AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Krishna Rao, J.:
The petitioners have filed the present writ petition challenging the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Jangipur and its consequential orders dated 29th July, 2026, cancelling or impounding the Schedule Tribe (ST) Certificates of the petitioners classifying the petitioners as “Bedia” and communicating the same to the Joint Commissioner for Reservation, Backward Classes Welfare Department, Government of West Bengal, as well as to the West Bengal College Service Commission, and to the colleges or hospitals or school of the petitioners.
All the petitioners are brothers and sisters and are the sons and daughters of Ainul Hoque. All the petitioners have obtained their Scheduled Tribe Certificates from the Office of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Jangipur, Murshidabad. The petitioner nos.1 to 5 were issued their ST Certificates on 28th June, 2007 and the petitioner nos. 6 and 7 were issued ST Certificates on 8th November, 2005 and 22nd January, 2014, respectively.
Mr. Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharyya, Learned Senior Advocate, representing the petitioners submits that the petitioner no.1 has received a notice dated 9th April, 2024, issued from the Block Development Officer, Farakka, directing the petitioner no. 1 to attend the hearing on 15th April, 2024 with regard to his selection in Kabi Nazrul College, Murarai Birbhum as Assistant Professor in Botany subject as an ST candidate. The petitioner no. 1 has attended the hearing and submitted his all documents regarding his caste, identity and profession. Another Notice under Rule 3 of the West Bengal Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Identification) Rules, 1995, in respect of the complaint against the petitioner no.1 on his Caste Certificate issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Jangipur on 18th September, 2024, directing the petitioner no. 1 to produce his identity and caste related documents on 25th September, 2024. The petitioner no.1 has submitted his all documents but no order was passed.
Mr. Bhattacharyya submits that on 1st September, 2025, the Sub-Divisional Officer has issued a Show Cause Notice to the petitioner no. 1 in connection with the complaint against his ST Certificate reported by one Sonarpur Dhalua Tribals’ Welfare Society, Sonapur, South 24 Parganas, alleging selection of non-tribal candidates for the post of Assistant Professor in the Government-aided General Degree Colleges under the ST reserved category by the West Bengal College Service Commission.
The Sub-Divisional Officer also issued a notice to the Pradhan, Bewa-II Gram Panchayat dated 16th October, 2025, regarding a Certificate dated 11th September, 2025, issued from the office of the Pradhan stating that the petitioner no.1 belonged to ‘Bedia’ Tribe Community under the ST Caste and directed to submit his clarification as to why the petitioner no. 1 was issued such certificate. The petitioner no. 1 has submitted his reply along with all documents. The respondents have conducted field verification to ascertain the identity and whereabouts of the petitioner no.1. On 11th June, 2026, the Sub-Divisional Officer has again issued a notice under Rule 3 of the West Bengal Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Identification) Rules, 1995, for hearing on 18th June, 2026. The petitioner no. 1 has attended the hearing and submitted all his document to prove that the petitioner no. 1 belongs to Bedia Tribe. Again a notice was issued on 25th June, 2026 for hearing on 2nd July, 2026, directing the petitioners for submission of original documents and the petitioners have submitted all documents. On 29th July, 2026, the Sub-Divisional Officer has passed the impugned order.
Mr. Bhattacharyya submits that the impugned proceedings and final order dated 2nd July, 2026, issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer is not sustainable under law as the Sub-Divisional Officer has no jurisdiction to cancel the Scheduled Tribe Certificate issued to the petitioners. He submits that the finding of the Sub-Divisional Officer is contrary to the relevant provisions of the Constitution of India. He submits that ‘Bediya’, ‘Badia’ or ‘Bedia’ community belongs to Scheduled Tribes Community as per the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, Part XVI of the Schedule.
Mr. Bhattacharyya submits that the eminent researchers opined that “Bedias” constitute a small Muslim group, primarily inhabiting in northern and central parts of West Bengal, as well as in Bihar. In West Bengal, they are found to be in the Districts of Murshidabad, Malda, North Dinajpur, South Dinajpur and Darjeeling. In Murshidabad, ‘Bedias’ are found at Farakka, Pakur and Kandi.
Mr. Bhattacharyya submits that the Sub-Divisional Officer has initiated the proceeding against the petitioner no. 1 on receipt of complaint from one Sukram Oraon, Secretary of the Sonarpur Dhalua Tribes Welfare Society, South 24 Parganas, but the said complaint was never served to the petitioners.
