WP(C) 4794/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE BD AGARWAL Both the writ petitions are disposed of by this common order since both the writ petitions have claimed identical reliefs. Heard Mr. H Das and Mr. J Patowary, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also h eard Mr. AD Choudhury, learned counsel for the private respondents and Mr. RK Bo ra, learned Government Advocate. The petitioner’s case is that the writ petitioners contested the election of Goa lpara Municipal Board and was elected as member of Ward No. 8, which was reserve d for Schedule Caste (Women). The petitioner’s further case is that the petition er has obtained fraudulent certificate from the Chairman, Sub-Divisional Schedu led Caste Development Board, Goalpara for the aforesaid purpose . The petitioner has further pleaded that the petitioner migrated to Assam from West Bengal and as such, she is not entitled to the same caste status. At the time of filing writ petition, the petitioner was occupying the post of th e Chairman of the Goalpara Municipal Board. In the meanwhile, the private respon dents namely, Kakoli Goswami has already been removed from the aforesaid post on the basis of no-confidence resolution. In this way, one part of the writ petiti on has become infructuous. With regard to the caste of the private respondents, Mr. AD Choudhury submitted that a complaint has already been filed before the State Level Scrutiny Committe e and as such this Court need not go into the disputed facts, since the matter is pending before a Statutory Committee to decide the caste of the private respo ndents, namely, Kakoli Goswami. Accordingly, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the said authority to dispose of the complaint dated 24.04.2010 as ex peditiously as possible preferably within a period of 3(three) months f rom the date of receipt of a copy of this order. While doing so, the authorit y shall also consider the Government of India’s Circular of 1975 and als o upon hearing Kakoli Goswami.