NADIRA PATHERYA, J. - (1.) BY this writ petition the petitioners have challenged the order dated 28th March, 2014 and sought for a declaration that the Scrutiny Committee, Backward Classes Welfare Department, Government of West Bengal has no authority to scrutinize or verify the social status of the private respondent no.14.
(2.) THE case of the writ petitioner is that one Ramananda Baraik was the owner of the property purchased by the writ petitioner. The said Baraik belonged to the general category. One Sanjay Gupta in 1983 purchased the subject property. The respondent nos. 14 to 17 are the legal heirs of Baraik and a tribal certificate was issued in favour of the respondent no.14 on 23rd April, 1999. According to respondent no.14 he belonged to the "Chik Baraik" Schedule Tribe community. On January 22, 2004 an application was filed under Section 14E of the Land and Land Reforms Act, 1955 before the authority alleging violation of Section 14C of the 1955 Act. An order was passed on November 29, 2004 by the Revenue Officer holding that the sale was bad as no permission had been taken. The said order was challenged under Section 14H of the 1955 Act and dismissed on 16th March, 2005. A revisional application was filed before the District Judge which was dismissed for default. The said was restored and in revision the order was set aside and sent on remand. In 2013 the proceeding filed before the District Judge was withdrawn. An application was filed on 29th March, 2012 for cancellation of the certificate issued in favour of the respondent nos. 14 to 17 by the writ petitioner and by order dated 6th July, 2012 the certificate was cancelled as Ramananda Baraik belonged to the general category. From the said order an appeal was filed before the Additional District Magistrate by the respondent no.14 which was dismissed in January 2013.
(3.) BEFORE the Commissioner, Jalpaiguri Division an appeal was filed by the respondent no.14 and on his advice that an appeal be filed before the Scrutiny Committee, the appeal before the Scrutiny Committee was filed. An order was passed staying the mutation proceeding. At this stage W.P.10002 (W ) of 2013 was filed challenging the order dated 6th March, 2013. During the pendency of the said writ petition proceeding before the Commissioner, Jalpaiguri Division was withdrawn and the first writ petition rendered infructuous. Before the Scrutiny Committee the appeal was filed in December 2013 seeking revocation of cancellation. The said was challenged in a subsequent writ petition and an order was passed on 28th January, 2014 whereby the order dated 23rd December, 2013 was set aside, with a direction that the jurisdictional aspect ought to be considered as the preliminary issue. Pursuant to the said order dated 28th January, 2014 the order under challenge dated 28th March, 2014 was passed, whereby, the Scrutiny Committee upheld its jurisdiction to consider a case of cancellation under the 1994 Act. The petitioners filed a counter to the said appeal and sought for rejection of the appeal on the ground that an appeal could be filed in case of refusal to grant certificate but not in a case of cancellation. Section 8A of the 1994 Act deals with the constitution of the State Scrutiny Committee and its function is to verify the social status of a person in whose favour a certificate has been issued under Section 5.;