Mr. Bhattacharyya submits that the Sub-Divisional Officer has issued Scheduled Tribe Certificates to the petitioners in the year 2005, 2007 and 2014. The petitioner nos.1, 2, 6 and the proforma respondent got their services and the petitioner nos. 3, 4, 5 and 7 have obtained their educational credentials as Scheduled Tribe candidates. He submits that ‘Bedia’ tribe is mentioned in serial no. 3 of Part XVI of Chapter I of the Second Schedule of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 1976. Part XVI deals with the different Scheduled Tribe communities of the State of West Bengal.
Mr. Bhattacharyya referred Sections 2(a), 9(1), 9(2) of the West Bengal Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Identification) Act, 1994 and Rule 3 of the West Bengal Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Identification) Rules, 1995 and submits that the Sub-Divisional Officer has exceeded his jurisdiction by cancelling the Scheduled Tribes Certificates to the petitioners. He submits that neither the Scrutiny Committee verified the ST Certificates issued to the petitioners nor the Committee has passed any order for cancelling or impounding the ST Certificates of the petitioners. He submits that no subjective satisfaction was reached by the Committee that the ST certificates obtained by the petitioners were by fraud or suppression.
In support of his submissions, he has relied upon the judgment in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil and Another vs. Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development and Others reported in (1994) 6 SCC 241 and submits that the State Governments shall constitute a Committee of three officers, namely, (I) an Additional or Joint Secretary or any officer higher in rank of the Director of the department concerned, (II) the Director, Social Welfare/ Tribal Welfare / Backward Class Welfare, as the case may be, and (III) in the case of Scheduled Castes another Officer who has intimate knowledge in the verification and issuance of the social status certificates. In the case of the Scheduled Tribes, the Research Officer who has intimate knowledge in identifying the tribes, tribal communities, parts of or groups of tribes or tribal communities. He submits that in the present case, no committee was constituted, the matter is not referred to any committee. The Sub-Divisional Officer of its own cancelled all certificates of the petitioners without following due process of law and without any jurisdiction.
Mr. M.S. Tiwari, Learned Advocate, representing the respondents submits that on receipt of a formal direction from the Deputy Commissioner for Reservation and Ex-Officio Deputy Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Backward Classes Welfare Department dated 28th February, 2024, the Sub-Divisional Officer has initiated a proceeding under Section 9 of the West Bengal Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Identification) Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as “Act of 1994”) read with Rule 3 of the West Bengal Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Identification) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as “Rules, 1995”) for the cancellation, impounding or revocation of Scheduled Tribe (ST) Certificates issued against the petitioners and proforma respondents on 4th March, 2024.
Mr. Tiwari submits that after initiation of proceedings, the Sub-Divisional Officer initiated suo moto enquiry under Rule 3(1) of the Rules, 1995 and the Block Development Officer was directed to conduct local field enquiry about castes, sub-castes and family lineage. The Block Development Officer has submitted preliminary enquiry report on 18th July, 2024. On receipt of enquiry report, the Sub-Divisional Officer has issued notice of hearing to the petitioners and the petitioners have appeared before the Sub-Divisional Officer at the time of hearing.
Mr. Tiwari submits that a letter was sent to the Director, Cultural Research Institute, Kankurgachi, Kolkata on 30th October, 2024 but no analytical report was received. The Sub-Divisional Officer again called for detailed inquiry report from the Block Development Officer on 15th May, 2026. Mr. Tiwari submits that show cause notices were issued to the petitioners to substantiates their claims and personal hearing was also provided to the petitioners but the petitioners failed to establish that they belong to Scheduled Tribes, on the other hand taking into consideration of enquiry report of the Block Development Officer, it was established that the ancestral lineage of the petitioners belonged to the “Shershabadia” community which is legally recognized as an “Other Backward Classes (OBC)” under the State of West Bengal.
Mr. Tiwari submits that Rule 3 of Rules, 1995 provides for procedure for cancellation, impounding or revocation of certificate. He submits that the Sub-Divisional Officer has followed the said procedure and was satisfied that the petitioners and the proforma respondents are not the Scheduled Tribes and are coming under the Other Backward Classes, the Sub-Divisional Officer has passed the impugned order.
