Basudeb Mahato vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 1336 Cal

22.02.2023 sayandeep

WPA 3579 of 2023

Basudeb Mahato

-Versus-

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Prohlad Chandra Ghosh Ms. Kakoli Samajpati Mr. Subir Hazra .....for the petitioner Mr. Debasish Ghosh Ms. Piyali Sengupta .....for the State

The petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated 7th

February, 2023 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer,

Lalbagh, cancelling the Caste Certificate of the

petitioner under Section 9(1) of the West Bengal

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Identification)

Act, 1994. The impugned order was passed on the

basis of the petitioner obtaining Scheduled Tribe

Certificate from the SDO, Lalbagh by furnishing forged

documents including the petitioner's ration card and

the ration card of his uncle.

The petitioner seeks to have this order quashed.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits

that there has been violation of principles of natural

justice and that the matter should now be sent to the

Scrutiny Committee under the provisions of the 1994

Act.

Learned counsel appearing for the State relies on

a Judgment of a co-ordinate Bench in WPA 15952 of

2018 (Sumitra Sarkar vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.) to

submit that the petitioner was given a hearing and that

the impugned order was passed upon a detailed enquiry

pointing to certain facts which led to cancellation of the

petitioner's Caste Certificate.

Section 9 of the West Bengal Scheduled Castes

and Scheduled Tribes (Identification), Act, 1994

provides for the power to cancel, impound or revoke a

certificate. Section 9(1) gives the power to the certificate

issuing authority when such authority is satisfied that

the certificate under the Act has been obtained by a

person upon furnishing false information or by

misrepresentation or suppression of material

information.

Section 9(2) is a separate and distinct provision

which starts with non obstante clause and reserves the

power to cancel Caste Certificate to the Committee upon

similar conditions. Section 8A of the Act, which

provides for constitution of a State Scrutiny Committee.

It is evident from the facts in the present writ

petition that the impugned cancellation was not made

by the Committee but by the certificate issuing

authority which is the Sub-Divisional Officer, Lalbagh.

Hence, Section 9(1) of the Act would be relevant for the

present case and not Section 9(2).

The impugned order indicates that the SDO

considered two reports in coming to the conclusion that

there has been misrepresentation of material facts. The

first is an enquiry Report dated 19th December, 2022 of

the concerned Inspector of the SDO office and second,

the Report of the Sub-Divisional Controller, Food and

Supplies, Lalbagh. The SDO formed an opinion based

on these two Reports to hold that the petitioner had

obtained the Caste Certificate from the certificate

issuing authority by furnishing forged documents. The

impugned order makes it evident that none of these two

Reports were furnished to the petitioner before the

conclusions were arrived at. Besides, Rule 3(4)(a) of the

West Bengal Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

(Identification) Rules, 1995 makes it clear that the

complainant as well as holder of the certificate shall be

given a notice of hearing and shall be asked to bring all

documentary evidence in support of their respective

cases. Rule 4 further provides that any order by the

certificate issuing authority for the purpose of hearing

of the witness giving evidence against or in support

shall be in writing. Both these Rules indicate the

procedure to be followed by the concerned authority

and certainly indicate that the certificate holder shall be

given sufficient opportunity to present his/her case.

The impugned order makes it clear that this

opportunity was not given to the petitioner since none

of the two Reports relied on by the SDO were furnished

to the petitioner. This is in breach of principles of

natural justice and against the scope of Rules 3 and 4

of the 1995 Rules.

WPA 3579 of 2023 is allowed for the above

reasons and disposed of by quashing the impugned

order dated 7th February, 2023. The concerned

authority shall be at liberty of taking proceeding in the

matter but with due compliance of the 1994 Act and

1995 Rules.

(Moushumi Bhattacharya, J.)