WP(C) 3226/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN Heard Mr. B. Gogoi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also h eard Mr. J.M.A. Choudhury, learned Central Govt. counsel for the respondent No. 1. Mr. D. Baruah, learned counsel assisted by Ms. D. P. Hazarika and Ms. B. Das, learned counsel appears for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3. Mr. M. U. Mahmud, lear ned counsel appears for the respondent No. 5. Mr. J. Handique, learned State cou nsel appears for respondent Nos. 4, 6 and 7. Respondent No. 8 is a formal party and therefore, the name of the said respondent is struck off. The name of the petitioner was included in the category of ’D’ voters in respect of Polling Station No. 28 of No. 88 Samaguri Legislative Assembly const ituency. Aggrieved, the petitioner is before this court seeking a direction to st rike of his name from the ’D’ voters list. It appears that the petitioner’s name was included in the list of doubtf ul voters pursuant to an order of this court dated 23-3-2011 passed in W. P.(c) No. 1334 of 2009. One of the direction given in that order was that the Election Commission of India should ensure that the ’D’ voters are not allowed to cast t heir votes, clarifying that ’D’ voters would include persons whose names are in cluded in the electoral rolls but their citizenship are in doubt/disputed and wh ose cases are pending in various Foreigners tribunals. Mr. B. Gogoi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner refers to ann exure-E to the writ petition and submits that the Foreigners Tribunal No. 2, Nag aon in F.T. Case. No. 28 of 2007(B) by its order dated 1-12-2008 had already dec ided that the petitioner is not a foreigner and, therefore, inclusion of his nam e in the ’D’ voters category is wholly illegal and without any justification. Th e learned standing counsel appearing for the Election Commission of India agrees to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and has no ob jection to the prayer so made. The same is also the stand of the other responden ts. I have considered the order passed by the Foreigners Tribunal and I find that by a detailed order dated 1-12-2008 the Foreigners Tribunal No. 2, Nagaon in F.T. Case. No. 28 of 2007(B) had already declared that the petitioner is not a foreigner. As such, the inclusion of his name under the ’D’ voter category is without any justification. Therefore, I am inclined to accept the submission mad e by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed directing the respondents to delete t he name of the petitioner from the list of ’D’ voters in respect of Polling Stat ion No. 28 of No. 88 Samaguri Legislative Assembly Constituency. This disposes of the writ petition. No cost.