Proper procedure and adherence to guidelines are essential for verifying caste status, and failure to comply can invalidate decisions related to caste certificates.

i. Order dated 06.06.2009 of constitution of a Vigilance Cell in the Directorate of WPT & BC;

ii. Communication dated 11.07.2019 issued by the WPT & BC Department directing enquiry into the social status of the petitioner;

iii. Notification dated 05.09.2022 of reconstitution of the State Level Scrutiny Committee (hereinafter SLSC) and

iv. Speaking order dated 12.01.2024 of the SLSC.

2. The challenge nos. i, iii and iv above, are based on the allegation that the same are in violation of the direction of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kumari Madhuri Patil vs. Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development , reported in (1994) 6 SCC 241. The second prayer has been made by questioning the authority to direct such enquiry on the social status of the petitioner.

3. To understand and appreciate the issue and the grounds of challenge vis-à-vis the defence of the respondents, it would be convenient if the facts of the case are narrated in brief. Suffice it to mention that in this writ petition, initially an order was passed on 27.03.2024 by the learned Single Judge granting an interim order suspending the impugned order dated 12.01.2024 of the SLSC and all consequential action. However, the said order was the subject matter of an appeal preferred by the State and 4 other connected respondents being WA 110/20204 in which the Hon’ble Division Bench had passed an order dated 03.04.2024 whereby the aforesaid interim order was interfered with and set aside. However, considering the urgency, the matter was directed to be listed before the learned Single Bench for final disposal.

4. The facts projected in the writ petition and those emanating from the pleadings and upon hearing is that the SLSC had passed an order dated 12.01.2024 that the petitioner does not belong to Boro/Boro Kachari community, which is a recognized ST(P) community in the State of Assam. It however transpires that pursuant thereto, an order dated 20.01.2024 has been passed by the Government of Assam cancelling the Caste Certificate dated 17.10.2011, issued in favour of the petitioner.

5. I have heard Shri Salman Khursid, learned Senior Counsel, who has appeared online, assisted by Shri M. Sarania, learned counsel for the petitioner. I have also heard Shri D. Saikia, learned Advocate General, Assam, assisted by Shri K. Gogoi and Mr. R. Dhar, learned State Counsel for the official respondents. I have also heard Shri D. Das, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri N. Das, learned counsel for the respondent no. 8.

6. Shri Khursid, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has, at the outset, drawn the attention of this Court to the observations made by the Hon’ble Division Bench in paragraph 32 of the judgment dated 03.04.2024 and has contended that the present consideration is to be made independently as the said order was passed for the limited purpose of disposal of the writ appeal.

7. Giving a brief history of the case, Shri Khurshid, the learned Senior Counsel has submitted that the petitioner was granted a caste certificate dated 12.10.2011 by the competent authority by recognizing him to belong to the "Boro Kachari" community which is a Scheduled Tribe (Plains) [hereinafter ST(P)]. On the strength of the said certificate, the petitioner had successfully contested the Parliamentary elections from the Kokrajhar constituency of the State which is a reserved constituency for ST(P) on two occasions and is presently a Member of Parliament. The first election of the petitioner was the subject matter of challenge in an Election Petition which had reached the Hon’b