1. All these writ petitions being WP (C) No. 1225/2016 [Sri. Gauranga Chandra Sarkar vs. State of Tripura and Others], WP (C) No. 1240/2016 [Sri. Kartik Sarkar vs. State of Tripura and Others] and WP (C) No. 170/2017 [Smt. Pratima Sarkar vs. State of Tripura and Others] are consolidated for disposal by common judgment for the reason that by the common final order dated 19.10.2016 under No. F.2-137(MTB-2)/SCW/GL/98 the State Level Scrutiny Committee (SLSC, for short) has cancelled the status certificates of the petitioners. Most importantly, all the petitioners are sons and daughter of Manoranjan Sarkar, since deceased and thus the petitioners are uterine brothers and sister. It would be apposite to note that in this regard there is no dispute. It is also not in dispute that the SLSC has conducted an inquiry initially by a Vigilance Officer and thereafter on affording purported reasonable opportunities to the petitioners the SLSC has passed the said final order by cancelling the status (SC) certificates of the petitioners on observing that the petitioners do not belong to ‘Namasudra’ community which is recognized as the Scheduled Caste (SC) in the State of Tripura. The petitioners claimed that they belong to that community.

2. The impugned final order dated 19.10.2016 is available at Annexure-12 in the writ petition being WP (C) No. 1225/2016 filed by the petitioner namely Gauranga Chandra Sarkar, at Annexure-11 of the writ petition being WP (C) No. 1240/2016 filed by the petitioner namely Kartik Chandra Sarkar and at Annexure-15 of the writ petition being WP (C) No. 170/2017 filed by Smt. Pratima Sarkar.

3. On the basis of a complaint received from the Tripura SC Welfare Society, Udaipur Branch in the year 1998, the inquiry proceeding was launched against the petitioners who originally hail from a village called Khupilong, Udaipur now under District Gomati. That complaint was sent as per rule to be enquired into by the Vigilance Officer. The Vigilance Officer having enquired submitted the report dated 25.02.2005 clearly observing that none of the petitioners and another Smt. Parbati Sarkar belonged to the Scheduled Caste community. In addition to the said inquiry report, the SLSC obtained the report from the B.D.O., Matabari R.D. Block along with views of SC Welfare Sub Committee on the caste status of the petitioners and Smt. Parbati Sarkar [to avoid unnecessary narration this Court would henceforth be dealing only with the cases of the petitioners and here-in-after the reference would instead be made as the petitioners]. The said report as called for has according to the SLSC clearly shown that the petitioners did not belong to the scheduled castes. Having satisfied by the prima facie materials, the SLSC issued the show cause notice dated 24.04.2008 [Annexure-1 to the writ petitions] along with a copy of the report of the Deputy Superintendent of Police (Vigilance) to each of the petitioners separately by giving them opportunity to make representation if any, in writing in support of their caste status along with relevant records/evidence within two weeks from the date of receipt of the notice, failing which it was cautioned, it shall be presumed that they had nothing to say and a decision accordingly would be taken ex-parte. The petitioners were further instructed to specifically mention in the representation whether they would seek an opportunity of hearing or claim any inquiry to be made by the SLSC. It has been also observed failing to mention in the manner as stated, it should be further presumed that the petitioners had abandoned such claim.

4. The petitioners filed their reply [Annexure-2 to the writ petitions] dealing elaborately with the finding of the vigilance report and also by incorporating the statements in support of their claim to be member of the scheduled caste community. Along with t