Mr. Tiwari submits that Section 9(1) of the Act of 1994 provides that if the issuing authority is satisfied that a certificate has been obtained by any person by furnishing any false information or by misrepresenting any fact or by suppressing any material information or by producing any document which is an act of forgery, it may cancel, impound or revoke such certificate. He submits that the Sub-Divisional Officer has passed the impugned order in accordance with the above provisions.
Mr. Tiwari submits that the order impugned is an appealable order under Section 9A of the Amended Act of 2022 but the petitioners have filed the present writ petition which is not maintainable.
Mr. Tiwari has relied upon the judgment in the case of Sumitra Sarkar Vs. State of West Bengal and Others in WPA No. 15952 of 2018 dated 25th February, 2021 and submits that the Coordinate Bench of this Court approved the order of cancellation of the caste certificate of the petitioners by the Sub-Divisional Officer on the basis of the report submitted by the Block Development Officer and detailed oral and documentary evidence.
In order to appreciate the rival contentions of the parties, it would be profitable to trace the history of legislation relating to the identification of members of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe in the State of West Bengal.
In order to identify members of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe in the State of West Bengal and for matters connected therewith and/or incidental thereto, the State enacted the "West Bengal Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Identification) Act, 1994", that is, Act of 1994 which came into force on and from 1st October, 1994.
Section 5 of the said Act empowered the Sub-Divisional Officer of each Sub-Division and the District Magistrate, South 24-Parganas in respect of city of Kolkata to issue certificates in favour of a member of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe upon due enquiry in accordance with the Act and the rules framed thereunder.
Section 6 of the Act provided that such certificate shall be issued on an application made by a person in prescribed form and upon production of evidence in support thereof.
Section 7 empowered the concerned officers to refuse an application for grant of such certificate if he was not satisfied with the evidence produced by the person but after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing to such person in that regard.
Section 8 provided that for an appeal against the orders of refusal under Section 7 of the Act to the District Magistrate or Additional District Magistrate in cases such refusal was by the Sub-Divisional Officer and to the Commissioner, Presidency Division and in case of refusal by the District Magistrate, South 24-Parganas in the city of Kolkata. Section 8(3) provides such appellate orders shall be final.
Section 9 of the Act empowered the Certificate Issuing Authority to cancel a certificate issued under Section 5 if such certificate had been obtained by furnishing false information, misrepresentation or suppression of material information or by producing a forged document.
Statutory Rules, namely, West Bengal Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Identification) Rules, 1995, were framed and notified on 14th October, 1986. Rule 3 of the aforesaid Rules lays down the procedure for cancellation, revocation or impounding of a certificate issued under the Act.
About a month prior to the enforcement of the aforesaid Act, the Apex Court in Kumari Madhuri Patil & Anr. Vs. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development and Ors., (hereinafter referred to as "Madhuri Patil-1") being concerned with the rampant issuance of illegal caste certificates to undeserving persons thereby depriving genuine SC/ST/OBC candidates from availing constitutional benefits conferred upon them, issued directions for constitution of State Scrutiny Committees and the procedure to be followed in the matter of issuance of social caste certificate and scrutiny/approval of such certificates. Fifteen (15) directions were laid down by the Apex Court in that regard.
In a subsequent decision Kumari Madhuri Patil & Anr. Vs. Additional Commissioner Tribal Development Thane & Ors., (hereinafter referred to Madhuri Patil - II), the Apex Court clarified some of the said directions and also approved the suggestion of the learned counsel appearing for the applicants that the aforesaid Committee may also go into questions of wrongful refusal of certificate to deserving applicants in addition to verification of cases of wrongful issuance of certificates as envisaged in Madhuri Patil-1.
From the aforesaid judicial pronouncements, it is clear that it was the intendment of the highest judicial authority that the State constitutes a plenary expert body which may effectively enquire into cases of wrongful issuance and/or refusal of certificates to applicants and undertake remedial and/or penal measures in connection therewith.
To achieve such end, the State of West Bengal amended the Act of 1994 by the amending Act, namely, West Bengal Act 4 of 2007 whereby it constituted 'State Scrutiny Committee' and 'Vigilance Cell' and laid down the powers and functions of the said authorities. Relevant provisions in that regard are set out herein below.
"2.(a) "Committee" means the state scrutiny Committee constituted under section 8A for verification of social status of a person in whose favour a certificate is issued under section 5."
Constitute of State Scrutiny Committee and its
"8A.(1) The State Government may, by order, constitute a Committee to be called the state Scrutiny for verification of social status of a person in whose favour a certificate is issued under section 5.
(2)The Committee shall consist of the following members:-
a) the Secretary, Backward Classes Welfare Department, Government of West Bengal.
Explanation.- Secretary shall include a special secretary
Chairperson b) the Commissioner, Directorate of Backward Classes Welfare, West Bengal or any officer not below the rank of Deputy Director, duly authorized by him. Convenor c) the Director, Cultural Research Institute, Backward Classes Welfare Department or any officer not below the rank of Deputy Director, duly authorized by him. Expert Member (3)Subject to any agent or special order of the State Government, provisions of this Act and rules made thereunder, the Committee shall have powers-
a)to verify the social status of a person in whose favour a certificate is issued under section 5;
b)to issue direction to the Vigilance Cell constituted under section 8B;
c)to make an inquiry in connection with the contravention of any provision of this Act;
d)to issue notice to any person or authority in such manner as may be prescribed;
e)to call for information from any person or authority for the purpose of satisfying itself whether there has been any contravention of any provision of this Act or any rule or order made or direction issued thereunder;
f)to require any person or authority or produce or deliver any document or thing useful or relevant to the inquiry;
g)to examine any person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case;
h)to issue direction under sub-section (2) of section 9 to the certificate issuing authority;
i)to do such other things and perform such other acts not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act as may appear to be necessary or expedient for the proper conduct of its function, or which may be prescribed.
(4)The Committee shall meet as such place and time, and the meeting shall be conducted in such manner, as may be prescribed.
(5)All order or direction of the Committee shall be authenticated by the Chairperson of by such officer of the Committee as may be authorized by the Chairperson on this behalf.
Constitution of Vigilance Cell and its power
8B. (1) The state Government may, by order, constitute a Vigilance Cell for each district of the West Bengal.
(2)The Vigilance Cell shall consist of-
a)an Officer-in-charge not below the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police, and
b)such number of investigating officers not exceeding three from amongst the police officers in the rank of Inspector.
(3)Subject to any general or special order of the State Government or the provisions of this Act and rules made thereunder, the Vigilance Cell shall have powers –
a)to inquire the cases relating to social status claims of a person in whose favour a certificate is issued under section 5;
b)to make an inquiry in connection with the contravention of any provision of this Act;
c)to issue notice to any person or authority in such manner as may be prescribed;
d)to call for information from any person or authority for the purpose of satisfying himself whether there has been any contravention of any provisions of this Act or any rule or order made or direction issued thereunder;
e)to require any person or authority to produce or deliver any document or thing useful or relevant to the enquiry;
f)to examine any person or authority acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case;
g)to do such other things and perform such other acts not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act as may appear to be necessary or expedient for the proper conduct of its function, or which may be prescribed.
Power to cancel, impound or revoke certificate,
9.(1) If the certificate issuing authority is satisfied that a certificate under this Act has been obtained by any person by furnishing any false information or by misrepresenting any fact or by suppression any material information or by producing any document which is an act of forgery, it may cancel, impound or revoke such certificate in such manner as may be prescribed.
Amendment of section 9
(2)Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), if the Committee is satisfied that a certificate under this Act has been obtained by any persons by furnishing any false information or by misrepresenting any fact or by suppressing any material information or by producing any document is an act of forgery, it may issue a direction to the certificate issuing authority, in such manner as may be prescribed, to cancel, impound or revoke such certificate and, on receipt of such direction, the certificate issuing authority shall, by order in writing, cancel, impound or revoke such certificate."
Section 2(a) of the Act of 1994 (as amended by West Bengal Act of 2007) defines the 'State Scrutiny Committee'. Section 8A of the Act defines the powers and functions of the said Committee. Section 9(2) of the Act empowers the Committee to cancel a Caste Certificate issued under Section 5 of the Act in the manner provided therein notwithstanding the power of cancellation vested in the Certificate Issuing Authority under Section 9(1) of the Act.
The Sub-Divisional Officer on receipt of direction from the Deputy Commissioner for Reservation and Ex-Officio Deputy Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Backward Classes Welfare Department initiated a proceeding against the petitioners and called for report from the Block Development Officer and issued notices to the petitioners and passed the impugned order.
