JUDGMENT - S.P. BHARUCHA, J.:---We have before us several writ petitions and appeals in which the principal question is : is Vanjari (an Other Backward Class) a synonym of Banjara (notified as a Vimukta Jati). As a matter of convenience, this appeal, though it is an appeal against the grant of interim relief in a writ petition, is, by consent of all concerned, heard and treated as determinative. We have heard Mr. Gursahani, who appears for the petitioners in all the matters; Mr. Saraf and Mr. Chogle, who appear for the State Government; and Ms. Madhyan, who appears in some matters for the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay. We have permitted Mr. S.C. Dharmadhikari, to intervene on behalf of the All India Banjara Sewa Sangh.

2. The petitioner was admitted in 1948-49 to the A.E.S. High School at Palghar in District Thane in the State of Maharashtra. In the School's record his caste was shown as Hindu Vanjari. In 1959 the petitioner came to Bombay for the purposes of employment. In February 1980 the petitioner applied to the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bandra, for the grant of a caste certificate. On 20th February, 1980 the said Magistrate issued to him a caste certificate which showed that he belonged to the Banjara community. On 5th May, 1980 the petitioner wrote a letter to his employer, the State Government, asking that he be shown as a Banjara in his service record. On 18th June, 1980 the State Government passed a resolution which directed that the community Hindu Banjara, which was recognised as a Vimukta Jati under the Government Resolution, Education and Social Welfare Department No. CBC-1361-M dated 21st November, 1961, should be entered in the service book of the petitioner.

3. On 19th November, 1983 the petitioner received a memorandum from the Under-Secretary in the Rural Development Department of the State Government. The memorandum noted that the petitioner's school certificate showed him to be a Hindu Vanjari whereas the said Magistrate's certificate showed him to be a Hindu Banjara. The Hindu Banjara community had been declared a Denotified Tribe by Government Resolution dated 12th November, 1961. The petitioner was called upon to produce the said Magistrate's certificate. On 16th December, 1983 the same Under-Secretary sent to the petitioner another memorandum which stated that the certificate of the Tahsildar of the Taluka in which he was born was an admissible certificate and not that of the said Magistrate. The petitioner was, therefore, required to submit a certificate from the Tahsildar concerned to the effect that he belonged to the Banjara community. The petitioner was told that action would be taken against him if he did not produce the certificate within 15 days. On 4th September, 1985 the petitioner received a memorandum from the Deputy Secretary in the Rural Development Department of the State Government which required the petitioner, if he wanted to claim that he belonged to the Banjara community, to obtain a certificate to that effect from the competent authority at Palghar before 20th September, 1985.

4. The petitioner was unable to produce a certificate from the Tahsildar, Palghar, whom he approached because, it is his case, the Tahsildar, Palghar, told him that he had specific instructions from his superiors not to issue a caste certificate to anyone who claimed to belong to the Banjara community. On 19th September, 1985 the petitioner wrote to the said Under Secretary accordingly.

It is the petitioner's case that on 14th January, 1986 he received a notice from the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bombay, in regard to the caste certificate dated 20th February, 1980 which had been issued in his favour by the said Magistrate. He appeared as directed on 10th February, 1986 and was asked to file a written statement. On 15th March, 1986, the petitioner was informed that the powers of metropolitan Magistrates to issue caste certificates had been revoked with effect from 1st March, 1986 a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document