The Supreme Court issued a notice to the Assam government on Friday in response to a petition filed by 89 members of Assam's Foreigners Tribunals challenging the state's discharge from service.

The appointments followed an order issued in May 2019 by a bench led by then-Court of Appeal Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi directed the relevant authorities to establish 200 additional Foreigners Tribunals by September of that year. However, because no new infrastructure, including buildings to house the courts, has been built or provided, the appointed members - advocates, retired judicial officers, and retired civil servants - have been "attached" to the original 100 tribunals. According to The New Indian Express, the Ministry of Home Affairs finally disbursed its budgeted allocation to the state government in May of this year to make these additional quasi-judicial bodies operational. To the chagrin of these members, the state government published a notification in October announcing the "forfeiture" of their services with retroactive effect from September 23.

A bench consisting of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice Hima Kohli issued a notice to the state of Assam and requested a response. "After the appointment, at a point, there were 180 left to be deputed because the government took its own sweet time in setting up the tribunals – infrastructure, staffing, and everything else that is required. They were not able to finish that in time. So, suddenly by way of this impugned order passed last month, the government has, for some reason, without having ever adverted to the NRC before, decided to link their service with the NRC. How could their services be forfeited, when this court had instructed the government to populate the ranks of the Foreigners Tribunal and they took up this job under the protection of this court?"

Former members of the Additional Foreigners Tribunals, the petitioners, have accused the government of being arbitrary and discriminatory, as well as violating Articles 14 and 16. Although the new members were supposed to "deal with cases of foreigners who have illegally come from Bangladesh or are illegally residing in Assam," Sankaranarayanan argued before the Supreme Court that the state government misclassified their service by "linking it with the NRC." The petitioners claim that the government purposefully "misinterpreted" the purpose of their appointment as limited to "deciding NRC-related issues," in order to direct the termination of their services because the final citizenship register has not yet been drawn up. According to Sankaranarayanan, this action contradicted the Supreme Court's directive to make the additional tribunals operational.

Case Title: Pranab Borah & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

Writ Petition (C) No. 978/2022

Link: https://main.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2022/35486/35486_2022_1_17_39795_Order_18-Nov-2022.pdf