Hon’ble Amitava Lala, J.—This writ petition is made by the petitioner virtually for the purpose of direction not to give effect of the letter dated 13th December, 2000, being Annexure-5 to the writ petition, and for quashing the departmental order dated 18th January, 2001, being Annexure-7 to the writ petition, and order in connection with election proceeding etc.

2. The writ petitioner was a candidate of the election notified for the local Gram Panchayat. The constituency was reserved for the people of backward class. The petitioner was a candidate under the scheduled category of “Banjara”. The petitioner had filed his nomination after obtaining requisite certificate from the Tehsildar. But his nomination was cancelled. The plea of cancellation as taken by the authority is that the petitioner is Muslim by religion, therefore, his candidature as “Banjara” cannot be accepted. “Banjara” belong to Hindu community only. Initially by virtue of Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes) Act, 1994 the “Banjara” was placed in Schedule-I of the Act. The said Act was amended with effect from 31st August, 2002 by incorporating “Banjara”, “Ranki”, “Mukeri” and “Mukerani” in the Schedule-I of the amended Act. The Act is known as Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes) (Amendment) Act, 2002. U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947, as amended upto date, borrowed the meaning of ‘backward class’ from the aforesaid Act. The writ petition was filed on 13th February, 2001 prior to the amendment when item “Banjara” was only available under the Schedule of the earlier Act.

3. It further appears that an order dated 29th September, 1999 passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 11107 of 1997, Sesh Mani Yadav v. 1st Additional District Judge, Gorakhpur and others, is also impugned herein. According to His Lordship, “Banjara” belonging to Hindu religion will only be considered as “Banjara” for the purpose of election of Gram Panchayat. From the order a special appeal, being Special Appeal No. (509) of 2002, Moazzam Ali v. 1st Additional District Judge, Gorakhpur and others), was filed before this Court which was also assigned to this Bench for the purpose of analogous hearing and passing appropriate order. The letter impugned dated 13th December, 2000 is outcome of the aforesaid decision. We have gone through the judgement and found that the same is based on common knowledge. It was held that according to common knowledge of history “Banjara” is a caste amongst Hindus and no such caste or sect was known amongst Muslims. No fundamental right has been affected by the refusal by the authority. It was observed that as “Ahir”, “Kurmi”, “Giri”, etc. can be said to be available amongst the Hindu religion and “Naqqal”, “Faqir”, “Momin” can be said to be available amongst the Muslim religion, Banjara community can be said to be Hindus on such logic.

4. Hence, not only the letter and Government Order under the writ petition but also the special appeal from the judgement of the learned Single Judge require to be considered.

5. Apparently the word ‘Banjara’ denotes to profession. But by virtue of such profession how their identity become restricted within one religion is unknown to this Court. Therefore, a thorough historical research is required to come to a conclusion to test the foundation. All the learned Counsel helped this Court a lot to come to a conclusion including Mr. U.N. Sharma, who was appointed as amicus curiae by the Court. We are thankful to them.

6. We get meaning of the word ‘Banjara’ from P. Ramanatha Aiyar’s. The Law Lexicon’, 2nd Edition 1997, revised by Justice Y.V. Chandrachud. The meaning of ‘Banjara’ is that the name of the class of traders who travel over the country with numerous pack-bullocks carrying grain, salt, etc., from market to market. Some are Hindus and some are Musalmans.

7.