(1) WE have heard Mr Sharma in person, learned Additional Solicitor General for Union of India and counsel for the States of Gujarat, Mad- hya Pradesh and Maharashtra. Mr Bagia, the present Commissioner who is present in court has also been heard.

(2) A letter received from Mr Sharma, while he was in Office as Com- missioner of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes has been treated as a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution. His letter essentially raised questions with reference to the relationship between the Com- missioner and the Union of India as also the State governments, the effective nature of the Reports made from time to time by the Com- missioner; implementation and non-implementation of the recommenda- tions and the consequences arising out of the same and the constitutional methods which should have been generated for the purpose of treating the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes for the purpose of monitor- ing their welfare. That letter apparently appeared to raise constitutional issues of importance and, therefore, we considered it appropriate that it should be examined. It is true that in the letter reference was made to certain instit