Sunday, December 23, 2012

REPORT OF THE BANJARA-VANJARI COMMITTEE


This is the html version of the file http://dspace.gipe.ac.in/jspui/bitstream/1/13771/2/235799.pdf.Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web.

Page 1
REPORT
OF THE
BANJARA-VANJARI COMMITTEE
SUBMITTED
TO THE
GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA
1993
GOKHALE INSTITUTE OF POLITICS AND ECONOMICS
(DEEMED TO BE A UNIVERSITY)
PUNE 41 1004

Page 2

Page 3

Page 4

Page 5

Page 6
PREFACE
For some years, litigation has been going on at
various levels in the State regarding the I Banjara—Vanjari
dispute. On June 9, 1992, the Maharashtra Administrative
Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, directed the State Government to
constitute a Committee to go into the whole question.
On July ' 31, 1992, in pursuance of the above-
mentioned order of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal,
the State Government set up the present Banjara—Vanjari
Expert Committee. Its composition was as under :
Dr.D.C. Wadhwa,
Director, Gokhale Institute of
Politics and Economics, Pune. Chairman
Dr. R.K.Mutatkar,
Department of Anthropology,
University of Poona, Pune. Member
Shri A.M.Dudhbhate,
Retired Additional Director,
Directorate of Social Welfare, .
Maharashtra State, Pune. Member
Shri A.R. Bodhankar,
Retired Joint Director,
Directorate of Social Welfare, Pune. Member
Shri K.K.Nayadu,
Joint Secretary,
Department of Housing and
Special Assistance,
Government of Maharashtra.
Bombay. Member-Secretary
Shri S.V.Deshmul<h, Retired Assistant Commissioner,
Tribal Research and Training Institute, Pune, was appointed
as a Research Officer to assist the Committee in its work.
The Committee was required to opine whether the
Banjara and Vanjari are synonyms of each other or not. The
Committee was asked to give its opinion after making an
i

Page 7
in—depth study of the subject by giving an opportunity to
the representatives of the Banjara and Vanjari communities
to place before the Committee their views and the relevant
material in support of their views and after taking into
consideration the material put forward before the Committee
by the All India Banjara Seva Sangh, if any, in support of
its claim and the report of the Tribal Research and Training
Institute, Pune, submitted to the Government on November 30,
1982, in this behalf.
As the terms of reference given to the Committee
were wide, it necessitated a close look into virtually all
aspects of the problem including the study of the
distinctive aspects of culture of both the groups and the
differences in their cultural traits, if any, in the field.
The terms of reference also required a careful review of the
relevant material, collected‘ by the Committee as well as
submitted to the Committee by both the groups in support of
their respective contentions.
The field study was conducted by Dr.Mutatkar,
Shri Dudhbhate and Shri Bodhankar, members of the Committee.
The Committee met the enlightened persons from
both the communities.I including the representatives of the
All India Banjara Seva Sangh, who placed before the
Committee their ‘views and the material’ in support of their
views.
The Report is divided into seven chapters which
are so designed that the first five chapters are presented
as background material for the analysis of the various
aspects of the problem in the sixth chapter. The seventh
chapter summarises the findings of the Committee.
ii

Page 8
I am grateful to my colleagues on the Committee who
shared the burden of its work in full measure. For the last
one year, I have been very busy in connection with the work
of obtaining the status of deemed to be a University for our
Institute and, therefore, I could not get the time to write
this report earlier. When I accepted this assignment, I had
not anticipated that the work of obtaining the status of
deemed to be a University for our Institute will take so
much time. I am, therefore, sorry for the delay in writing
this report and submitting the same to the Government.
Shri S.V. Deshmulch provided ~total support to the
Committee in collecting the research material’ and in
coordinating the administrative work with the Directorate of
Social Welfare. He also helped me in seeing through this
report in print. I am thankful to him for all his help.
Shri A.V. Thipse of the Directorte of Social Welfare, Pune,
typed the draft report and assisted Bhri Deshmukh in his
work. He also helped me in getting this report printed.
Shri P.D. Naik, Stenographer, Directorate of Social Welfare,
Pune, composed the report on the Word Processsor in record
time even by working on holidays. I am thankful to them
both for their timely help in this work.
D.C. Wadhwa
Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics
(Deemed to be a University),
Pune 411 004
August 9, 1993.
iii

