Unilateral withdrawal of a recommendation for a Scheduled Tribe certificate without due process violates constitutional protections for Scheduled Tribes.

JUDGMENT :

ANIRUDDHA ROY, J.

1. The last order dated January 21, 2025, as wrongly typed out, should be read as February 21, 2025 in place and stead of January 21, 2025 (as wrongly typed out).

2. This is a hearing of the writ petition upon direction for filing affidavits. Affidavit-in-opposition has been filed by the respondents. Ms. Anjili Nag, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that, considering the urgency involved in this matter, her clients shall not file any affidavit-in-reply and shall proceed on the basis of the existing records.

3. This writ petition has been considered previously on several occasions. The last order dated February 21, 2025, as corrected above, speaks for itself showing urgency in the matter. The urgency is that the petitioner no.2 is an aspirant for the entrance examination for NEET as a Scheduled Tribe candidate and the last date of submission of her application is March 01, 2025, when the petitioner no.2 shall have to produce the Scheduled Tribe certificate along with her application.

FACTS:

4. The petitioner no.1 is the mother and the petitioner no.2 is the daughter, who is the aspirant for the NEET entrance examination.

5. The grievance of the petitioners is that, despite the application being submitted through online mode on September 5, 2024, Annexure P-5 at page 51 to the writ petition, for obtaining the Scheduled Tribe certificate. The application was not considered and was kept pending. At this juncture, this petition was filed.

6. On February 21, 2025 (as corrected), this Court passed an order, inter alia, directing the respondent no.4, the jurisdictional Tehsildar, to decide the issue on the basis of the application submitted by the petitioner and to pass a reasoned order and the writ petition was directed to appear today under the heading “Special Fixed Matters”, in view of the urgency involved therein.

7. Pursuant to and in terms of the said direction of this Court, the Tehsildar passed his reasoned order on February 26, 2025 as some typographical errors were there, the order was corrected and accordingly the corrected reasoned order was passed on February 27, 2025. Copies of these orders have been placed before this Court by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. The learned counsel for the petitioners has also admitted that these are two orders passed by the Tehsildar. Copies of the said two orders dated February 26, 2025 and February 27, 2025 are taken on record.

8. The brief facts, which are inescapably required to be stated, are that the petitioner no.2 when submitted her application on September 05, 2024 through online process Annexure P-5 at page - 51 to the petition, a certificate was made part of that in that prescribed format of the application. The content of the said certificate is available at the bottom of page -51 to the writ petition which, inter alia, states that the certificate was to be issued (through Village Headman/Tribal Council) Car Nicobar. The certificate shows that the petitioner no.2 bearing the names of her parents, was certified as a bonafide tribal of Car Nicobar Islands. The said declaration/certificate bears the signatures of the Head of Tuhet, Village Headman and of the Secretary of the Tribal Council, Car Nicobar. The said format of application was the prescribed format through which one has to apply for obtaining the Scheduled Tribe certificate.

9. Tehsildar considered the case of the petitioner no.2 on the basis of the said application dated September 05, 2024 at page 51 to the writ