The West Bengal Advocate General on Tuesday told the Calcutta High Court that caste certificates issued on the basis of voter identity cards from 2011 onwards would require reverification, while those issued on the basis of documents such as PAN cards would not be subjected to such an exercise.

The submission was made before a Division Bench of ACJ Tapabrata Chakraborty and Justice Atarup Banerjee, hearing a plea filed by CPI(M), challenging the State government's decision to undertake a "blanket" reverification of caste certificates in the wake of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

The Advocate General clarified that deletion of a person's name from the electoral rolls during the SIR exercise would not, by itself, result in cancellation of the person's caste certificate.

" It is not absolute that if someone is deleted in SIR, his certificate would be taken away on that basis," the AG submitted.

The Court, however, questioned the statutory basis for undertaking reverification merely because a person's name had been deleted from the electoral rolls.

"But this is not a ground for reverification in terms of the statute," the Court observed.

The Bench made it clear that it was not seeking to interfere with the regular statutory process governing caste certificates, but expressed concern that the State's exercise could cause prejudice to genuine certificate holders.

The AG submitted that the State had sought information regarding the documents on the basis of which caste certificates had been issued. He said that the State had been informed that caste certificates had been granted to persons bearing surnames such as Ghosh and Bose, suggesting the need to verify the basis on which such certificates had been issued.

The Court then asked whether caste certificates of persons deleted from the electoral rolls would be revoked, subject to reverification. The AG responded in the affirmative.

The Court pointed out that such a consequence was "not in the statute". The AG responded that the process would be undertaken "as per the law".

Senior Advocate Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the challenge was not to the State's power to conduct genuine reverification, but to the manner in which the State had directed such an exercise.

"I have challenged the authority of the State to issue this notification. This is bad by doctrine of dictation. Entire memo is challenged," Bhattacharya submitted.

He argued that the statutory mechanism for cancellation or verification of caste certificates already exists and that the State could act upon individual complaints or cases of suspected fraud.

"I am not saying there should not be reverification. You can wait for complaints. You cannot review all from 2011. See the social instability created," he submitted.

Bhattacharya further argued that the State could not direct authorities to scrutinise certificates issued from 2011 onwards merely on the basis of an administrative direction.

"The statute had empowered the method of quashing. That method should continue. It should not happen on the dictation of the State that do it from 2011," he submitted.

The Court observed that the petitioners could not seek final relief at the interim stage.

Bhattacharya, however, clarified that he was not seeking quashing of the entire exercise as an interim measure, but was questioning the basis for directing scrutiny of certificates dating back to 2011.

The Bench observed that even if the authorities picked up caste certificates issued from 2011 onwards for scrutiny, any action against such certificates would have to comply with the statutory procedure.

"Even if they pick up certificates from 2011, it has to go through the rigours of the statute," the Court observed.

The Court also cautioned that staying the entire circular could prevent the authorities from taking action in genuine cases.

"If the entire circular is stayed then authorities can't deal with genuine cases also," the Court said.

Bhattacharya responded that the authorities could proceed against genuinely suspect certificates even without the impugned circular.

The petitioner also pointed out that the State had specifically identified certificates issued from 2011 onwards, as well as those issued through the Duare Sarkar scheme, for scrutiny.

"Why this dictation?" Bhattacharya questioned.

The Court indicated that the statutory safeguards would continue to govern any reverification or cancellation process, even where certificates have been identified for scrutiny under the State's exercise.

Case No: WPA(P)/300/2026

Case: COMMUNIST PARTY OF INDIA (MARXIST LENINIST) AND ANR. VS STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.