Page 9
I am grateful to my colleagues on the Committee who
shared the burden of its work in full measure. For the last
one year, I have been very busy in connection with the work
of obtaining the status of deemed to be a University for our
Institute and, therefore, I could not get the time to write
this report earlier. When I accepted this assignment, I had
not anticipated that the work of obtaining the status of
deemed to be a University for our Institute will take so
much time. I am, therefore, sorry for the delay in writing
this report and submitting the same to the Government.
Shri S.V. Deshmulch provided ~total support to the
Committee in collecting the research material’ and in
coordinating the administrative work with the Directorate of
Social Welfare. He also helped me in seeing through this
report in print. I am thankful to him for all his help.
Shri A.V. Thipse of the Directorte of Social Welfare, Pune,
typed the draft report and assisted Bhri Deshmukh in his
work. He also helped me in getting this report printed.
Shri P.D. Naik, Stenographer, Directorate of Social Welfare,
Pune, composed the report on the Word Processsor in record
time even by working on holidays. I am thankful to them
both for their timely help in this work.
D.C. Wadhwa
Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics
(Deemed to be a University),
Pune 411 004
August 9, 1993.
iii

Page 10
1.3 On January 24, 1953, the percentage of
reservations for recruitment to service in Class III and
Class IV, from the above— mentioned backward classes, was
revised as under : {4}
C_1a_iE-_mi'=11i_C_E§
(i) Scheduled Castes .. .. .. 6 per cent
(ii) Scheduled Tribes .. .. .. 7 per cent
(iii) Dther Backward Classes .. .. '9 per cent
Class L Services
(i) Scheduled Castes .. .. .. 7 per cent
(ii) Scheduled Tribes .. .. .. 9 per cent
(iii) Other Backward Classes .. . . 11 per cent
1.4 On November 21, 1961, the Government of
Maharashtra cancelled all the previous orders issued in
connection with the classification of Vimukta iii;-|_ {5} and
Nomadic Tribes and Semi— Nomadic Tribes in the various
component units of the State of Maharashtra and declared a
common and single list of Vimukta Jatis and Nomadic Tribes
and Semi—Nomadic Tribes throughout the State.
Kachakiwale Banjaras,
as synonyms to the Laman
The Banjaras,
Laman Banjaras and Lambadas were shown
community in the list of Vimukta
{4} Government of Bombay Resolution,
Services Department, No-490/46, dated January
Political
24, 1953.
and
{5} Vimukta means set free and Jatis here means tribes.
Thus, Vimukta Jatis means tribes that are set free. Under
the provisions of the different Criminal Tribes Acts,
certain tribes were notified from time to time in the
State Gazette as criminal tribes and certain restrictions
were imposed on their movements. In 1949, the Criminal
Tribes Act, 1924, was repealed and since then all the
tribes notified as criminal tribes till then stood
denotified. Therefore,
tribes or vimukta Iiatis, that is, tribes set free.
these tribes are known as denotified

