him.
C. For that barring the date of birth of the appellant’s father the details given in the ration
card are exactly the same as the details of the address, family composition etc. in the
certified voter list of 1971.
D. For that the proper assessment of the List A document i.e. the appellant’s father’s name
and details in the certified voter list of 1971 and the List B i.e. the appellant’s birth
certificate prove a clear linkage between the appellant and his father.
E. For that the abovementioned documents are sufficient to include the appellant in the
NRC.
F. For that the error of date of birth of appellant’s father cannot vitiate the proof of linkage
between the appellant and his father because the ration card is merely a secondary
document for evidence.
G. That for securing ends of justice the appellant may be permitted to examine witnesses to
prove that the alleged linkage for inclusion in the NRC.
H. For that as per provision under clause 12 of order 3A of the Foreigners (Tribunal)
Amendment Order,2019 the appellant is entitled to examine witness or adduce evidence
during hearing of the same and hence this appeal.
I. That the appellant begs to state that this Honourable Tribunal has jurisdiction to pass
order under order- 3A(5) of the Foreigners (Tribunal) Amendment Order, 2019 to allow
his inclusion in the updated NRC.
J. That rendering a person stateless deprives him/her of the fundamental right to life. Hence,
the appellant should be given a fair chance to prove himself a citizen of India.
K. That this is a bona fide appeal filed in the interest of justice and equity.