BIMALA KHATUN Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The review petitioner sought review of the judgment and order dated 25.8.2015 in WA 235/2015 of the Division Bench on the ground of non -consideration of the documents produced by the petitioner before the learned Single Judge in WP(C) 6658/2013, as well as in the writ appeal.

(2.) We have heard Mr. HRA Choudhury, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. SC Keyal, learned Assistant Solicitor -General of India and Mr. M Bhagabati, learned state counsel.

(3.) The petitioner herein made a prayer in WP(C) 6658/2013 for setting aside the ex parte order of the learned Foreigners' Tribunal, Sonitpur in Tezpur on 3.8.2010 in FT(DC) case 191/2008, which was forwarded by the Superintendent of Police(B), Sonitpur, wherein the petitioner was declared foreigner. The said writ petition was disposed by the learned Single Judge on 21.7.2015 refusing to interfere in the ex parte order of the learned Foreigners' Tribunal on various grounds, including the fact that though the petitioner appeared before the Tribunal in response to service of notice but failed to submit written statement within the period 5.8.2008 to 28.7.2010. Ultimately the learned Tribunal passed an ex parte order on 3.8.2010. The learned Single Judge further considered the aspect that nowhere in the petition the petitioner explained the cause of delay from 3.8.2010 to 14.11.2013(date of filing of the writ petition), for which ground alone the petition is not maintainable. That apart, taking note of the decision of a Full Bench in State of Assam v/s. Moslem Mondal reported in : 2013 (1) GLT(FB) 809 it has also been held that unless and until the petitioner made out an extraordinary ground to interfere in the ex parte order, the writ court in a routine manner has no jurisdiction to set aside such ex parte order which was passed by the learned Tribunal in a proper manner.