Abdul Kuddus v. Union of India and Others
Background
This matter was one of a batch of connected civil (and one criminal) appeals concerning the preparation of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) in Assam. The core issue was a perceived conflict within the Schedule to the Citizenship (Registration of Citizens and Issue of National Identity Cards) Rules, 2003: one provision said persons already declared illegal migrants/foreigners by a competent authority could not be included in the NRC, while another provision gave a right of appeal to the Foreigners Tribunal against exclusion from the NRC. Appellants argued they should get a fresh appeal before the Tribunal even where the Tribunal itself had earlier found them to be foreigners.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court held that an opinion of the Foreigners Tribunal under the Foreigners (Tribunals) Order, 1964 is a quasi-judicial decision, not a mere administrative view, and operates as res judicata, meaning once the Tribunal has decided a person's nationality status, that determination is final and binding and cannot be relitigated through a second appeal under paragraph 8 of the Schedule to the 2003 Rules. The right of appeal to the Tribunal under paragraph 8 applies only where the Tribunal has not already adjudicated the issue. The Court also rejected the appellants' alternative request that it create a new appellate forum for citizenship disputes, holding this would encroach on the legislature's domain. The appeals, including Abdul Kuddus's own (Civil Appeal No. 5012 of 2019), were disposed of on these terms.
Lesson Learnt
Once a quasi-judicial tribunal has finally decided a person's legal status on the merits after due process, that decision is binding and cannot be reopened through a second round before the same forum: a person aggrieved by it must instead challenge it through the proper channel of a writ petition or review, not a fresh appeal.