Page 11
Jatis.{6L Till then, there was no recognised list of
Vimukta Jat is in Vidarbha area {71) and of the Nomadic and
Semi—Nomadic Tribes in Marathwada {B} and Vidarbha, area
although persons belonging to these communities were found
in those regions of the State. In the old Bombay State
territories,{9} there were two separate lists of the Vimukta
Jatis {10} (earlier notified as Vimochit Jatis and
Nomadic and Semi—Nomadic Tribes {11).
{6} Government of Maharashtra Resolution, Education
and Social Welfare Department, No.CBC—1361—M, dated November
21, 1961.
{7} The' territories comprising the districts of Akola,
Amravati, Bhandara, Buldhana, Chanda, Nagpur, Wardha and
Yeotmal which were transferred -from the old State of Madhya
Pradesh to the Bombay State at the time of states
reorganization on November 1, 1956 E vide section B (1) (c)
of the States Reorganization Act, 1956, Central Act 37 of
1956]. The territories comprising the districts of Akola,
Amravati, Buldhana and Yeotmal constituted Berar area.
{B} ' The territories comprised in the Marathwada region
of the then existing State of Hyderabad, that is, (a)
Aurangabad, Bhir, Elsmanabad and Parbhani districts, (b)
Islapur circle of Boath taluka, Kiinwat taluka and Rajpura
taluka of Adilabad district, (c) Ahmedpur, Nilanga and Udgir
talukas of Bidar district and (d) Nanded district except (i)
Bichkonda and J'ul<:ka1 circles of Delgur taluka and (ii)
Bhiansa, Kuber and Mudhol circles of Mudhol taluka which
were transferred to the Bombay State at the time of states
reorganization on November 1, 1956 [vide section 8 (1) (b)
of the States Reorganization Act, 1956, Central Act 37 of
1956]. The territories comprising the said Islapur circle of
Boath taluka, Kinwat taluka and Rajapura taluka were
included in Nanded district and the territories comprised in
the said talukas of Ahmadpur, Nilanga and Udgir were added
to Osmanabad district Evide section B (2) of ' the States
Reorganization Act, 1956, Central Act 37 of 1956].
{9} The territories comprised in the districts of
Ahmednagar, Dhulia, Greater Bombay, Jalgaon, Kolaba, Nasik,
Poona, Ratnagiri, Sangli, Satara, Sholapur and Thana.
{10} Government of Bombay Resolution, Political and
Services Department, No.BAC—1054, dated May 14, 1954.
{11) Government of Bombay Letter, Labour and Social
Welfare, Department, No.MBC—3156/2064—E, dated December 7,
1956.

Page 12
1.5 On April 9, 1965, the Government of Maharashtra
revised orders reserving vacancies in the Government
Services for members of the backward c1asses.{12} According
to the then existing orders, the backward classes consisted
of the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward
Communities. This grouping was revised and the backward
classes were declared to consist of Scheduled Castes and
Scheduled Castes converts to Buddhism; Scheduled Tribes
including those living outside the specified areas, Vimukta
1% and Nomadic Tribes; and Other Backward Communities.
In modification of the then existing orders making
reservation in favour of members of the backward classes,
the Government directed that the following percentage of
vacancies occuring in each of the various services under it
which were filled by direct recruitment should be reserved
for members of each of the following sections of the
backward classes, namely, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Castes converts to Buddhism 13 per cent, Scheduled Tribes
including those living outside the specified areas 7 per
cent, Vimukta Jatis and Nomadic Tribes 4 per cent
{12} After the bifurcation of the former Bombay
State into the states of Gujarat and Maharashtra on May 1,
1960, the Government of Maharashtra appointed in November,
1961, a Committee under the Chairmanship of Shri B.D.
Deshmukh to go into the question of reservation of seats and
allied matters relating to the recruitment of backward
classes to Government services. These revised orders were
based on the recommendation contained in the report,
submitted in January 1964, of the above—mentioned Committee.

Page 13
and Other Backward Communities 10 per cent. {13) Thus,
with the issuance of the above—mentioned order, separate
reservation in the State services and educational
institutions for Virnukta Mg and Nomadic Tribes came
into being in the State of Maharashtra for the first time.
Till then, all the Vimukta La£i_s_ and almost all the
Nomadic and Semi-Nomadic Tribes (with the exception of a few
tribes (which were either treated as Scheduled Castes or
Scheduled Tribes) were included in the Other Backward
Classes. {14}
1.6 On May 23, 1974, the Government declared that
there will be reservation for the three sections of the
backward classes, as mentioned below, in promotions made on
the basis of seniority in appointment to all Class I, Class
II, Class III and Class IV posts in grades and services in
which the element of direct recruitment, if any, does not
exceed 50 per cent. {15)
(i) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled .. 13 per cent
Castes converts to Buddhism.
(ii) Scheduled Tribes including those .. 7 per cent
living outside the specified
areas.
(iii) Vimuhzta Jatis and Nomadic . . 4 per cent
Tribes.
{13} Government of Maharashtra, General Administration
Department, Resolution No.BCC-1064-—IlI—I, dated April 9,
1965.
{14} Government of Bombay Resolution, Political
and services Department, No.BAC—1054, dated May 14, 1'754,and
Government of Bombay Resolution, Political and Services
Department,No.BAC—1054, dated May 14, 1954, and Government
of Bombay Letter, Labour and Social Welfare Department,
No.315b/20b4—E, dated December 7, 1956.
{15} Government of Maharashtra, General Administration
Department, Resolution No.BCC—1072—J', dated May 23, 1974.

