Ngaranmi Shimray’s reasons for exclusion of Meitei in the ST list are misleading and incorrect
|
K Yugindro Singh, Sh Janaki Sharma & M Manihar Singh (Independent Researchers)
Apropos the article under the heading ‘Kalelkar Commission Report of 1956: Meitei exclusion from the ST list is by their own choice’ which appeared in the editorial page of the esteemed English local daily, The Sangai Express in its publication dated 10th October 2023
The assertions and claims of the author, Ngarami Shimray may be refuted as being misleading and devoid of truth for the following reasons:
1. During the days when the British ruled India, the British administrators identified and classified the people of India based on the definitions of ‘caste’ and ‘tribe’ enshrined in the ‘Imperial Gazetteer of India’ published by H Frowde, Oxford University, London (1907) and other authority books such as the ‘Census of India, 1901 Report’ by HH Risley & EA Gait (1903), and ‘The People of India’ by Hebert Risley & W Crook (1915). The anthropological devices used for the purpose were ethnography, ethnology and anthropometry which are well described in authority books such as ‘The Tribes and Castes of Bengal’ by HH Resley (1891).
2. Based on the ethnography of Meitei as provided in the book ‘Annual Report of the Munnipore Political Agency for 1868-69’ by Dr R Brown, the then Political Agent of Manipur, the British Government of India identified and classed Meitei as a primitive hill tribe of the erstwhile Assam Province. (For instance, see AM Meerwarth’s book ‘Ethnographical Gallery, Guidebook No. 2 (The Andamanese, Nicobarese and Hill Tribes of Assam)’ (1919)). As such, during the days when the British ruled India, the then British Government of India enlisted Meitei as a primitive hill tribe right from the year 1872 when the noted ethnographer ET Dalton published his famous book “Descriptive Ethnology of Bengal” printed by the office of the Superintendent of Government Printing, Calcutta.
3. In all census reports right from the census of India 1881, various books and research articles authored by contemporary British ethnographers, linguists and administrators during the British rule of India, described Meitei as a primitive hill tribe. For instance, in the book ‘Census of India, 1931 Volume III Assam Part I – Report’, by CS Mullan, MA, ICS, published by the Superintendent, Assam Government Press, Shillong in 1932, the author listed a series of 12 (twelve) primitive hill tribes of Assam viz., Meitei, Mikirs, Garos, Naga Tribes of Manipur, Kacharies, Lushai-Kuki, Khasis, Angami Nagas, Lhota Nagas, Ao Nagas, Thado Kukis, Lakhers, along with authority monographs on the ethnology of the tribes (pp.205). In case of Meitei, the monograph ‘The Meithei’ authored by TC Hodson was acknowledged.
4. Although the self-claim made by the contemporary Meitei as Kshatriyas of the Hindu Caste System, the British administrators rejected their claim of Hindu origin. In his book ‘History of Assam’, EA Gait (1906) wrote about Meitei (Manipuri) as follows: “They pretend to be Kshatriyas, and are supported in their claim by the degraded Brahmans who serve them, and who, after giving the State its present name and identifying it with the Manipur mentioned in the Mahabharat, have invented a legend that the people are descended from the hero Arjun by a Naga woman, with whom he cohabited during his 2 alleged sojourn in this neighbourhood” (pp.264). HH Risley, and EA Gait in their book ‘The Census of India, 1901 Volume I, Part I – Report’ stated categorically : “Although they have become thoroughly Hinduised, they have not adopted any Aryan tongue” (pp 270). The Hindu origin of Meitei was rejected by all frontier British officers including RB Pemberton, William McCulloch, R Brown and TC Hodson.
5. With the lapse of paramountcy of the British, India became a free Nation on 15th August 1947 and adopted its Constitution wef 26th January 1950. Clause (25) of article 366 of the Constitution of India defines “Scheduled Tribes” as those tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within such tribes or tribal communities as are deemed under article 342 to be Scheduled Tribes for the purposes of the Constitution. As required by Clause (1) of Article 342, the Central Government asked the then Chief Commissioner, the Rajpramukh of Manipur sometime in 1950-51 to recommend a list of tribes of Manipur for inclusion in the first Scheduled Tribes list of Manipur in the Constitution Order to be notified by the then President of India. Himmat Singh Maheshwari, the then Chief Commissioner did not recommend Meitei for inclusion in the ST list of Manipur. At that point of time, an atmosphere of public unrest, confusion, chaos and desperation prevailed in Manipur subsequent to its forced merger into India on October 15, 1949. Himmat Singh Maheshwari was found arrogant and antagonistic towards Meitei people as he dismissed a number of Meiteis from Government jobs, curtailed freedom of press, among others.
6. Vide SRO 1427-A dated 20th September 1951, the Government of India, Ministry of Law published the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) (Part C States) Order 1951, made by the President under the Constitution Order, CO 32. No community from Manipur was listed as Scheduled Caste under the said Constitution Order, CO 32. However, the SCHEDULE to that Constitution Order provided room for inclusion of any community in the Scheduled Castes list of Manipur. The SCHEDULE to the Constitution Order, CO 32 reads as: “PART VIII – MANIPUR Throughout the State: - Castes, races or tribes, or parts of, or groups within, castes or tribes specified as Scheduled Castes in relation to the State of Assam.” On the other hand, vide SRO 1427-B dated 20th September 1951, the Government of India, Ministry of Law published the first Scheduled Tribes list of Manipur under the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) (Part C States) Order, 1951 made by the President under CO 33 and the said list consisted of three tribe names given below: “Part VI. – MANIPUR Throughout the State – 1. Any Kuki Tribe 2. Any Lushai Tribe 3. Any Naga Tribe”
7. The non-inclusion of Meitei in the first Scheduled Tribes list of Manipur under the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) (Part C States) Order, 1951 dated 20th September 1951 3 would be an administrative blunder of the then Indian Administrators including local authority because Meitei was a primitive hill tribe already approved and recognized by the British Government in the pre-independence era.
8. The reason for being an adherent of Hinduism cannot be the ground for exclusion of Meitei Tribe in the Scheduled Tribes list of Manipur under the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes)(Part C States) Order, 1951 dated 20th September 1951. Religion was not a criterion for inclusion/exclusion of a tribal community in the list of Scheduled Tribes as per Article 342 of the original Constitution of India, 1950 which was in force at that point of time. On the other hand, there are many Hindu tribes which are included in the Scheduled Tribe list of India eg, Meena of Rajasthan.
9. The First Backward Classes Commission of India under the chairmanship of Kaka Kalelkar was set-up by a Presidential Order dated 29th January 1953 under Article 340 of the Constitution of India. The mandate of authority assigned to the Kaka Kalelkar Commission, as directed by the President of India, is enshrined in para 1 of Chapter IX of the Kaka Kalelkar Commission Volume-I (pp. 154) which reads as: ‘The President of India was pleased to direct the commission to examine the lists of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes as already published under his order and to suggest any revision of those lists, if on enquiry it was found that such a revision was necessary’. In the context of Manipur the lists of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes as already published by Presidential Order mentioned in the above quoted statement are: (i) the list of Castes of Manipur scheduled to the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) (Part C States) Order, 1951 dated 20th September 1951 under CO 32 and (ii) the list of Tribes of Manipur scheduled to the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) (Part C States) Order, 1951 dated 20th September 1951 under CO 33 viz., (i) Any Kuki tribe, (ii) Any Lushai tribe and (iii) Any Naga tribe.
10. Since Meitei had not been included in the list of Scheduled Tribes of Manipur published by the President of India under CO 33, the Kaka Kalelkar Commission neither had the authority to examine the case of Meitei tribe for inclusion in the revised list of tribes of Manipur nor had the authority to recommend the Meitei tribe to the President.
On the other hand, the Commission had powers for consideration of communities, if any of Manipur including Lois and Yaithibi who have close affinity to Meitei, for inclusion in the Scheduled Castes list of Manipur, as no community from Manipur was listed as Scheduled Caste under the Constitution Order, CO 32.
