THE SUPREME Court on Tuesday favoured a sample re-verification of at least 10 per cent of the names included in the final draft of the National Register of Citizens (NRC) for Assam, and raised questions on the Centre’s proposal to allow those who were excluded to submit additional linkage documents for claiming legacy. A bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and R F Nariman, which went into the district-wise break-up of those left out of the final draft, said: “Having perused the same, we are of the view that the court should consider the necessity of carrying out the sample re-verification of at least 10 per cent of the names included in the final draft NRC, if required, by a team of NSK (NRC Sewa Kendras) personnel from a neighbouring district.” The bench asked Assam NRC coordinator Prateek Hajela “to submit a report in this regard and the possible time frame when such an exercise can begin, if ordered by the court, and the time frame within which the same can be completed”. “If the results are positive, it will be an accurate barometer,” said Justice Gogoi. “You need to gear up. This will be parallel to the claims and objections,” he said. The court approved the Centre’s suggestion to extend the time for filing claims and objections from one month to two months, but postponed the date when the exercise would start. The date was postponed after the court noticed a “contradiction” in the SOP allowing those left out of the final draft to submit additional linkage documents for claiming legacy, while saying that the family tree would remain undisturbed. “On the one hand, the Union of India says family tree remains intact. On the other hand, you say he can claim legacy through any person. There appears to be a contradiction,” said Justice Gogoi, adding, “that will ultimately amount to redoing the exercise”. Attorney General K K Venugopal said those left out deserved to be given one more chance as many of them are poor and could not have been able to furnish the proper documents. “You are allowing a person to pull out additional documents which were not considered earlier. Depending on these documents, the family tree will also change,” said Justice Nariman. The counsel for Assam, Sanmilita Mahasangha, opposed the Centre’s move to allow additional documents to prove legacy. Justice Nariman said this was “a human problem of huge magnitude” and referred to the AG’s argument that most of them are illiterate and poor. But the counsel contested this and said, “this is being said since long. they are not illiterate when it comes to crossing the border. All other occasions they are.” The court asked Hajela to submit a report in a sealed cover about the likely ramifications if a person was allowed to change the legacy. It asked him to submit the report before September 5, when the court will hear the matter.
