NRC in Assam: Supreme Court Clarifies ‘Originally Inhabitants’ Term

The Supreme Court of India recently delivered an important judgment regarding the inclusion of individuals in the National Register of Citizens (NRC) for Assam. The case involved multiple writ petitions filed by Kamalakhya Dey Purkayastha and others against the Union of India and other respondents. The primary issue was the interpretation of the term ‘originally inhabitants of the State of Assam’ under Clause 3(3) of the Schedule to the Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issues of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003.

Background of the Case

The case stemmed from the long-standing efforts to update the NRC in Assam. The NRC is a register intended to document legitimate Indian citizens residing in Assam and to identify illegal migrants. The petitioners argued that the term ‘originally inhabitants of the State of Assam’ needed a clear definition to prevent ambiguity in determining citizenship claims.

Legal Provisions Involved

The petitioners referred to Clause 3(3) of the Schedule (Special Provisions as to Manner of Preparation of National Register of Indian Citizens in State of Assam) under the Citizenship Rules, 2003. The relevant provision states:

“The names of persons who are originally inhabitants of the State of Assam and their children and descendants, who are citizens of India, shall be included in the consolidated list if the citizenship of such persons is ascertained beyond reasonable doubt and to the satisfaction of the registering authority.”

The petitioners sought clarity on this provision and asked the Court to issue guidelines for identifying those who qualify as originally inhabitants of Assam.

Arguments by the Petitioners

• The term ‘originally inhabitants’ lacked a clear legal definition, leading to inconsistent implementation by authorities.
• There was an apprehension that a ‘superior class’ of citizens was being created, with different verification standards for originally inhabitants and others.
• The classification might affect opportunities for education, employment, and other benefits.
• They requested a uniform and transparent process for verifying claims under Clause 3(3).

Arguments by the Respondents

• The classification of ‘originally inhabitants’ does not create any special entitlement beyond citizenship verification.
• Citizenship in the NRC is determined solely based on constitutional provisions and the Citizenship Act, including Section 6A, which deals with Assam’s special provisions.
• All citizens, whether originally inhabitants or not, are treated equally in the NRC process.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court, comprising Justices Ranjan Gogoi and Rohinton Fali Nariman, analyzed the concerns raised and provided key clarifications.

On the Purpose of Clause 3(3):

“Identification of persons who are originally inhabitants of the State of Assam as against those who are not does not determine any entitlement for inclusion in the NRC which is on the basis of proof of citizenship alone and nothing else.”

On Allegations of a ‘Superior Class’ of Citizens:

“All such apprehensions are wholly unfounded. The exercise of upgradation of NRC is not intended to be one of identification and determination of who are originally inhabitants of the State of Assam. The sole test for inclusion in the NRC is citizenship under the Constitution of India and under the Citizenship Act including Section 6A thereof.”

On Equal Treatment in the NRC Process:

“Citizens who are originally inhabitants/residents of the State of Assam and those who are not are at par for inclusion in the NRC.”

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court disposed of the writ petitions and refused to issue any further directions or clarifications on the meaning of ‘originally inhabitants of the State of Assam.’ The Court reiterated that the NRC process is solely for determining Indian citizenship and does not grant any special status based on whether a person is an original inhabitant.

Key Takeaways

• The term ‘originally inhabitants’ does not create a special class of citizens.
• The NRC update is based solely on verifying Indian citizenship, not identifying original inhabitants.
• All citizens, regardless of background, are treated equally in the NRC process.
• The Supreme Court rejected the petitioners’ plea to define ‘originally inhabitants’ further, stating that it was unnecessary.

This ruling clarifies that NRC verification should focus strictly on legal citizenship status, ensuring a uniform and fair process for all residents of Assam.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Kamalakhya Dey Purka vs Union of India & Ors Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 05-12-2017.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Fundamental Rights
See all petitions in Public Interest Litigation
See all petitions in Constitution Interpretation
See all petitions in Judgment by Ranjan Gogoi
See all petitions in Judgment by Rohinton Fali Nariman
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments December 2017
See all petitions in 2017 judgments

See all posts in Constitutional Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Constitutional Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Constitutional Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Constitutional Cases Category