During the transition of Manipur from a part C state to a full-fledged state in 1971-72, a unique legislative process was envisaged for the “Hill Areas” of Manipur
Share
During the transition of Manipur from a part C state to a full-fledged state in 1971-72, a unique legislative process was envisaged for the “Hill Areas” of Manipur. It resulted in the insertion of Article 371-C in the Constitution of India along with the notification of a Presidential Order dated 20th June 1972 to continue the provisions under section 52 of the Government of Union Territories Act 1963 after Manipur becomes a full-fledged State. These provisions provide for a Hill Areas Committee (HAC) with a differentiated legislation framework for hill areas. Central to the unique design of legislation is the HAC’s right to conceptualise laws, draft Bills, recommend Bill to the state government, vet Bills tabled by the state government in the Assembly, submit a report and recommendation on the government Bill for enactment into law by the Assembly. Subjects for legislation for hill areas are specified under “scheduled matters”.
The process of legislation envisaged for hill areas includes duties for the Speaker and Chief Minister and oversight roles for the Governor and President. If the HAC and tribal people of hill areas have grievances, the President can issue executive directions to be complied with by the state government. The safeguards and oversight roles ensure the enactment of laws for hill areas on any scheduled matters with none or minor variations from the HAC recommended Bill. These processes and procedures have been laid down under the Presidential Order of 20 June 1972 (Manipur Legislative Assembly (Hill Areas Committee) Order, 1972; hereby referred to as ‘1972 Order’). The framework of legislation for hill areas is unique to Manipur and is unlike the Sixth Schedule, which gives law-making power to the ADCs themselves with the approval of the Governor and without the involvement of the state government and the Assembly. However, despite this explicit architecture for legislation, successive state governments dominated by the majority community have consistently obstructed and derailed the implementation of the constitutional mandate, thereby depriving the autonomous district councils (ADCs) and the village council/authorities of laws for implementation in hill areas.
This article examines the systemic neglect and undermining of constitutional safeguards for more than 50 years, and the continuing adversarial stance of the state government controlled by the dominant community, to contend that the only way forward to actualise the constitutional framework envisaged by Article 371-C is to exhaust all specified intervention provisions, and thereafter seek judicial remedy in the Supreme Court if Article 371-C and the 1972 Order are not implemented by the state government.
Manipur’s constitutional asymmetry is deeply rooted in its demographic and geographic configuration; the valley, inhabited primarily by the Meitei community, with more than half of the state’s population electing 40 Members of Legislative Assembly, while the hill areas, occupied predominantly by Scheduled Tribes, elect only 20 MLAs. In recognition of this structural imbalance, Parliament enacted the Manipur (Hill Areas) District Council Act, 1972, inserted Article 371-C in the Constitution, and followed it up with the 1972 Order, thereby establishing a distinct legislative and administrative scheme for the “hill areas” of Manipur. Yet since statehood in 1972, the constitutional scheme has been thwarted and repeatedly frustrated, with no laws and administrative system for hill areas, leaving the tribes neglected, deprived, and backward.
HAC-recommended Bill of 2021 languishing
1. For more than half a century, the mechanisms for legislation and administration of hill areas envisaged under Article 371-C remain dormant without a single HAC-recommended law enacted by the Assembly for administration by ADCs and Village Authorities (VAs). The only attempt made so far by the HAC is the Manipur (Hill Areas) Autonomous District Councils Bill of 2021 recommended to the state government in 2021, which incidentally has been kept in cold storage by the state government for the last four years. The prolonged denial of constitutional rights of tribes in hill areas to have their own laws for self-governance by the ADCs and VAs for more than 50 years has deprived them of balanced development and good governance.
The state government, dominated by the Meitei community, has consistently obstructed and derailed the implementation of the constitutional mandate. Thwarting the implementation of the unique legislative and administrative scheme given by Article 371-C for tribes of hill areas by successive state governments, despite explicit legislative architecture, provides a strong case for seeking judicial intervention. However, before doing that, the HAC/politicians, CSOs, legal practitioners, students, activists, etc., should submit petitions to the Governor to make the council/state government discharge its function under Rule 12-A of the Rules of Business of the Government of Manipur (1972) on the pending Bill of 2021. They should urge the Governor to perform his special responsibility under paragraph 9 of the 1972 Order. In addition, the President may be urged to call for a report from the Governor under Article 371-C(2) regarding the administration of the Hill Areas, with a prayer to invoke the executive power of the Union to give directions to the State regarding the administration of the hill areas. After exhausting all remedial channels as provided under Article 371-C and the 1972 Order, a case should be filed in the Supreme Court.
2. Constitutional Framework under Article 371-C
This article envisages a unique legislative and administrative governance model for “hill areas” of Manipur with an oversight mechanism of the Governor and President aimed at protecting vulnerable and politically underrepresented minority tribal population.
Firstly, Article 371-C(1) constitutes a committee comprising all MLAs elected from the hill areas and one of its functions is vesting HAC with the right of legislation on subjects relating to hill areas listed in the “Scheduled Matters” (Paragraph 4(3) and the Second Schedule of 1972 Order).
Secondly, Article 371-C(2) entails upon the Governor to act as directed by the President when remedy is sought regarding the administration of the Hill Areas in the State of Manipur.
Thirdly, the President has an oversight role under Article 371-C(2) to seek reports from the Governor and issue binding executive directions to the State Government concerning the administration of the hill areas.
3. The 1972 Presidential Order
3.1 Functions of HAC are laid down in paragraph 4, which has five sub-paragraphs. (a) Sub-para 4(1) provides that all “Scheduled Matters” relating to the Hill Areas fall within the purview of the HAC.
(b) Sub-para 4(2) provides that every Bill, other than a Money Bill, affecting wholly or partly the Hill Areas and containing mainly provisions dealing with any of the Scheduled Matters shall, after introduction in the Assembly, be referred to the HAC for consideration and report to the Assembly. It has a provision that states that any question in respect to this sub-paragraph shall be referred to the Governor, and his decision shall be final.
(c) Para 4(3) gives the HAC the right to consider and pass resolutions recommending to the state government any legislation.
(d) Sub-para 4(4) gives the HAC the right to discuss the Annual Financial Statement in so far as it relates to the Hill Areas.
(e) Sub-para 4(5) entails upon the HAC to endeavour safeguarding the interests of the people of the Hill Areas, particularly through accelerated development of these areas, and promote unity between the people of the Hill Areas and other areas of the State by aiming at an integrated and evenly based economic growth of those areas and augmenting the resources of the state as a whole.
3.2 Responsibility of Legislation
To make laws for hill areas has been given to the HAC in partnership with the state government and the Assembly. The definition of “Scheduled Matters” is given under paragraphs 2(f) of the 1972 Order. The scope of HAC includes the right to consider and pass resolutions recommending to the state government any legislation affecting the Hill Areas with respect to any Scheduled matter (paragraph 4(3) of the 1972 Order). It is the job of the HAC to conceptualise laws and formulate them into Bill for the tribes of hill areas on any “Scheduled Matters”. The HAC has passed a resolution and recommended the Manipur (Hill Areas) Autonomous District Councils Bill, 2021 under the “Scheduled Matter” item (2).
The HAC-recommended Bill is now with the state government, and Rule 12A of the Rules of Business of the Government of Manipur, 1972 is attracted. Rule 12A states that “The Council shall normally give effect to the recommendation of the Hill Areas Committee under sub-paragraph (3) of paragraph 4 of the Manipur Legislative Assembly (Hill Areas Committee) Order, 1972, but if the Council is of the opinion that it would not be expedient to do so or that the Hill Areas Committee was not competent to make any such recommendations, the matter shall be referred to the Governor, whose decision thereon shall be final and binding on the Council, and action shall be taken accordingly”. This Rule entails upon the state government to refer the matter to the Governor since it ignored the HAC Bill by tabling two of its own Bills in the Assembly, thereby amounting to rejecting the HAC Bill, making it mandatory for the Council to refer the matter to the Governor.
The administrative system for the ADCs and VAs to implement laws becomes evident from the reading of section 29 of the Manipur (Hill Areas) District Council Act, 1971, which provides functions to the ADCs that are similar to the “Scheduled Matters” given for legislation to the HAC under the 1972 Order. The right of legislation for HAC includes subjects under “Scheduled Matters” item (7), which provides for “The establishment of Village Committees, Councils and their powers and other matters relating to village administration,” as the village institution is one of the administrative machineries for implementation of laws for hill areas.
3.3 Mandatory Reference of Bills
The State Assembly is constitutionally obligated to refer any Bill affecting the hill areas to the HAC (Paragraph 4(2) of 1972 Order and Rule 140 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business of the Manipur Legislative Assembly, 1964). This implies that any Bill affecting the hill areas, which are not money Bill, has to be mandatorily referred to the HAC for its report and recommendations. This enables the HAC to function like the Select Committee of the Assembly to vet Bills relating to hill areas.
3.4 Procedural Safeguards Under State Rules
If the Assembly rejects, modifies, or enacts a Bill significantly different from HAC’s report and recommendation (rule 157A(1) of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business of the Manipur Legislative Assembly, 1964), or the Bill is not approved by the Hill Areas Committee but is passed by the Assembly (rule 157A(2) ibid), the Speaker must submit the matter to the Governor (Rule 157A(3) ibid), whose decision to return the Bill to the Assembly with a message shall be reported by the Speaker to the Assembly, and the Governor’s decision either to withdraw or accept the Bill as recommended by HAC or as passed by the Assembly shall be deemed. These provisions ensure that any variations from the HAC-recommended Bill can be restored/modified, etc., and deemed enacted, etc.
3.5 Rule 12A of the Rules of Business of the Government of Manipur (1972)
The Council of Ministers must normally give effect to HAC recommendations or refer the matter to the Governor.
4. Governor’s Special Responsibility
Paragraph 9 of the 1972 Order and Rule 12A of the Rules of Business of the Government of Manipur (1972), Rule 157A, Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business (1964), and Article 371-C provide the Governor’s duty to ensure that the HAC, state government/Chief Minister, Speaker, and Assembly discharge their functions effectively and that the constitutional mandate of HAC is neither undermined nor bypassed.
5. Presidential Powers under Article 371-C(2)
The article provides that the Governor shall annually, or whenever so required by the President, make a report to the President regarding the administration of the Hill Areas in the State of Manipur, and the executive power of the Union shall extend to the giving of directions to the State as to the administration of the said areas. This is an extraordinary supervisory mechanism that enables a proactive role by the Governor and President. But somewhere along the line during the last 50 years, omissions may have taken place as the provisions given by Article 371-C seem to have been left unimplemented without proactive actions from the constitutional heads despite elaborate arrangements made under the Constitution by Article 371-C and 1972 Order.
6. Systematic Non-Implementation and Constitutional Subversion
Despite clear mandates, the intended structure under Article 371-C has been consistently undermined. Key instances include:
7.1 Bypassing HAC Scrutiny
In 2015, three Bills affecting the hill areas were introduced and passed without mandatory HAC reference, violating Rule 140 of the Procedure and Conduct of Business of the Manipur Legislative Assembly, 1964 and Paragraph 4(2) of the 1972 Order. The resulting unrest in the hill districts underscored the consequences of ignoring constitutional safeguards.
7.2 Substitution of HAC-recommended Legislation
The HAC’s landmark 2021 Manipur (Hill Areas) Autonomous District Council Bill, drafted under Paragraph 4(3), was sidelined/shelved by the State Government. Instead, the Cabinet introduced two versions of its own Bills—an act inconsistent with Rule 12A of the Rules of Business of the Government of Manipur (1972) and the right to legislation by HAC given by Article 371-C. The HAC recommended Bill of 2021 is effectively pending with the state government as the council/cabinet is required under Rule 12-A to complete the process of legislation by referring the matter to the Governor whose decision thereon shall be final and binding on the Council and action taken accordingly.
7.3 Non-Operationalisation of the Governor’s Role
Successive Governors have not exercised their special responsibility under Paragraph 9 of the 1972 Order, rendering the safeguards decorative. When there is a constitutional breakdown in the state, the Governor is duty-bound to make a report to the President. Likewise, certain responsibilities have been given to the Governor under Article 371-C and the 1972 Order, and he is expected to take suitable action as mandated upon him.
7.4 Structural Political Dominance
With 40 MLAs from the valley and only 20 from the hills, state institutions remain structurally skewed. This imbalance of political power equation has created a persistent domineering environment where constitutional rights designed for tribes in the hill areas are overridden or ignored.
7.5 Attempted Subversion
The Speaker of the Manipur Legislative Assembly issued an order to enlarge the Hill Areas Committee in September 2021 by including nine MLAs elected from the valley constituencies (non-hill areas). This order was subsequently withdrawn in the same month due to widespread opposition from tribal organizations. This illegal action is violative of Article 371-C which “provides for the constitution and functions of a committee of the Legislative Assembly of the State consisting of members of that Assembly elected from the Hill Areas of that State”, and is an eye-opener to the domineering mindset of political leadership of the Meitei community.
Collectively, all these actions and non-actions constitute a pattern of constitutional non-compliance and deliberate attempts to subvert constitutional provisions rather than viewing them as isolated administrative lapses.
8. Article 371-C gives the right of legislation to the HAC
A unique institutional arrangement, as it includes the entire process of law-making starting from the conceptualisation of law, formulating a draft Bill, making the state government table the Bill in the Assembly and referring it to the HAC, vetting of the Bill referred to the HAC and submitting a report and recommendation to the Assembly for enactment into law. With the various duties of the HAC, Council, Minister and Speaker and the oversight roles of the Governor and President, the unique scheme for legislation of laws for hill areas designed by Article 371-C will definitely result in the enactment of laws for hill areas, which are largely HAC-recommended legislation.
9. A Case for Judicial Intervention
The Constitution provides avenues for challenging sustained non-implementation of constitutional mandates under Article 32 (Right to Constitutional Remedies) by a writ petition filed directly before the Supreme Court along with Article 142 for the issue of comprehensive directions to ensure full implementation of constitutional obligations of Article 371-C and the 1972 Presidential Order. There are Supreme Court precedents where the court has consistently intervened to uphold constitutional provisions or statutory mandates designed for Scheduled Tribes, but have been neglected or rendered ineffective. The non-operationalisation of Article 371-C falls squarely within this jurisprudence. Given that political channels have been structurally incapable of enforcing constitutional safeguards, judicial remedy emerges as not merely appropriate but unavoidable.
10. Conclusion
Article 371-C has been enacted to protect the tribes living in hill areas of Manipur from political marginalisation and to institutionalise a system of self-governance. Five decades of consistent delay, procedural violations, and political dominance have deprived the tribal people of hill areas of the constitutional and institutional framework needed for development and good local governance. The inability of the state government, the Governor, and the President to implement constitutional provisions for more than half a century amounts to institutional betrayal and lip service paid to the marginalised minority by those in power. The tribes living in hill areas of Manipur have exhausted legislative and executive routes to remedy their situation. Political leaders from the valley still pursue their policy of domination, and the tribes from the hill areas have lost faith in their assurances. The implementation of Article 371-C is not a political aspiration, but a constitutional obligation. The time has come to assert the rights of tribes from hill areas through the political route by submitting representations to the Governor and President. In the meantime, the CSOs, legal practitioners, scholars, and tribal institutions from hill areas should take the lead in spearheading a concerted effort to approach the Supreme Court under Article 32 for the enforcement of the constitutional mandate for hill areas of Manipur given by Article 371-C within a given time frame.
Ngaranmi Shimray
New Delhi