Page 14
1.7 On February 20, 1980, One Shri Ganpat Pandurang
Sankhe (originally resident of Palghar taluka of Thane
district), an employee (Assistant) of the Department of
Rural Development, Government of Maharashtra, since 195'? and
residing in Bombay since 1950 obtained from the Additional
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bandra, Bombay, a certificate
to the effect that he belonged to the Banjara caste {16}
which, as mentioned above, had been declared as Vimukta Jati
in 1961. In the school record, his caste was shown as
Vanjari which had been included in the Other Backward
Classes {17} ‘The above caste certificate was issued by the
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate on the basis of,
besides other documents, Shri Sankhe's sworn statement, the
certificate from the Banjara Samaj and the certificate of
the Special Magistrate.
1.9 cm June 18, 1950, ‘on the ‘basis of the above-
mentioned caste certificate, the Government directed that
the caste, that is, Hindu Banjara should be entered in the
Service Book of Shri G.P. Sankhe.{1B}
1.‘? On January C50, 1982, the Government wrote to the
Director of Tribal Research and Training Institute,
Maharashtra State, Pune, saying that it was noticed that
many Vanjaris from Thane district were declaring as
belonging to the Banjara community and were trying to
{16) Certificate No.B/363/BO, dated February 20, 1980-
-Cl-7) Government of Maharashtra, Education and Social
Welfare Department, Resolution No.CBC—14b7—M, dated October
13, 1967.
{18} Government of Maharashtra, Rural Development
Department, Resolution No.EST—lOBO/11581/I, dated June 18,
1980.

Page 15
obtain the caste certificates of M ._T_al_vls_ -£19} and
therefore it had become absolutely necessary for the
Government to have his detailed report in the matter {20}.
1.10 On November 30, 1982, the Tribal Research and
Training Institute, Pune, submitted to the Government its
detailed report wherein it was stated that the Institute had
conducted a detailed survey of 13 villages in Palghar tehsil
of Thane district with a view to finding out whether the
Vanjaris, who were predominantly living in that area, were
the sub—groups of Banjara community and had come to the
conclusion that they did not belong to that community. {21}
{19} For example in 1979, the Government had
accepted the declaration of another employee of the
Government, namely, Shri K.J. Sankhe, Assistant Registrar of
Co—operative Societies (Housing), Bombay, to the effect that
he belonged to the Banjara community and had directed
that the caste written in his Service Book and office record
with A the Government and the Accountant General,
Maharashtra, be changed from “Vanjari" to "Banjara"
(vide Government of Maharashtra Memorandum No.CSG—
1079/43075/CE/1970/12—C, Agricultural and Cooperation
Department, dated October 29, 1979.
Similarly, in 1980, the Government had
ordered that entry regarding the caste of Shri V.B. Sankhe,
Clerk, Home Department, in his Service Book should be
modified from "Vanjari" to 'Banjara’ for all purposes. Shri
V.B. Sankhe had produced a caste certificate No.B/1639/B0,
dated May 7, 1980, from the Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Bandra, Bombay, which indicated that Shri
Vasudeo Elabu Sankhe belonged to 'Banjara' caste which had
been recognised as Vimukta Jati by the Government in 1961
(vide Government of Maharashtra, Home Department, Dffice
Order No.HDE-0180-HDCl—2, dated July 15, 1990
-£20} D.D.No.CBC—1é79/61715(290)/D.V, dated January 30,
19G2,from the Under Secretary to the Government, Social
welfare, Cultural Affairs, Sports and Tourism Department, to
the Director, Tribal Research and Training Institute,
Pune-
{21} Letter No.Banjara/381/D—VI/1369, dated November
30, 1982, from the Director, Tribal Research and Training
Institute, Pune, to the Secretary to the Government, Social
Welfare and Sports Department, Bombay.

