Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010045392026 2026:GAU-AS:3335 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/1313/2026 DR TARA PRASAD DAS S/O LATE BHUMIDHAR DAS,R/O TOWN SONKUCHI COLONY, WARD NO. 15, P.O. AND P.S. BARPETA, DIST BARPETA, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 781006. 2:THE DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF WELFARE OF SCHEDULE CASTES AND BACKWARD CLASSES ASSAM SARUMOTORIA DISPUR-781006. 3:THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER BARPETA DISTRICT BARPETA ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. T J MAHANTA, R SAHIINII,MR N KALITA Advocate for the Respondent : SC, SOCIAL JUSTICE AND EMPOWERMENT, GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI Page No.# 2/4 ORDER 06.03.2026 Heard Shri TJ Mahanta, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri N. Kalita, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri H. Sarma, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, AssamandMs. P. Chakraborty, learned Standing Counsel, Social Justice and EmpowermentDepartment. 2. Considering the subject matter involved and in the interest of justice, this writ petition is taken up for disposal at the motion stage itself. 3. Briefly stated, the grievance of the petitioner is with regard to a proceeding initiated in the context of the genuineness of his Caste Certificate.It is contended that the petitioner was issued a Caste Certificate in the year 1979, which was renewed in the online process whereafter, a show-cause notice was issued to him on 05.02.2026, questioning the genuineness of the Caste Certificate by granting two weeks’ time to submit his reply. It is averred that the notice was received on 16.02.2026.However, before expiry of 14 days, the petitioner had submitted an application on 23.02.2026 for grant of additional 14 days’ time. The said letter was responded to vide the communication dated 02.03.2026, whereby, though the prayer for extension of time was granted, the same was directed to be filed on the same day, i.e.,02.03.2026. 4. Shri Mahanta, learned Senior Counsel for the petitionerhas submitted that the initial show-cause notice was received by the petitioner on 16.02.2026, which itself stipulated that 14 days' time was available for making the reply. He has submitted that before expiry of the said period, a request was made for extension of time, which, however, has not been effectively granted, as,vide the impugned letter dated 02.03.2026, the reply was directed to be filed on that day itself. The writ petition was accordingly filed on 05.03.2026. Page No.# 3/4 5. Ms. Chakraborty,learned Standing Counsel has submitted that there cannot be any restraint in verifying the genuineness of a Caste Certificate. A similar submission has also been made by Shri Sharma, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate. 6. The show-cause notice dated 05.02.2026 has stipulated a period of 14 days for submitting the reply from the date of receipt.The said show-cause notice is said to have been received on 16.02.2026 and the relevant pleadings are made in paragraph 4 of the writ petition. The pleadings have however been verified in the accompanying affidavit as matters of records but no supporting documents have been enclosed. However, giving benefit of doubt, even if it is assumed that the notice was received on 16.02.2026,the period of 2(two) weeks would have expired on or about 02.03.2026.In the meantime, the petitioner had filed an application on 23.02.2026 for grant of additional 14 days' time to submit the reply. Though the said prayer has been stated to be accepted, the date of submission of the reply has been fixed on 02.03.2026, which does not appear to be in terms of the stipulation of time made. At the same time, the additional period of 14 days as prayed for by the petitioner would expire on or about 08.03.2026. 7. This Court is of the opinion that the interest of justice would be served and the equitieswould be balanced if a reasonable extension of time is provided to the petitioner to submit his reply. This Court accordingly directs that if such reply is filed on or before 13.03.2026, the same be accepted by the respondent no. 2 and taken up for consideration strictly in accordance with law. 8. It is further provided that if any prejudicial action has been taken in the meantime, the same stands interfered with and the scrutiny is to be made independently by taking into consideration the relevant factors. Page No.# 4/4 9. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant