The burden of proof regarding caste status lies with the certificate holder, and the court may not re-evaluate factual determinations made by administrative bodies.

1. By this intra - court appeal, the judgment and order dated 22.09.2016 delivered in W.P.(C) No.275 of 2011 [Sri Ashok Das vs. the State of Tripura] by a learned Single Judge of this Court has been challenged by the writ petitioner, the appellant herein.

2. The State Level Scrutiny Committee, the SLSC in short, by the order dated 21.05.2011, Annexure - P / 6 to the writ petition, has cancelled the Scheduled Caste (SC) certificate bearing No.739 / SDO / BLN / CTZN / 90 dated 01.11.1990 issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Belonia, South Tripura. On challenging the said order, the petitioner has filed the writ petition. The SLSC in the order dated 21.05.2011 has recorded how they have inquired into the veracity of the claim that the petitioner belongs to Mahishya Das Community, members of which, is recognized as the Scheduled Caste in Tripura.

3. Having received of the complaint dated 13.08.1998 lodged by one Samir Das, the Director of Scheduled Caste Welfare, Government of Tripura had sent the said complaint to the Statutory Sub-Committee for the Scheduled Castes at Rajnagar RD Block. It appears from the records that the said Sub-Committee for the Scheduled Caste in their meeting held on 28.02.2002 had resolved unanimously as under:
"On the basis of reference No.19012-13 of 2-138 BSN - 51 SCW GL 98 dated 03.11.2001 of the SC & OBC Welfare Directorate, the case of SC certificate of Sri Ashok Das, S/O - Sri Promode Ranjan Das of village Ballamukha, Bankar, Belonia, South Tripura has been examined and after detailed discussions it has been found that the said person does not belong to Scheduled Caste."

4. The said Sub-Committee came to a clear decision that the petitioner does not belong to the Scheduled Caste community. Thereafter, the reference was made by the Director for Welfare of Scheduled Caste and OBC's Welfare, Government of Tripura to the SLSC. The SLSC in observance of the procedure as laid down in R.7A of the Tripura Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Reservation Rules , 1992 had sent the said complaint to the Director of Vigilance. After investigation, the Vigilance Officer submitted the report to the SLSC on 09.03.2005. It has been clearly held in the vigilance report that the petitioner does not belong to the Scheduled Caste community rather he belongs to 'Barui' community which is not recognized as the Scheduled Caste community. The vigilance officer had submitted his report after recording the statements of the persons who were living in the neighbourhood and reasonably believed to have knowledge about the status of the petitioner. With the report of the Vigilance Officer, the report of the Statutory Sub-Committee and a copy of the complaint was sent to the petitioner asking for his reply, if any. It has been stated in the notice that he may submit the reply in writing with all relevant records, evidence and he may also appear for personal hearing. In response to the show cause notice, the petitioner has submitted his reply on 15.09.2010. Thereafter, the petitioner availed accommodation no various dates but on 15.11.2010 he had urged for a long adjournment. The SLSC granted 2(two) weeks time for personal hearing on fixing the next date on 02.12.2010. But the petitioner was absent on that day. However, he filed a writ petition being W.P. (C) No. 565 of 2010 in this court challenging the said show cause notice. By the judgment and order dated 05.01.2011, the said writ petition was disposed of on consensus with the following directions:
"The respondent No.2 is directed to dispose of the reply [Annexure - 3 to the writ petition] of the petitioner to the show cause notice b