Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sonamani Tudu @ Sonamani Murmu vs Election Commission Of India & Ors on 3 April, 2026
S/L 1
03.04.2026
Court. No. 25
Sourav
WPA 8341 of 2026
Sonamani Tudu @ Sonamani Murmu
Vs.
Election Commission of India & Ors.
Mr. Samim Ahammed
Mr. Arka Maiti
Ms. Ambiya Khatun
Mr. Asif Ikbal Baidya
Md. Nasirul Haque
Ms. Reshma Khatun
... for the petitioner.
Mr. Soumya Mazumdar, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Anamika Pandey
Mr. Ghanshyam Pandey
Mr. Dinesh Bachar
... for ECI.
Mr. Kishore Datta, Ld. AG
Ms. Sumita Shaw
Mr. Alok Banerjee
... for the State.
1. The petitioner has filed the present writ application with
the grievance that the petitioner is the Scheduled Tribe
under the Category of Santhal at the State of Jharkhand
and after her marriage, she has shifted to West Bengal and
started residing at Village - Asanpani, P.O. Kunchia, P.S.
Bandwan, District - Purulia, West Bengal along with her
husband.
2. He submits that as per the notification the Santhal
Category has also been recognized as tribe in the State of
West Bengal. He further submits that in the year 2024, the
petitioner has contested the Parliamentary Election as a
tribal candidate. Now, the Election Commission of India
has conducting Assembly Election in the State of West
Bengal and the petitioner intends to file her nomination as
Reserved Category (Tribe) of Manbazar, Purulia. He
2
submits that the authorities have not accepted the
nomination form of the petitioner as the petitioner is not
having the certificate of tribe category though the
petitioner is the tribal as Santhal Category of Jharkhand
and the said has been recognized by the State of West
Bengal also.
3. Mr. Ahammed, learned counsel for the petitioner further
submits that the petitioner has also applied for grant of
Scheduled Tribe certificate before the concerned authority
and the same is pending before the authority. He is relied
upon the judgment in the case of Rajesh Arjunbhai
Patel Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. reported in
AIR 1990 Bombay 114 and submits that in the said case
also the petitioner was the Scheduled Tribe category of the
State of Gujarat under the category of Bhil tribe but he has
completed his study from the State of Maharashtra and,
accordingly, the Bombay High Court has directed the
authorities to consider the application of the petitioner
under the Scheduled Tribe Category.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further relied upon
Section 5(a) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951
and submits that as per the said provision, in the case of a
seat reserved for the Scheduled Castes or for the
Scheduled Tribes of that State, he is a member of any of
those castes or of those tribes, as the case may be, and is
an elector for any Assembly constituency in that State. He
submits that in the present case the petitioner is the
Scheduled Tribe of the Jharkhand State under the
Category of Santhal and he had married the person who is
3
the resident of Village - Asanpani, P.O. Kunchia, P.S.
Bandwan, District - Purulia, West Bengal and in the State
of West Bengal also the Santhal Category has been
recognized as tribal. Thus, the petitioner is entitled to
contest the election of the said constituency as tribal
candidate.
5. Per contra, Mr. Mazumdar, learned senior counsel
appearing for the Election Commission of India by
referring Section 5(a) of the Representation of the People
Act, 1951 and submits that as per the said provision, the
person who intends to contest the election of the particular
area on the reserved seat, he/she should be the member of
the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes. He submits
that in the present case the petitioner is claiming to be a
Scheduled Tribe but she is not having any documents of
Scheduled Tribe in the State of West Bengal and as such,
she cannot claim that she is the Scheduled Tribe of the
State of West Bengal.
6. He further relied upon the judgment in the case of Action
Committee on Issue of Caste Certificate to
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the
State of Maharashtra and Another Vs. Union of
India and Another, reported in (1994) 5 SCC 244 and
submits that in the said case the Hon'ble Supreme Court
has categorically held that the migrant would not be
entitled to derive benefits in the State to which he had
migrated on the strength of such a certificate. He submits
that the petitioner is claiming to be a tribal of the
Jharkhand but in the State of West Bengal, no certificate
4
has been issued to the petitioner. Thus, she is cannot claim
the benefit as a Tribal candidate in the State of West
Bengal.
7. The Advocate General submits that though the petitioner
has not claimed any relief in the present writ application
against the State but he submits that if the petitioner
intends to contest the Assembly Election as a Tribal
candidate of a particular constituency, the petitioner has
to prove that she is belongs to the Tribal category of the
particular State of Union Territory. Only because she is
holding the certificate of tribal of the State of Jharkhand
cannot be treated as a tribal in the State of West Bengal.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.
Perused the materials on record.
9. This Court finds that the petitioner is intending to contest
the Assembly Election of the particular constituency as a
reserved category of Scheduled Tribe but the petitioner is
having the certificate of Scheduled Tribe of the State of
Jharkhand under the category of Santhal but she is not
having Scheduled Tribe Certificate of the State of West
Bengal though in the State of West Bengal, the category of
Santhal is recognized as a tribal category.
10. The petitioner has submitted an application before the
authority for grant of tribal certificate but the learned
counsel appearing for the State has brought to the notice
of this Court that the application submitted by the
petitioner is not filled up in a proper way. The petitioner
has neither submitted any certificate to show that any of
the blood relation of the petitioner possesses caste
5
certificate and the petitioner has also not disclosed the
documents that the applicant or his family member has
been migrated from the other states.
11. The only prayer of the petitioner in the present writ
application that the petitioner may be allowed to contest
the election in the particular assembly election as a Tribal
candidate but this Corut finds that the petitioner is
claiming to be a Tribal candidate of the Jharkhand under
the category of Santhal but the petitioner is not having any
certificate from the State of West Bengal. The State of
West Bengal has recognized the Santhal category as Tribal.
This Court finds that only the petitioner is intending to file
the nomination to contest the forthcoming assembly
election as reserved category candidate.
12. Considering the above, the petitioner is allowed to submit
the nomination form for contesting the election of the
particular State assembly under the category of Tribal
subject to verification by returning officer. If the returning
officer i.e., the respondent No. 4 on verification of
nomination form finds that the petitioner has disclosed all the required documents, he can take decision for allowing the petitioner to contest the election in the particular assembly as reserved candidate and if the returning officer finds that the petitioner is not disclosed the required documents to prove that the petitioner is Scheduled Tribe candidate, the returning officer is at liberty to take appropriate decision for rejecting the application of the petitioner at the time of verification/scrutiny of the nomination form submitted by the petitioner. 6
13. In view of the above observations, the writ petition being WPA 8341 of 2026 is disposed of.
14. This order passed by this Court as the last date of filing of the nomination is April 6, 2026 and this direction cannot be treated as precedent in future.
15. Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all the necessary formalities.
(Krishna Rao, J.)