Admittedly, the Sub-Divisional Officer has not forwarded the report to the Scrutiny Committee. Only on the basis of the report of the Block Development Officer, has passed the impugned order. From the impugned order, it also reveals that the Sub-Divisional Officer has issued a letter to the Director, Cultural Research Institute, Kankurgachi, Kolkata, to conduct an expert identification mapping to the petitioners’ lineage and share their expert anthropological findings but no report was received by the Sub-Divisional Officer and without any report, the Sub-Divisional Officer has passed the impugned order.
It is also the specific case of the petitioners that though the Sub-Divisional Officer has relied upon two reports of the Block Development Officer but no report was served upon the petitioners. It is also the case of the petitioners that the complaint was also not served upon the petitioners.
In the case of Darvell Investment and Leasing (I) Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs. State of West Bengal and Others reported in 2015 (2) CHN (CAL) 674 before the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court a short question which arose for the decision in the said appeal was whether the State Scrutiny Committee constituted under the West Bengal Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Identification) Act, 1994, is empowered to enquire into a complaint of illegal cancellation of caste certificate by the certificate issuing authority under Section 9(1) of the Act of 1994 and/or to verify the social status of the certificate holder in relation thereto. The Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court held that:
“40.Let me examine the statutory provisions in West Bengal Act 4 of 2007 in that light.
41.Section 2(a) of the Act defines the 'Committee' as State Scrutiny Committee constituted under section 8A for verification of social status of a person in whose favour a caste certificate under section 5 is issued. Section 8A(2) provides that the Committee shall comprise of the Secretary of the Backward Classes Department as Chairperson, Commissioner, Directorate of Backward Classes Welfare or his authorized representative not below the rank of Deputy Director as Convenor and the Director, Cultural Research Institute, Backward Classes Welfare Department or his authorized representative as an Expert Member.
42.Sub-section (1) of section 8A empowers the said Committee to verify social status of a person in whose favour a certificate is issued under section 5 of the Act. Section 9(2) of the Act lays down that the Committee may upon due enquiry direct cancellation of a caste certificate procured upon false information, misrepresentation, suppression or forgery. Such provisions, however, are not exhaustive of the powers of the Committee. Sub-section (3) of section 8A provides for other powers of the said Committee too. Clause (c) of sub-section 8A(3) of the Act empowers the Committee to make an enquiry in connection with contravention of any provision of the said Act. Clause (e) thereof authorises the Committee to call for information from any person or authority for the purpose of satisfying itself whether there has been any contravention of any provisions of the Act or any Rule or order made thereunder and clause (i) gives power to the Committee to do such thing or act which are not in consistent with the provision of the law for the proper conduct of its functions which may appear to the Committee to be necessary or expedient for the proper conduct of its function.
43.Powers vested in the Committee under clauses (c), (e) and (i) of section 8A(3) are couched in the widest terms. It empowers the Committee to enquire into contravention of any provision of the Act, to seek information from any person or authority in that regard and to perform such other thing or act which may be necessary or expedient for exercise of its functions which are not in consistent with the Act. There is no express embargo/prohibition in the Act disentitling the Committee from enquiring into illegal cancellation of caste certificate by Certificate Issuing Authority under section 9(1) of the Act. Nor is an order of cancellation issued under section 9(1) of the Act final unlike an appellate order of refusal of caste certificate under section 7(3) of the Act.
44.In view of the socio-legal background leading to constitution of the Committee to weed out cases of illegal and unjust deprivation of deserving members of the SC/ST community from their constitutional privileges, the high-powered composition of the Committee comprising of senior and experienced personnel and the wide and unfettered amplitude of the words employed in describing the powers of the Committee in sub-clauses(c), (e) and (i) of section 8A(3) of the Act one is persuaded to hold that such powers are independent and not ancillary or incidental to the power vested in the Committee under sub-section(1) of section 8A of the Act.
45.Hence, we are unable to accept the contention of the learned senior counsel of the appellants that the powers of the Committee enumerated in section 8A(3) of the Act are not substantive in nature but are ancillary and/or incidental to the powers of the Committee as provided in sub-section (1) of section 8A of the Act. The ratio in Beedi Leaves (supra) is therefore of no assistance to the appellants.