11. A team of the Kaka Kalelkar Commission visited Manipur during 29th November to 1st December 1953 and met representatives of some unions/bodies of hill tribes. No representative-body of Meitei tribe was invited for interaction with the team for considering inclusion of Meitei tribe in the revised list of Scheduled Tribes of Manipur. The Kaka Kalelkar Commission submitted its report to the President of India on 30th March 1955 and it recommended 27 tribes by their own names for inclusion in the Scheduled Tribes list of Manipur. The list of the 27 tribes recommended by the Commission is enshrined in Volume II, pp. 231-232 of the Commission’s report. Through a letter dated 30th November 1955 communicated to the Central Government, one Kuki officer named T Kipgen, the then Secretary (Home & Development), Govt of Manipur, added two more tribe names viz. ‘Any Mizo (Lushai) tribes’ and ‘Zou’ which 4 were not mentioned in the report of the Kaka Kalekar Commission. The Government of India published the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Lists (Modification) Order, 1956 made by the President on 29th October 1956 and the said Presidential Order listed 7 Scheduled Castes of Manipur and 29 Scheduled Tribes of Manipur including ‘Any Mizo (Lushai) tribes’ and ‘Zou’ added by T Kipgen.
12. A major blooper had occurred while notifying the 29 ST list by the Presidential Order, 1956 as evident from the facts that (i) The two tribe names ‘Any Mizo (Lushai) tribes’ and ‘Zou’ were not recommended by the Kaka Kalelkar Commission and (ii) The ambiguous name ‘Any Mizo (Lushai) Tribes’ was contradictory to the recommendation of the Kalelkar Commission because, on Page 205 in Volume-I of its report, the Commission recommended that “All the tribes should be listed by their own particular names in the hilly areas of Assam and Manipur”, apart from giving an observation on Chapter IX of Volume I, pp. 155 that “In these circumstances, we are of opinion that it would be more convenient to list all the tribes by their own particular names in the hill areas of Assam and Manipur.” The fruits of the blooper have been taken by the Kukis of Manipur whose population has increased from the 1881 Census figure of 25,384 (ie 11.48% of total population) to the 2011 Census figure of 4,81,455 (ie 16.86% of total population). They have now claimed more than half the geographical area of Manipur including the hill areas surrounding the Manipur valley and have even started demanding a separate homeland of Kukis in the name of ‘Central Zalengam’ by dismembering Manipur.
Apropos the article under the heading ‘Kalelkar Commission Report of 1956: Meitei exclusion from the ST list is by their own choice’ which appeared in the editorial page of the esteemed English local daily, The Sangai Express in its publication dated 10th October 2023
The assertions and claims of the author, Ngarami Shimray may be refuted as being misleading and devoid of truth for the following reasons:
1. During the days when the British ruled India, the British administrators identified and classified the people of India based on the definitions of ‘caste’ and ‘tribe’ enshrined in the ‘Imperial Gazetteer of India’ published by H Frowde, Oxford University, London (1907) and other authority books such as the ‘Census of India, 1901 Report’ by HH Risley & EA Gait (1903), and ‘The People of India’ by Hebert Risley & W Crook (1915). The anthropological devices used for the purpose were ethnography, ethnology and anthropometry which are well described in authority books such as ‘The Tribes and Castes of Bengal’ by HH Resley (1891).
2. Based on the ethnography of Meitei as provided in the book ‘Annual Report of the Munnipore Political Agency for 1868-69’ by Dr R Brown, the then Political Agent of Manipur, the British Government of India identified and classed Meitei as a primitive hill tribe of the erstwhile Assam Province. (For instance, see AM Meerwarth’s book ‘Ethnographical Gallery, Guidebook No. 2 (The Andamanese, Nicobarese and Hill Tribes of Assam)’ (1919)). As such, during the days when the British ruled India, the then British Government of India enlisted Meitei as a primitive hill tribe right from the year 1872 when the noted ethnographer ET Dalton published his famous book “Descriptive Ethnology of Bengal” printed by the office of the Superintendent of Government Printing, Calcutta.
