Calcutta High Court Voids OBC Certificates Issued Under 2025 State Notifications, Says Candidates Must Be Treated As General Category

The Calcutta High Court has held that OBC certificates issued on the basis of the West Bengal Government's notifications issued in May-June 2025 were void ab initio, after finding that the notifications themselves lacked legal authority.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Rajasekhar Mantha and Justice Anuj Singh was hearing an appeal filed by Shreyasi Dhang, who had obtained an OBC-A certificate on April 13, 2026 claiming membership of the Goala, Gope category.

The Court noted that the certificate had been issued under notifications which had been prima facie found to be void ab initio by a coordinate Bench in proceedings concerning the State's OBC list.

The Bench traced the litigation concerning the State's OBC reservation policy. It noted that a coordinate Bench had, by its judgment dated May 22, 2024, struck down the inclusion of 77 and 37 classes as OBCs, besides setting aside the categorisation into OBC-A and OBC-B and the corresponding 10% and 7% reservation.

The State subsequently issued fresh notifications in May-June 2025 declaring the same classes as OBCs. Those notifications were challenged, and a coordinate Bench stayed them on June 17, 2025.

The Supreme Court subsequently stayed that interim order on July 20, 2025, resulting in the notifications being revived. However, the State later withdrew the Special Leave Petitions challenging both the May 22, 2024 judgment and the June 17, 2025 interim order.

The High Court observed that the withdrawal of the SLPs had the effect of extinguishing the Supreme Court's July 20, 2025 order and consequently reviving the High Court's June 17, 2025 order.

The Bench further noted that the notifications had been issued under the West Bengal Commission for Backward Classes Act, 1993, despite the State already having a specific legislation, namely the West Bengal Backward Classes Reservation (Other than Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) (Reservation in Services and Posts) Act, 2012.

Referring to the Supreme Court's decision in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India, the Bench observed that executive instructions providing reservation could operate only in the absence of statutory provisions, and could not run contrary to existing statutory provisions.

The Court held: “The certificate of the petitioner dated 13th April, 2026 is, therefore, invalid for having been obtained under a void executive order.”

The Bench further held that the notifications issued between May 8, 2025 and June 12, 2025 had no legal consequence and that their subsequent withdrawal would operate retrospectively.

It consequently ruled that OBC certificates issued during the relevant period would also be rendered void ab initio.

The Court observed: “Persons falling within the OBC category under the classes existing prior to 2010 would have to apply afresh for certification as OBC, if they fall within the classes that have been saved by the judgment of Coordinate Bench dated 22nd May, 2024.”

The Bench held that candidates who had participated in NEET or the JENPAS (UG) 2026 examination conducted by the West Bengal Joint Entrance Examination Board, claiming OBC status on the basis of the invalidated notifications, would have to be treated as general category candidates.

At the same time, the Court said that the State or the competent authority could, at its discretion, take appropriate measures in the interest of students belonging to OBC classes that existed prior to 2010 and who had participated in national or State eligibility examinations during the current year.

The Court clarified that this observation was not a direction to the State.

“This should not be treated as any specific direction on the State. It is left entirely to the discretion of the State, to avoid any inconvenience to anyone in competitive examination held for the current year.”