JUDGMENT B.L. Loomba, J. - In this case Petitioner No. 1 is Gond Adivasi Sabha, U.P. through its President Sri Dev Nath Gond, resident of village Partapatti, P.O. Dbamhapur district Varanasi. Petitioner No. 2 is District Gond Adivasi Sabha, Deoria U.P. through its Secretary Sri Ram Dhani resident of village and Post Paina, district Deoria, while Petitioner No. 3 and 4 are individuals, namely Radhey Shyam Gond and Mahant Prasad minor through his natural guardian Sri Ram Briksh resident of district Deoria. The Respondents are State of U.P., District Magistrate, Deoria and Tehsildars of Tehsils Deoria, Exemplum and Hata in district Deoria. Briefly stated the Petitioner's case is that the community of 'Gond' is a notified scheduled Caste under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act, 1976, but members of their caste are being deprived of the benefits admissible to the scheduled castes, In this conreCtion they have referred to certain individuals who are denied such benefits, particularly those residing in district Deoria. 2. The grievance raised is that despite the circular letters issued by the U.P. Government to all the District Magistrates, the district authorities are creating difficulties and are trying to make distinction in the words 'Gonrh' and 'Gond' and are trying to classify the Petitioners and Ors. as belonging to the caste of 'Gonrh' and treating them backward class as Kahars. The Petitioners assert that 'Gonrh' and 'Gond' is just the same caste and because of local dialect there may be difference in pronounciation and those called 'Gonrh' are also 'Gond' specified in the aforesaid 1976 Act. The Petitioners seek writ of mandamus against the Respondents to treat all such persons who are called 'Gonrh' or 'Gond' as Schedule Castes and admit them to the benefits as are available to the members of the scheduled castes. 3. The assertion that the caste 'Gond' as specified in the Schedule to the said Act is a scheduled caste is not disputed by the respordents and the only plea raised on their behalf is that the caste 'Gond' has 5 sub castes, namely, Dhuriya, Naik, Ojha, Pathriya and Rajgond, those not belonging to any of these sub castes cannot be treated as 'Gond' and that the Petitioners and some others like them have started calling themselves as 'Gond' in order to secure the benefits and advantages admissible to the members of the schedule caste. According to the Respondents, the Petitioners in fact belong to Kahar caste which is a backward caste but not a scheduled caste. Reference has, in this connection been made to the circular communication issued by the Director Harijan and Social Welfare Department U. P. dated (sic) clarifying that only 5 sub castes named (sic) within the caste 'Gond', a copy of this circular communication has been annexed as Annexure-C.A.2 to the counter affidavit. This communication makes a reference to the recommendation of the Joint Committee constituted for Anusuchit Jati, Anusuchit Janjati Orders (Amendment) Bill, 1967 that the 'Gond' caste covers only the subcastes of Dhuriya, Nayak, Ojha, Pathri and Rajgond. The rejoinder affidavit dated 28.U.82 on this point, vide paragraph 6 thereof, mentions that the report of the Joint Committee has no legal force being only a recommendatory in nature and restricted meaning cannot be assigned to the caste 'Gond' and on that basis they cannot by denied the benefits and advantages admissible to the scheduled castes. 4. After hearing learned Counsel for the parties it is manifestly clear that the parties are not at dispute on the constitutional and legal aspect of the matter and caste 'Gond' having been classified as a scheduled caste Under schedu'e 'Ka' to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Orders (Amendment) Act 1V75 for the whole of Uttar Pradesh, the persons who belong to 'Gond' caste shall be ireated as scheduled caste and admitted to the benefits available for the members of the scheduled castes under the various orders of the Government. The dispute remains confined only to the factual position whether particular persons residing in any area of U.P. and particularly in Deoria district actually belong to the 'Gond' caste. For obvious reasons this Court cannot enter upon the question of fats as to the merits or otherwise underlying the claim of a particular person or a group of persons as belonging or not belonging to the caste called 'Gond'. An enquiry on this factual aspect has necessarily to be made and considered at the district level and if warranted at the State Government level. What may be the composition of the enquiring body and its coverage is also not for this Court to determine, the answer to the controversy raised in the petition would depend on the result of the enquiry. What may be the composition of the enquiring body and its coverage is also not for this Court to determine, the answer to the controversy raised in the petition would depend on the result of the enquiry. If it is found that any persons are actually not belonging to caste 'Gond' but by misrepresenting facts and in order to derive unmerited advantage have started calling themselves as 'Gond' their plea has necessarily to be rejected. If the Joint Committee on scheduled caste and scheduled tribes after analysis of the factual position had made certain recommendations, in regard to the sub-castes covered within the castes 'Gond' the recommendations may certainly be important serving as a foundational guide for purpose of the necessary enquiry. It has also to be considered on merits whether 'Gond' and 'Gonrh' are separate castes or whether it is one and the same caste and the difference is only of pronunciation in local dialect. 5. In this view of the matter this writ petition merits to be disposed of with the direction that the caste 'Gond' is and shall be treated as a scheduled caste throughout the State of U.P. and all the members of Gond caste shall be entitled to all the benefits and advantages as are available to the members of the scheduled castes, whether or not particular person or group of persons actually belong to 'Gond' caste is a matter of factual enquiry to be dealt with and determined by the Executive authorities and in any case cannot be decided in these proceedings. The direction is issued and writ petition decided accordingly. In the facts the parties are left to bear their own costs.