3. In all census reports right from the census of India 1881, various books and research articles authored by contemporary British ethnographers, linguists and administrators during the British rule of India, described Meitei as a primitive hill tribe. For instance, in the book ‘Census of India, 1931 Volume III Assam Part I – Report’, by CS Mullan, MA, ICS, published by the Superintendent, Assam Government Press, Shillong in 1932, the author listed a series of 12 (twelve) primitive hill tribes of Assam viz., Meitei, Mikirs, Garos, Naga Tribes of Manipur, Kacharies, Lushai-Kuki, Khasis, Angami Nagas, Lhota Nagas, Ao Nagas, Thado Kukis, Lakhers, along with authority monographs on the ethnology of the tribes (pp.205). In case of Meitei, the monograph ‘The Meithei’ authored by TC Hodson was acknowledged.
4. Although the self-claim made by the contemporary Meitei as Kshatriyas of the Hindu Caste System, the British administrators rejected their claim of Hindu origin. In his book ‘History of Assam’, EA Gait (1906) wrote about Meitei (Manipuri) as follows: “They pretend to be Kshatriyas, and are supported in their claim by the degraded Brahmans who serve them, and who, after giving the State its present name and identifying it with the Manipur mentioned in the Mahabharat, have invented a legend that the people are descended from the hero Arjun by a Naga woman, with whom he cohabited during his 2 alleged sojourn in this neighbourhood” (pp.264). HH Risley, and EA Gait in their book ‘The Census of India, 1901 Volume I, Part I – Report’ stated categorically : “Although they have become thoroughly Hinduised, they have not adopted any Aryan tongue” (pp 270). The Hindu origin of Meitei was rejected by all frontier British officers including RB Pemberton, William McCulloch, R Brown and TC Hodson.
5. With the lapse of paramountcy of the British, India became a free Nation on 15th August 1947 and adopted its Constitution wef 26th January 1950. Clause (25) of article 366 of the Constitution of India defines “Scheduled Tribes” as those tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within such tribes or tribal communities as are deemed under article 342 to be Scheduled Tribes for the purposes of the Constitution. As required by Clause (1) of Article 342, the Central Government asked the then Chief Commissioner, the Rajpramukh of Manipur sometime in 1950-51 to recommend a list of tribes of Manipur for inclusion in the first Scheduled Tribes list of Manipur in the Constitution Order to be notified by the then President of India. Himmat Singh Maheshwari, the then Chief Commissioner did not recommend Meitei for inclusion in the ST list of Manipur. At that point of time, an atmosphere of public unrest, confusion, chaos and desperation prevailed in Manipur subsequent to its forced merger into India on October 15, 1949. Himmat Singh Maheshwari was found arrogant and antagonistic towards Meitei people as he dismissed a number of Meiteis from Government jobs, curtailed freedom of press, among others.
6. Vide SRO 1427-A dated 20th September 1951, the Government of India, Ministry of Law published the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) (Part C States) Order 1951, made by the President under the Constitution Order, CO 32. No community from Manipur was listed as Scheduled Caste under the said Constitution Order, CO 32. However, the SCHEDULE to that Constitution Order provided room for inclusion of any community in the Scheduled Castes list of Manipur. The SCHEDULE to the Constitution Order, CO 32 reads as: “PART VIII – MANIPUR Throughout the State: - Castes, races or tribes, or parts of, or groups within, castes or tribes specified as Scheduled Castes in relation to the State of Assam.” On the other hand, vide SRO 1427-B dated 20th September 1951, the Government of India, Ministry of Law published the first Scheduled Tribes list of Manipur under the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) (Part C States) Order, 1951 made by the President under CO 33 and the said list consisted of three tribe names given below: “Part VI. – MANIPUR Throughout the State – 1. Any Kuki Tribe 2. Any Lushai Tribe 3. Any Naga Tribe”
7. The non-inclusion of Meitei in the first Scheduled Tribes list of Manipur under the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) (Part C States) Order, 1951 dated 20th September 1951 3 would be an administrative blunder of the then Indian Administrators including local authority because Meitei was a primitive hill tribe already approved and recognized by the British Government in the pre-independence era.
8. The reason for being an adherent of Hinduism cannot be the ground for exclusion of Meitei Tribe in the Scheduled Tribes list of Manipur under the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes)(Part C States) Order, 1951 dated 20th September 1951. Religion was not a criterion for inclusion/exclusion of a tribal community in the list of Scheduled Tribes as per Article 342 of the original Constitution of India, 1950 which was in force at that point of time. On the other hand, there are many Hindu tribes which are included in the Scheduled Tribe list of India eg, Meena of Rajasthan.
