Understanding NRC and Citizenship in Assam: Analysis of Kamalakhya Dey Purkayastha vs. Union of India Judgment

The case of Kamalakhya Dey Purkayastha vs. Union of India revolves around the interpretation of the term “originally inhabitants of the State of Assam” in the context of the National Register of Citizens (NRC). The petitioners sought clarification on how individuals under this category should be identified and whether such classification would create a distinction among citizens.

Background of the Case

The petitioners filed writ petitions and interlocutory applications requesting the Supreme Court to define the term “originally inhabitants of the State of Assam” as mentioned in Clause 3(3) of the Schedule to the Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003. They argued that the lack of a clear definition could lead to unequal treatment of citizens in Assam.

Relevant Legal Provisions

Clause 3(3) 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.”

Petitioners’ Arguments

The petitioners contended that:

• The term “originally inhabitants” was vague and needed a clear definition.
• There was an apprehension that individuals classified as “originally inhabitants” might receive preferential treatment over others in matters of education, employment, and other government benefits.
• The verification process for such individuals might be less strict compared to others.

Respondents’ Arguments

The respondents, including the Union of India, countered that:

• The NRC was solely meant for identifying citizens of India and not for classifying individuals as superior or inferior.
• All applicants were required to prove their citizenship through valid documents, irrespective of whether they were “originally inhabitants” or not.
• The category was merely a procedural distinction to facilitate inclusion in the NRC and did not grant any special privileges.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court, in its judgment, clarified:

“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.”

Further, the Court emphasized:

“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.”

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court dismissed the petitions and ruled that:

• The term “originally inhabitants of the State of Assam” did not create a separate class of citizens.
• The verification process for NRC applicants remained uniform and based solely on proof of citizenship.
• There was no basis to issue any further clarifications or directions regarding the term.

Judgment delivered by: Ranjan Gogoi, Rohinton Fali Nariman

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 Constitution Interpretation
See all petitions in Public Interest Litigation
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