JUDGMENT :

SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA, J.

1. The petitioner was issued a Scheduled Caste certificate by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chanchal on April 10, 2018. On the basis of such certificate, the petitioner contested in the last Panchayat Election of West Bengal held on May 14, 2018. The winning certificate for such Election was issued in favour of the petitioner on May 17, 2018. The said election was contested by the petitioner from a seat reserved for the Scheduled Caste candidates.

2. Subsequently, upon receiving a memo bearing No. 1500/SDO/CHL dated August 16, 2018, issued by the Sub-Divisional officer, Chanchal-II, Malda, the petitioner learnt of a proceeding for cancellation/impounding/revocation of the Scheduled Caste certificate of the petitioner having been initiated.

3. In the meantime, a writ petition bearing WP No. 10516(W) of 2018, was filed by the present respondent no. 6 challenging the SC certificate of the petitioner, which is still pending.

4. The hearing of the cancellation proceeding was fixed on August 21, 2018 to the knowledge of the petitioner. However, the petitioner allegedly had to be admitted to a nursing home due to her cardiac problem on August 20, 2018. An adjournment was sought on behalf of the petitioner by her son on August 21, 2018 by submitting relevant medical documents.

5. However, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Chanchal, passed the impugned order dated August 21, 2018, without granting any adjournment to the petitioner, thereby revoking and cancelling the SC certificate issued in favour of the petitioner. Being thus aggrieved, the present writ petition has been preferred.

6. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner submits that the Sub-Divisional Officer acted de hors the law in considering only the paternal genealogy of the petitioner and ignoring the genealogy of her spouse, who belongs to a scheduled caste.

7. It is argued that the petitioner belongs to the scheduled caste, both by virtue of her marriage to a scheduled caste family as well as through the lineage of her mother.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that as per Rule 3(3) of the West Bengal Scheduled Casts and Scheduled Tribes (Identification) Rules, 1995, the Certificate Issuing Authority shall, upon deposit of the certificate which has been challenged, issue a notice to the holder of the certificate to show cause within 15 days or within a period of shorter duration as it may think fit, as to why the certificate issued in his favour shall not be cancelled, impounded or revoked on the grounds stated in the notice. In the present case, however, such notice was issued only on August 16, 2018 and the date of hearing was fixed shortly thereafter, on August 21, 2018, thereby giving the petitioner far less than 15 days to prepare for such hearing.

9. That apart, it is argued that the petitioner’s prayer for adjournment, made on a single occasion due to her hospitalisation, was refused arbitrarily by the Sub-Divisional Officer and the cancellation order was passed in hot haste.

10. In this context, learned counsel relies on Rampal vs. State of Haryana and Others, (2009) 9 SCC 187. In the said case, no opportunity of hearing was granted to the certificate holder before cancelling the Scheduled Caste certificate. In the absence of such opportunity of hearing, the Supreme Court held, such cancellation was to be set aside. In the present case, no opportunity as per the rules was given to the petitioner.

11. Learned counsel then contends that no enquiry was undertaken by the Sub-Divisional Officer as contemplated under Section 8A of the West Bengal Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Identification) Act, 1994. The said provision stipulates that the State Government may, by order, constitute a Committee to be called the State Scrutiny Committee for verification of social status of a person in whose favour a certificate is issued under Section 5 of the Act.

12. Section 9(1) contemplates the power of the Certificate Issuing Authority