SUDIP DEBBARMA Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals arise in common background. They have been heard together and would be disposed of by this common judgment. All the appellants-original petitioners belong to the same clan and claim to be members of Scheduled Tribe (ST) recognized in the State of Tripura. In their favour ST certificates were also issued. These ST certificates came under scrutiny and the specially constituted committee called the State Level Scrutiny Committee (SLSC, for short) as per the decision of the Supreme Court in case of Kumari Madhuri Patil and another v. Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development and others reported in (1994) 6 SCC 241 quashed these certificates. The appellants unsuccessfully challenged such decisions of SLSC before the learned Single Judge who dismissed all the petitions by a common judgment which has been challenged in these appeals.

(2.) Before recording facts at some length, we may give brief background in relation to the question of issuance, verification and cancellation of caste certificates. As is well-known, large number of complaints is received alleging fraudulent claims of reservation either in public service or in education. On account of enormity of such complaints and seriousness of a person claiming false caste status and thereby fraudulently availing the benefit of reservation, the Supreme Court in case of Kumari Madhuri Patil (supra) examined the issues at length and laid down the procedure for dealing with the complaints of false caste certificates. It was observed that admission wrongly gained or appointment wrongly obtained on the basis of false social status certificate necessarily has the effect of depriving the genuine Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe or OBC candidates of the benefits conferred on them by the Constitution. It was further observed that the ineligible or spurious persons who falsely gained entry, resort to dilatory tactics and create hurdles in completion of the inquiries by the Scrutiny Committee. It was, therefore, found necessary to streamline the procedure for issuance of social status certificates, their scrutiny and their approval. The Supreme Court, therefore, created following mechanism in the said judgment:

(3.) In the context of scope and jurisdiction of the High Court to examine the correctness of the decision of SLSC it was observed as under: