WP(C) 2383/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE A.K. GOSWAMI Heard Mr. B.K.Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also he ard Mr. J.Handique, learned State counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Pursuant to the direction dated 12.8.11, records of FT Case No. 109/D /06 from the Foreigners Tribunal, Dibrugarh has been received . The challenge made in this writ petition is founded on the basis that ju dgment dated 3.2.11 passed in the aforesaid FT Case was rendered without serving any notice upon the petitioner. Records of the FT Case was allowed to be inspected by the learned counse l representing the parties. Both Mr. Bhattacharjee and Mr. Handique submit that perusal of the records do not indicate that notice, either directly or in substi tuted manner, has been served upon the petitioner. I have also perused the recor ds. From the perusal of the records, this court is also satisfied that notic e has not been duly served on the petitioner. The report of the Process Server goes to show that the petitioner was not found. Having regard to the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the records, I am satisfied that the impugned judgment dated 3 .2.11 is liable to be set aside and quashed. Accordingly, the same is set aside and quashed. The writ petition is allowed. The Registry is directed to send back the records of the Foreigners Trib unal,Dibrugarh forthwith.The petitioner is also directed to appear before the le arned Foreigners Tribunal on 23.11.11.The learned Tribunal shall dispose of the case in accordance with law. Petition stands disposed of.