JUDGMENT : A.M. Bujor Barua, J Heard Mr. J. Sarmah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. AI Ali, learned counsel for the Election Commission of India and Mr. J Payeng, learned counsel for the State of Assam appearing for the Foreigners’ Tribunal and Border Areas, Ms. A Verma, learned standing counsel for the authorities under the NRC as well as Ms. G. Sarma, learned counsel for the authorities under the Union of India. 2. On being referred by the Superintendent of Police (B), Morigaon, the F.T.(D) Case No.182/2015 was registered against Md. Azad Ali son of Late Chutia Seikh and F.T.(D) Case No.141/2015 was registered against Md. Nur Mahammad son of Late Chutia Seikh. The reference was also made against Md. Azad Ali son of Late Chutia Seikh and Md. Nur Mahammad son of Late Chutia Seikh of village: Thengsali (Janpar), P.S: Mikirbheta, district: Morigaon, Assam. 3. In the reference, the age of Nur Mahammad was shown to be 46 years and the age of Azad Ali was shown to be 51 years. In the written statement of Nur Mahammad, a stand was taken in paragraph-2 that he is the son of Md. Chutia Seikh whose name appeared in the voter list of 1966 in respect of the village: Sataribari, P.S.: Mikirbheta, district: Nagaon, Assam and a similar stand was also taken by Azad Ali. In course of the proceeding, the petitioners exhibited the voter list of 1966 wherein the name of Md. Chutia Seikh, son of Gelou Seikh, aged about 40 years appeared at Serial No.75. 4. The voter list of 1970 had also been exhibited which shown the name of Chutia Mulla son of Gelou Seikh at Serial No.748, Azad Ali at Serial No.749 and Nur Mahammad at Serial No.751 showing them to be the son of Md. Chutia Mulla. It is taken note of that the voter list of 1966 pertains to village: Sataribari, whereas the voter list of 1970 pertains to village: Thengsali. It is further taken note of that in the voter list of 1966 at Serial No.76, Surjana is shown as wife of Chutia Seikh and her age was about 33 years as on 1966. It is taken note of that the voter list of 1966 pertains to village: Sataribari, whereas the voter list of 1970 pertains to village: Thengsali. It is further taken note of that in the voter list of 1966 at Serial No.76, Surjana is shown as wife of Chutia Seikh and her age was about 33 years as on 1966. If Azad Ali is her son being son of Chutia Seikh, and the age of Azad Ali is shown to be 35 years in voter list of 1970, Surjana being the mother must have delivered the baby around the age of 3 years. Similarly, if Chutia Seikh aged about 40 years in the voter list of 1966 is the father of Azad Ali, the age factor makes it highly improbable that Chutia Seikh of 1966 voter list is the father of Azad Ali. 5. In the circumstance, we are unable to accept the linkage sought to be made out by the petitioner through the voter list of 1970 that they are son’s of Chutia Seikh whose name finds place in the voter list of 1966. As already noted, the reference was made against Azad Ali son of Chutia Seikh and Nur Mahammad son of Chutia Seikh of village: Thengsali. From the said point of view also it cannot be accepted that their father was Chutia Seikh whose name finds place in the voter list of 1966 pertaining to village: Sataribari. 6. All that the voter list of 1970 projects is that Nur Mahammad son of Chutia Mulla and Azad Ali son of Chutia Mulla are the citizens of India. As the petitioner failed to provide any credible evidence that Nur Mahammad son of Chutia Seikh and Azad Ali son of Chutia Seikh and Nur Mahammad son of Chutia Mulla and Azad Ali son of Chutia Mulla are the one and the same person, we are unable to accept the contention of the petitioner that Nur Mahammad son of Chutia Seikh and Azad Ali son of Chutia Seikh of village: Thengsali could establish their linkage with Chutia Seikh whose name appeared in the voter list of 1966 for village: Sataribari 7. In view of the aforesaid conclusions, we do not find any infirmity in the order dated 22.06.2018 of the Foreigners Tribunal No.3rd, Morigaon in F.T.(D) Case No.182/2015 and F.T.(D) Case No.141/2015, in arriving at the conclusion that Nur Mahammad son of Chutia Seikh and Azad Ali son of Chutia Seikh of village: Thengsali, P.S: Mikirbheta, district: Nagaon, Assam had failed to discharge the burden of proof as required under section 9 of the Foreigners Act, 1946. 8. In view of the above, we find no merit and the same accordingly stands dismissed. 9. Send back the LCR immediately.