Page 16
In paragraph 20 of the report it was stated that Vanjari and
Banjara were altogether distinct classes or castes though
they descendend from the same stock. In the concluding
paragraph of the report it was stated that the above view
point may be examined in consultation with the enlightened
Banjara persons for inclusion of Vanjari community into
Banjara community before final decision was taken by the
Government.
1.11 On November 19, 19133, Shri Sankhe was asked by
the Government to submit to it for scrutiny his original
certificate dated February 20, 1980, issued to him by the
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bandra, Bombay.
He was further asked to submit in original the certificates
submitted by him to the Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Bandra, at the time of his applying for the
issuadce of caste certificate {22}.
1.12 On November 24, 1963, Bhri Sankhe replied to the
above-mentioned letter and produced all the documents as per
the directions of the Government.
1.13 On December 16, 1993, Ghr-i Gankhe was informed by
the Government that the caste certificate of the‘ Garpanch of
the village in which he (Sankhe) was born and the caste
certificate of the tehsildar of the taluka in which that
village was situated could be held to be admissible in such
matters. He was therefore asked to submit certificates from
{22} Government of Maharashtra, Rural Development
Department, Memorandum No.Establishment 1063/CR—b7l/01,
dated November 19, 1983.

Page 17
the concerned Sarpanch and the concerned Tehsildar to the
effect that the belonged to the Banjara community.-£23}
1.14 On September 4, 1985, Shri Sankhe was informed by
the Government that the Caste Certificate Checking
Committee {24) had opined that the certificate of caste
(Banjara Denotified Tribe) issued by the Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate, Bandra, submitted by him could not
be held to be admissible. Shri Sankhe was further informed
that if he wanted to claim that he belonged to the 'Banjara ' '
caste, he would have to obtain a certificate to that effect
from the competent authority from the place of his
original {25} residence (native place), which was Palghar
in the district of Thane.
{23) Government of Maharashtra, Rural Development
Department, Memorandum No.Establishment—1OB3/CR-671/3/O1,
dated ‘December 16, 1983.
{24) It may be pointed out here that on May 6, 1980,
the Government had directed the Director of Social Welfare
Department to scrutinise the caste certificates (vide
Government of Maharashtra, Social Welfare, Cultural Affairs,
Sports and Tourism Department, Circular No.CBC—1bBO/19961/D-
5, dated May 6, 1980). On June 3, 1980, however, it was
decided that the Director, Social Welfare Department, and
the Director, Tribal Research and Training Institute,
Pune,should jointly verify the caste certificates (vide
Government of Maharashtra, Social Welfare, Cultural Affairs,
Sports and Tourism Department, Circular No..CBC-1680/19961/D-
5, dated June 3, 1980). On February 24, 1981, a small
committee consisting of departmental officers was brought
into existence to scrutinise the caste certificates. (vide
Government of Maharashtra, Social Welfare, Cultural Affairs,
Sports and Tourism Department, Letter No.CBC—
1680/65375/(499)/D—V, dated February 24, 1981, addressed to
the Director of Social Welfare, Government of Maharashtra,
Pune, and the Director, Tribal Research and Training
Institute, Maharashtra, Pune.
(25) Government of Maharashtra, Rural Development
Department, Memorandum No.Estab1ishment—1OB3/CR-671/83/O1,
dated September 4, 1985.