9. The First Backward Classes Commission of India under the chairmanship of Kaka Kalelkar was set-up by a Presidential Order dated 29th January 1953 under Article 340 of the Constitution of India. The mandate of authority assigned to the Kaka Kalelkar Commission, as directed by the President of India, is enshrined in para 1 of Chapter IX of the Kaka Kalelkar Commission Volume-I (pp. 154) which reads as: ‘The President of India was pleased to direct the commission to examine the lists of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes as already published under his order and to suggest any revision of those lists, if on enquiry it was found that such a revision was necessary’. In the context of Manipur the lists of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes as already published by Presidential Order mentioned in the above quoted statement are: (i) the list of Castes of Manipur scheduled to the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) (Part C States) Order, 1951 dated 20th September 1951 under CO 32 and (ii) the list of Tribes of Manipur scheduled to the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) (Part C States) Order, 1951 dated 20th September 1951 under CO 33 viz., (i) Any Kuki tribe, (ii) Any Lushai tribe and (iii) Any Naga tribe.
10. Since Meitei had not been included in the list of Scheduled Tribes of Manipur published by the President of India under CO 33, the Kaka Kalelkar Commission neither had the authority to examine the case of Meitei tribe for inclusion in the revised list of tribes of Manipur nor had the authority to recommend the Meitei tribe to the President.
On the other hand, the Commission had powers for consideration of communities, if any of Manipur including Lois and Yaithibi who have close affinity to Meitei, for inclusion in the Scheduled Castes list of Manipur, as no community from Manipur was listed as Scheduled Caste under the Constitution Order, CO 32.
11. A team of the Kaka Kalelkar Commission visited Manipur during 29th November to 1st December 1953 and met representatives of some unions/bodies of hill tribes. No representative-body of Meitei tribe was invited for interaction with the team for considering inclusion of Meitei tribe in the revised list of Scheduled Tribes of Manipur. The Kaka Kalelkar Commission submitted its report to the President of India on 30th March 1955 and it recommended 27 tribes by their own names for inclusion in the Scheduled Tribes list of Manipur. The list of the 27 tribes recommended by the Commission is enshrined in Volume II, pp. 231-232 of the Commission’s report. Through a letter dated 30th November 1955 communicated to the Central Government, one Kuki officer named T Kipgen, the then Secretary (Home & Development), Govt of Manipur, added two more tribe names viz. ‘Any Mizo (Lushai) tribes’ and ‘Zou’ which 4 were not mentioned in the report of the Kaka Kalekar Commission. The Government of India published the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Lists (Modification) Order, 1956 made by the President on 29th October 1956 and the said Presidential Order listed 7 Scheduled Castes of Manipur and 29 Scheduled Tribes of Manipur including ‘Any Mizo (Lushai) tribes’ and ‘Zou’ added by T Kipgen.
12. A major blooper had occurred while notifying the 29 ST list by the Presidential Order, 1956 as evident from the facts that (i) The two tribe names ‘Any Mizo (Lushai) tribes’ and ‘Zou’ were not recommended by the Kaka Kalelkar Commission and (ii) The ambiguous name ‘Any Mizo (Lushai) Tribes’ was contradictory to the recommendation of the Kalelkar Commission because, on Page 205 in Volume-I of its report, the Commission recommended that “All the tribes should be listed by their own particular names in the hilly areas of Assam and Manipur”, apart from giving an observation on Chapter IX of Volume I, pp. 155 that “In these circumstances, we are of opinion that it would be more convenient to list all the tribes by their own particular names in the hill areas of Assam and Manipur.” The fruits of the blooper have been taken by the Kukis of Manipur whose population has increased from the 1881 Census figure of 25,384 (ie 11.48% of total population) to the 2011 Census figure of 4,81,455 (ie 16.86% of total population). They have now claimed more than half the geographical area of Manipur including the hill areas surrounding the Manipur valley and have even started demanding a separate homeland of Kukis in the name of ‘Central Zalengam’ by dismembering Manipur.