Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J. - (1.) This mandamus appeal is at the instance of an unsuccessful writ petitioner and is directed against an order dated 6th December, 2004 passed by a learned Single Judge by which His Lordship dismissed the writ application filed by the present appellant in which the appellant prayed for setting aside the order dated 26th October, 2004 passed by the respondent No.4 in Cancellation Proceeding No.24 of 2003 by which the said respondent cancelled the Scheduled Tribe Certificate earlier granted to the appellant.
(2.) The facts giving rise to filing of the said writ application may be epitomised thus: "(a) The appellant describing himself as a member of Bedia community had obtained a Scheduled Tribe Certificate from the respondent No.4 bearing No.46667 dated 3rd January, 2002 from the office of the Sub- Divisional Officer, Balurghat. (b) Subsequently, on a preliminary enquiry, it was detected that the appellant was not a resident of the village Raghunathpur as described in the earlier certificate granted to him but was actually a resident of the village Sunderpukur under the Gangarampur Sub-Pivision. (c) In view of the aforesaid fact, a proceeding was initiated against the appellant under Rule 3 of the West Bengal Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Identification) Rules for cancellation of the earlier certificate as he obtained the said certificate on the basis of false information as regards his place of residence. (d) Accordingly, a notice was issued to the said appellant asking him to deposit the Scheduled Tribe Certificate granted to him and to show-cause why the said certificate should not be cancelled. (e) Instead of depositing the said certificate, the appellant had shown cause to the said notice along with some documents. The appellant also filed a writ application challenging the initiation of the cancellation proceeding. The said writ application was disposed of by directing the respondent No.4 to conclude the proceeding within a specified period after giving an opportunity of hearing to the appellant. (f) Pursuant to the said direction given by the High Court, the appellant was served with a notice to appear before the respondent No.4. The appellant, accordingly, appeared with his written statement and also filed some documents in support of his claim that he was a member of the Bedia community. (g) The respondent No.4 on consideration of the materials placed by the appellant before him came to the conclusion that the appellant had earlier procured the Scheduled Tribe Certificate by giving false information as regards his place of residence and also using fabricated documents. It was further held that the appellant failed to prove that he was a member of the Bedia community. (h) Being dissatisfied, the appellant preferred a fresh writ application before this Court challenging the decision of the respondent No.4 and a learned Single Judge of this Court, by the order impugned herein, has rejected the said writ application by affirming the order passed by the respondent No.4."
(3.) Being dissatisfied, the appellant has come up with the present mandamus appeal.;