Page 18
1.16 On September 19, 1985, Shri Sankhe wrote to the
Government that he was unable to produce the caste
certificate from the Tehsildar, Palghar, because he had
refused to give to him the same saying that he had specific
instructions by the Government not to issue caste
certificates to those who claimed to belong to the Hanjara
community.
1.17 [In January 14, 1986, the Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate, Bandra, directed Shri Sankhe to
appear before him on February 10, 1986, in regard to the
caste certificate issued by him to Shri Sankhe on February
20, 1980. Shri Sankhe appeared as directed. After
preliminary enquiry, Shri Sankhe was asked, on February 22,
1986, by the said Magistrate to file his written submissions
in the above matter which he did.
1.1B Dn March 5, 1986, the Government issued a
confidential circular addressed to the Heads of all the
Administrative Departments of the State instructing them to
get the caste certificates of all those employees, who had
got their castes changed from 'Vanjari ' to 'Banjara’ in
their Service Books, re—verified. The Heads of the
Administrative Departments were further instructed to
enquire, at the time of re—-verification, the caste recorded
in their School Leaving Certificates, the names of the
village, taluka and district from which they originally come
from and whether the certificates submitted by them to the
effect that they belonged to the BanZiara community were
issued to them by the Executive Magistrates having
territorial jurisdiction over their original places of
residence or not. They were also instructed to treat as
10

Page 19
invalid all the certificates showing the employees as
Banjaras, which were not issued by the Executive Magistrates
having territorial jurisdiction over the places of the
permanent residence of the employees. Lastly, they were
asked to instruct all the Executive Magistrates, who had
issued such certificates, to cancel those certificates.
Similarly, they were also instructed that so long as the
employees did not submit the caste certificates issued to
them by the competent Executive Magistrates, they were not
to be given the concesssions meant for Vimukta Jatis.{2b}
1.19 On March 15, 1986, Shri Sankhe was informed by the
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bandra, that his
powers to issue caste certificates had been revoked by the
Government with effect from March 1, 1966, and that he
should appear before the Collector of Bombay on April 14,
1986, {27} in whom that power had been conferred since then.
It appears that on April 15, 19Bb (14th April being a public
holiday), Shri Sankhe went to the office of the Collector
when he was asked to enquire about the above matter on April
23, 1986. On April 23, 1986, he appears to have been told
{26} Government of Maharashtra, Social Welfare,
Cultural Affairs, Sports and Tourism Department,
confidential circular No..CBC—l4B4/CM/
1964(2011)/BCI/J-5, dated March 5, 1986.
{27) It appears from the Government of Maharashtra,
Social Welfare, Cultural Affairs, Sports and Tourism
Department, Resolution No.CBC—1OB3/U.D.5b2(lB73)/BCW-V,
dated December 27, 1985, that the Government had withdrawn
with effect from December 27, 19B5,the powers relating to
the issue of caste certificates to the backward classes from
the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and the Metropolitan
Magistrates authorised by him and declared the District
Magistrate, Greater Bombay, as competent authority to issue
the caste certificates to backward classes in Greater
Bombay.
11

Page 20
that the Collector had decided to cancel the aforesaid
certificate and that the result of the same would be
communicated to him by post.
1.20 Apprehending that the Collector may cancel his
caste certificate without giving proper hearing, Shri Sank-he
filed the Writ Petition in the High Court of Bombay on April
25, 1‘?G6,seel<ing a declaration that the refusal of the State
Government to accept and act upon the caste certificate
dated February 20, 1980, issued to him by the Additional
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bandra, Bombay was bad in law
and requiring the State Government to act upon that
certificate and not to insist on a certificate from the
Tehsildar, Palghar, and further restraining the State
Government from reverting him from his post of Desk Officer,
pending the disposal of his Writ Petition. {28)
1.21 [In June 16, 1986, the above Writ Petition was
taken up for admission by the Single Judge Bench of the High
Court. The Government opposed the admission of the Writ
Petition on the ground that Banjara and the Vanjari were
two different castes and that since Shri Sankhe had come to
Bombay in 1950, he could not be treated as ordinarily
residing in Bombay for the purpose of getting a caste
certificate and therefore the caste certificate issued in
his favour in 1980 by the Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Bandra, was invalid. The Writ Petition was,
however, admitted 'and the State Government was restrained
{28} Writ Petition No. 1142 of 1986, Ordinary Original
Civil Jurisdiction of the High Court of Bombay, in the
matter of Ganpat Pahdurang Sankhe v. State of Maharashtra
and Others.
12



By
Kalidas Shinde
PhD Scholar
TISS

No comments:

Post a Comment