46.A conjoint reading of the aforesaid provisions would make it clear that the intention of the legislature was not to restrict the power of the State Scrutiny Committee merely to verify social status of persons in whose favour a certificate has been illegally issued under section 5. The Committee is empowered to look into all contraventions of any provisions of the Act. An illegal cancellation of a caste certificate issued under section 5 of the Act to a member of the SC/ST community without following the procedure laid down in section 9(1) read with Rule 3 of the State Rules (as alleged in this case) is undoubtedly a contravention of the provisions of the Act which would be amenable to the supervisory jurisdiction of the Committee under section 8A(3)(c)(e) & (i) of the Act.
47.It is trite law that social legislations are to be interpreted in a manner so that the benefits under the said law may be extended to the members of the socially backward community which it seeks to protect. Reference may be made to Pandey Oraon Vs. Ram Chander Sahu and Ors., MANU/SC/0045/1992 : 1992 Supp.(2) SCC 77 where the Apex Court while interpreting beneficial provisions of Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act enacted to protect the property rights of Scheduled Caste community held as follows:
"7.The provision is beneficial and the legislative intention is to extend protection to a class of citizens who are not in a position to keep their property to themselves in the absence of protection. Therefore, when the legislature is extending special protection to the named category, the Court has to give a liberal construction to the protective mechanism which would work out the protection and enable the sphere of protection to be effective than limit by (sic) the scope."
48.Act of 1994 is a social legislation to identify and acknowledge the status of members of the scheduled caste and scheduled tribe by issuing certificates under section 5 of the said Act so that they may enjoy constitutional privileges reserved for them.
49.Unjust and/or unfair cancellation of such status by an authority without following the procedure laid down in the Act and the Rules framed thereunder would result in grave injustice to such member of the socially and educationally backward community.
50.State Scrutiny Committee is a high powered expert body comprising of the most experienced personnel who have the requisite expertise, experience and machinery at their disposal to make proper enquiry into the social status of an individual whose caste certificate has been illegally cancelled by the Certificate Issuing Authority in contravention of the procedure provided under the Act and the rules framed thereunder. To denude the Committee of such jurisdiction by merely referring to the definition clause in Section 2(a) or its powers under section 8A(1) of the Act would render the powers engrafted in clauses (c), (e) and (i) of section 8A(3) otiose and redundant. Such an interpretation would also militate against the real intention of the legislature and deprive a deserving member of the SC/ST community from ventilating his grievances under the statutory scheme against illegal cancellation of his caste certificate in contravention of the provisions of the Act before the high-powered expert body which is best suited to enquire into such contraventions. To hold otherwise would defeat both the letter and spirit of the law which seeks to create a plenary expert body to verify social status of individuals and ensure that the deserving members of SC/ST community are not deprived of their just constitutional privileges.
51.For the aforesaid reasons, it is opined that the Committee has jurisdiction to enquire into complaints of illegal cancellation of caste certificate by the Certificate Issuing Authority in contravention of the provisions of the Act under section 9(1) of the Act and undertake verification of the social status of the aggrieved person in connection therewith.”
In the present case also the Sub-Divisional Officer has initiated proceedings against the petitioners under Section 9(1) of the Act of 1994 read with Rule 3 of the Rules of 1995 and passed the impugned order. The State Scrutiny Committee is empowered to look into all contraventions of any provisions of the Act. An illegal cancellation of a Caste Certificate issued under Section 5 of the Act to a member of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes community without following the procedure laid down in Section 9(1) read with Rule 3 of the State Rules is undoubtedly a contravention of the provisions of the Act which would be amenable to the supervisory jurisdiction of the Committee under Sections 8A (3)(c)(e) and (i) of the Act.
The State Scrutiny Committee is a high power expert body comprising of the most experienced personnel who have the requisite expertise, experience and machinery at their disposal to make proper enquiry into the social status of an individual whose Caste Certificate has been illegally cancelled by the Certificate Issuing Authority in contravention of the procedure provided under the Act and the Rules framed there under.
In view of the above, the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer dated 29th July, 2026, is set aside and quashed. The Sub-Divisional Officer is directed to refer the proceeding initiated by him against the petitioners to the State Scrutiny Committee forthwith and the Committee is directed to take appropriate decision after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners with respect to cancellation/ impounding or revocation of the Scheduled Tribe Certificates issued to the petitioners within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of the records of the proceedings from the Sub-Divisional Officer, Jangipur, Murshidabad.
WPA No. 21394 of 2026 is disposed of.