This judgment pertains to the cancellation of a caste certificate issued to respondent No. 15, which has been challenged through a series of legal proceedings initiated by the appellants.
The case, M/s Darvell Investment and Leasing (India) Pvt. Ltd. and others versus the State of West Bengal and others [CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6106 OF 2017]. originated with the issuance of a caste certificate to respondent No. 15, claiming membership in the Scheduled Tribe community. However, subsequent events raised doubts regarding the authenticity of this claim. It was revealed that respondent No. 15 had sold land as a member of the general category and had sworn affidavits declaring himself as such. Moreover, complaints were filed alleging violations of Sections 14B and 14C of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955, regarding the sale of Scheduled Tribe land without proper permission.
Various legal actions ensued, including applications challenging the validity of sale deeds and the caste certificate. Despite earlier dismissals of complaints against the sale deeds, further applications were filed under Section 14E of the 1955 Act. Additionally, appellants sought cancellation of the caste certificate issued to respondent No. 15, alleging fraud.
The proceedings involved administrative actions such as cancellation of the caste certificate by the certificate issuing authority, subsequent appeals filed by respondent No. 15 against such cancellations, and orders issued by the District Magistrate and Additional District Magistrate. These actions were further contested through writ petitions filed by the appellants, challenging administrative decisions and directives.
The case progressed through multiple stages of appeal, including challenges before the State Level Scrutiny Committee and the High Court. The Committee initially revoked the cancellation of the caste certificate but was later directed by the High Court to reconsider the matter. Subsequent orders and judgments iterated the jurisdiction of the Committee and the validity of its decisions.
The present petition before the Supreme Court seeks to challenge the judgment of the High Court, which upheld the jurisdiction of the Committee to investigate complaints regarding the cancellation of the caste certificate. The appellants contest the interpretation of relevant provisions of the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955, and argue against the legitimacy of the caste certificate obtained by respondent No. 15.
The primary contention raised by the appellants is the legality of the High Court’s judgment affirming the Committee’s jurisdiction to hear appeals regarding the cancellation of caste certificates. The appellants argue that the amendment to Section 8A of the West Bengal Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Identification) Act, 1994, enacted in 2017, cannot be considered retrospective as it lacks explicit legislative intent for retrospective application. They further question the bona fides of respondents No. 15 to 18, highlighting instances where they allegedly misrepresented their caste status.
The court meticulously examines the evidence presented, including the history of land transactions involving late Ramanand Baraik, father of respondent No. 15, who during his lifetime never claimed Scheduled Tribe status. Notably, the court observes that late Ramanand Baraik’s employment records indicate his classification as a general category employee. Additionally, respondent No. 15 himself had previously sworn affidavits affirming his general caste status. The court scrutinizes the series of land sales executed by Ramanand Baraik, finding no challenge to these transactions until much later.
Crucially, the court addresses the jurisdictional aspect concerning the Committee’s authority to adjudicate on caste certificate cancellations. While acknowledging the absence of explicit provision for retrospective application, the court opines that procedural laws, like the amendment in question, may apply retroactively. However, the court deems it unnecessary to delve deeply into this issue, given the conduct of the respondents and the lack of merit in their claims.
Ultimately, the court finds in favor of the appellants, setting aside the High Court’s judgment. It dismisses the idea of remitting the matter for further examination, citing the absence of merit in respondent No. 15’s claim. The court’s decision underscores the lack of credibility in the respondent’s assertions regarding their caste status and the related land transactions.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Aditi
Click here to view the judgment
