In a significant ruling delivered on February 25, 2026, the Calcutta High Court directed the immediate cancellation of an OBC certificate held by a sitting Gram Panchayat Pradhan in Purba Medinipur. The Court held that the Sub-Divisional Officer (SDO) had rightly concluded that the elected representative did not belong to the claimed Other Backward Classes (OBC) sub-caste.
Justice Krishna Rao passed the order while deciding two connected writ petitions - one seeking cancellation of the certificate and the other challenging the SDO’s findings.
Read also:- Sikkim High Court Closes NHM Transfer Dispute After Amicable Settlement Between Employee
Background of the Case
The dispute arose after the 2023 Panchayat elections in Iswarpur Gram Panchayat under Chandipur Block. The post of Pradhan was reserved for candidates belonging to the OBC category.
Ranajit Rakshit, who contested the election as an OBC (Kansari) candidate, later alleged that the winning candidate, Khukurani Mondal Ghorai, had obtained her OBC certificate fraudulently. According to him, she did not belong to the “Tanti (Tantubaya)” sub-caste, under which she had contested the reserved seat.
Earlier, the High Court had directed the Sub-Divisional Officer, Tamluk, to conduct a fresh enquiry and pass a reasoned order after hearing both sides.
Enquiry by Authorities
Following the Court’s direction, a joint enquiry was conducted by the Block Development Officer, Joint BDO, and the Inspector in charge of Backward Classes Welfare.
The enquiry report stated that although the OBC certificate issued in 2013 was genuine in form, the certificate holder failed to produce supporting documents to prove that she belonged to the OBC sub-caste “Tanti, Tantubaya.”
Read also:- Patna High Court Dismisses Plea for Compensation Over Alleged Illegal Detention, Flags Lapses
Field enquiries revealed that most residents in the locality belonged to the Mahishya sub-caste. The report also noted that the family’s rituals, gotra (clan), and social practices aligned with the Mahishya community. In the absence of documentary proof, the Committee concluded that her claim to OBC status could not be established.
After hearing the parties, the SDO held on July 23, 2025, that she did not belong to the OBC community.
Arguments Before the Court
Senior Advocate Billwadal Bhattacharyya, appearing for the petitioner, argued that once the SDO had found that the Pradhan did not belong to the OBC category, immediate remedial steps were necessary.
He submitted, “When a person secures a reserved post on the basis of a false certificate, it amounts to fraud and strikes at the root of the constitutional reservation system.”
On the other hand, counsel for the Pradhan argued that the certificate was issued in 2013 following official guidelines and that relevant documents were lost due to a cyclone and during travel. It was also contended that the SDO lacked authority to cancel the certificate.
The State defended the enquiry process, stating that due opportunity was given and that the certificate holder failed to produce evidence in support of her caste claim.
Read also:- Madras High Court Rules Grandparents Not ‘Family’ for Stamp Duty Concession in Settlement Deeds
Court’s Observations
Justice Rao examined earlier Division Bench rulings on the powers of certificate-issuing authorities and the State Scrutiny Committee. The Court noted that under Section 9 of the West Bengal Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Identification) Act, 1994, read with the 1995 Rules, the certificate-issuing authority can initiate proceedings if there is prima facie evidence of false information.
The Court observed that the SDO had acted in compliance with earlier judicial directions and conducted a proper enquiry through a duly constituted committee. Importantly, the certificate holder neither objected to the constitution of the committee nor challenged the enquiry report.
The Court further remarked that the plea regarding loss of documents was vague, as no clear description of such documents was provided.
The judge held, “This Court does not find any illegality in the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer holding that the private respondent does not belong to OBC community, sub-caste ‘Tanti, Tantubaya’.”
Read also:- Gujarat HC Sends 17-Year-Old Girl to Mehsana Children Home After She Refuses to Return
The Final Decision
While upholding the SDO’s finding, the Court noted that despite concluding that the Pradhan did not belong to the OBC category, no formal cancellation order had yet been issued.
Accordingly, the Court directed the Sub-Divisional Officer to take immediate steps for cancellation of the OBC certificate within one week from receipt of the order.
WPA No. 21813 of 2025 was allowed, and WPA No. 20033 of 2025 was dismissed.
Case Title: Ranajit Rakshit vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. (Connected with Khukurani Mondal Ghorai vs. State of West Bengal & Ors.)
Case No.: WPA 21813 of 2025 & WPA 20033 of 2025
Decision Date: 25 February 2026
