IMPORTANT POINT
The judgment emphasizes the importance of a reasoned order, personal examination of the candidate or their parents/guardians, and the right to lead evidence in the proceeding in the determination of tribe status.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Salman Khurshid, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. M. Sarania, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Saikia, learned Advocate General, Assam assisted by Mr. K. Gogoi, learned counsel for the State and Mr. B.C. Das, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the respondent No. 8.

2. The present writ petition is filed assailing the speaking order dated 12.01.2024 passed by the State Level Caste Scrutiny Committee (SLSC), whereby it is held that petitioner does not belong to Boro Kachari Tribe.

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Salman Khurshid had extensively argued praying for an interim protection by staying the impugned speaking order dated 12.01.2024 passed by the State Level Scrutiny Committee (SLSC) with all further consequential action thereto. The learned Advocate General of Assam, Mr. D. Saikia, had also elaborately and extensively argued for rejection of such interim prayer. Mr. B.C. Das, learned Senior Counsel also supported such arguments advanced by the learned Advocate General.

4. For the purpose of consideration of the interim prayer, the following necessary facts highlighted by the Learned Senior Counsels for the parties are recorded:

i. On 17.10.2011, the petitioner was issued a certificate certifying that the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Tribes (Plains) being a Member of Boro Kachari community, recognized as Scheduled Tribes (Plains) under the Constitution of India (Schedule Tribe) Order 1950. Such certificate issued by All Assam Tribal Sangha, was countersigned by Sub Divisional Officer (C), Tamulpur.

ii. The respondent No. 8, Sri Janaklal Basumatary challenged the election of the petitioner as Member of Parliament from a Parliamentary Constituency reserved for ST(P) on the ground that petitioner does not belong to ST (P) community. The respondent No. 8 also filed a writ petition in the Court in the year 2014 challenging such Certificate. The Election petition was dismissed by this Court and such decision was affirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court. The writ petition was closed being infructuous. Thereafter, the respondent No.8 filed a complaint before the Chairman, SLAC on 11.06.2019 with a prayer to cancel the certificate dated 17.10.2011 issued in favour of the petitioner.

iii. On the basis of such a complaint, the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Assam, WPT&BC requested the Director to enquire about the caste status of the petitioner through vigilance enquiry comittee.

iv. Thereafter, on 30.07.2019 one Jadu Ram Malakar, Vigilance Officer of the Vigilance Cell was asked to verify the caste certificate of three persons, including the petitioner.

v. On 23.10.2019, the Vigilance Officer prepared an enquiry report and submitted the same before the Superintendent of CID and the Superintendent of Police, CID in turn submitted the report before the Director on 25.10.2019.

vi. According to the said report, the petitioner is Sarania Kachari, and belongs to ST(P) in terms of a decision of the State whereby Sarania Kacharis were brought under the purview of the ST(P).

vii. Thereafter, by a communication dated 25.10.2019, the Secretary to the Government of Assam WPT & BC Department requested the Deputy Commissioner, Baksa, Mushalpur to submit a caste status report of the petitioner taking into account the documents relating to his land and legacy data. Along with the said communication, the copy of the complaint filed by the respondent No. 8 Janaklal Basumatary was also forwarded.

viii. Pursuant to the aforesaid request, the Deputy Commissioner submitted a report on 06.11.2019 to the effect that the father’s name of the petitioner was recorded as “Lakhi Sarukoch” in land documents and “Lakhi Kanta Sarukoch” in NRC related document.

ix. The Annexure-15 reflects that on 06.11.2019, the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Baksa also submitted a report to the DC that the caste certificate issued in favour of the petitioner was duly countersigned.

x.