The Meitei Community ST Demand and Its Implications

All tribal people in Manipur should be aware of the hidden agenda of Meitei community ST demand and understand its implication.

A. The Meitei community had the opportunity, but chose to opt out

1. When India became a Republic and the Constitution was adopted in 1950, it became necessary to notify downtrodden sections in the society deserving reservation policy as envisaged in the Constitution. During this period, the Meitei community considered themselves chaste Hindus and rejected the idea of being Scheduled Caste (SC) or (ST). This resulted in a few Meitei castes notified as SC and all tribes of Manipur as ST by Constitutional Orders issued in 1950/1951.

2. A few years later, the central government felt it necessary to revisit the lists and the first Backward Classes Commission (aka Kalelkar Commission) offered an opportunity for revision of the SC and ST lists. They circulated a questionnaire which included a question whether “your state government recommended the inclusion in or exclusion from the existing lists of any tribe, caste, or community.” The Meitei community had the opportunity to state that they want to be included, but failed again in 1955/56 to propose to be SC or ST. They found the idea degrading and undignified to become SC or ST at that point in time. The Meitei exclusion from the ST or SC list is by their own choice.

3. The General Secretary of the STDCM had stated in October 2023 that “the proposal of Manipur for ST list was made in collaboration of consultation with a few myopic converted Meitei Hindu fanatics who were considered educated or influential”. He seems to be implying that the Meitei community may have been represented by some elites in the society. This may be true, but it does not erase the fact that any Meitei individual, group etc. could have approached the Backward Classes Commission by sending representations or meeting them during their visit to Manipur.

B. The recent short-cut attempt of Meitei community to become ST

1. The Meetei (Meitei) Tribe Union (MMTU) bearing Regd. No. 15 of 2022 (strangely got registration from the Manipur government as a ‘Tribe’ Union when they are caste, majority under OBC category) filed WP(C) No. 229 of 2023 in the Manipur High Court and made the following as respondents:- (1) State of Manipur represented by the Chief Secretary, Government of Manipur, (2) Chief Secretary to the Government of Manipur, (3) Secretary, Tribal Affairs and Hills Department and (4) Secretary, Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India. The writ petition did not make any single ST individual or apex tribal organisation as respondent which should have been necessary as they would be adversely impacted by prayer made therein.

2. It is shocking, that all the petitioners and all the lawyers representing the state government and the standing counsel of the Union of India (UoI) attending the court on the day of motion and passing of oral order, i.e. 27th March 2023, are from the Meitei community.

3. Strangely, the department of Tribal Affairs and Hills, Government of Manipur or the state government, did not submit any response on the writ.

4. Shri Abhinay Lakshman wrote in The Hindu on 18th October 2023 that the Office of the Registrar General of India (RGI) had looked into the Meitei demand for inclusion in the ST list on a request from the Ministry of Home Affairs in 1982 and found that, based on “available information”, the Meitei community “does not appear to possess tribal characteristics”, and it was not in favour of inclusion. He went on to state that the Ministry of Social Justice (which included tribal affairs), while revising the SC/ST lists of States and Union Territories, had sought recommendations from the Manipur government and it responded on 3rd January 2001 that it agreed with the 1982 opinion of the Office of the RGI on the status of Meiteis.

5. The Manipur government, headed by then Chief Minister W. Napamacha Singh, had stated that the Meitei community was the “dominant group in Manipur” and need not be included in the ST list adding that Meitei people were Hindus and have “assumed the status of Kshatriya Caste in the ladder of Hindu Castes”, and have already been listed as Other Backward Classes. There cannot be any better equivocal rejection of the demand by the proposer (state government represented by the CM) and central government (Ministry of Social Justice and Office of the RGI).

6. The writ petitioners who are members of the Meetei (Meitei) Tribe Union deliberately suppressed information that ST demand for Meitei community was considered and rejected by the GoI in 1982. They would also have known that the government of Manipur had conveyed that the Meitei community is the dominant group in Manipur falling under Kshatriya Caste and they have already been listed as OBCs. All these facts would have been available in the files of the governments, but it appeared that no efforts were made by the petitioners to present all facts to the court.

7. The state government as well as the Ministry of Tribal Affairs had the opportunity to submit the correct picture on the writ petition, but both respondents did not offer any comments or sought for time to revert back to the court. They failed their duties to be just, fair and impartial. It is stupefying why the state government chose not to submit written reply against the writ petition and did not even seek time to submit its response on a very sensitive matter like reservation.

8. The then Minister for Tribal Affairs and Hills in Manipur is a tribal person, and he has not spoken a word on this matter, making the entire episode very suspicious. Further, there were four tribal ministers in the last ministry and they too have not stated whether the matter was discussed in the Cabinet meeting or was managed in a surreptitious manner by a group of individuals in the government. The tribal minister owes to tell the tribal people what actually transpired in the cabinet and state government deliberations on this writ petition to clear doubts about handling such sensitive matter that eventually triggered the ethnic conflict.

9. WP(C) No. 229 of 2023 was taken up on 27th March 2023 in Manipur High Court and both the counsels of the state government and Union of India along with parties present in court, all being from the Meitei community, consented for disposal of the writ at motion state/first hearing without submitting any comments and without any ST individual or organisation being made a party in the writ petition. The oral order of the High Court passed on 27th March 2023 became public only on 19th April 2023 when it was uploaded in the website of the Manipur High Court. The Hill Areas Committee had a meeting on 20th April 2023 expressing their dismay and protest etc and the ATSUM (All Manipur Students’ Union Manipur) called a Solidarity March on 3rd May 2023. Ethnic violence erupted on the day of the march in Churachandpur and the rest is history.

10. The act of not making any apex tribal organisation as respondent by the petitioners followed by omission of the counsels of state government and union of India to submit any written comments, obtain oral instructions or ask for time appears to indicate a deliberate strategy behind the entire episode. Classification of any community as SC/ST for reservation purposes is a very sensitive matter anywhere in the country and even ordinary persons know about its ramifications. It is stupefying to think why any state government will give its consent to pass orders without making any submissions in the court on such highly sensitive and delicate matter. Consent was given by all present in court, including the petitioners and the counsels of state and central government, all of whom happen to belong to the Meitei community, making it difficult to ignore the thought of some collaborative efforts behind the scene. The court order dated 27th March 2023, was revised a year later by deleting paragraph 17(iii) which had instructed the state government to consider the inclusion of Meiteis in the ST list. The court's decision to remove this paragraph came after it was deemed to be in conflict with a Supreme Court ruling in the case of State of Maharashtra v. Milind & Ors, where the Supreme Court stated that courts cannot modify, amend, or alter the ST list rendering the order ineffective. The oral order dated 27th March 2023 has been stated by top judicial and government personalities to have triggered the ethnic conflict in Manipur. Given these facts, it is difficult to dismiss the suspicion that misinformation and subterfuge did play a role in the surreptitious and coordinated handling of the writ petition.

C. Backwardness criteria to be ST

1. The Lokur Committee has prescribed criteria for consideration of any community to be included in the list of ST and they include - indications of primitive traits, distinctive culture, geographical isolation, shyness of contact with the community at large, and backwardness. Nothing in the current settings of the Meitei population remotely resembles any of the criteria. The Meiteis were comparatively not backward then and certainly are not now. Rather their socio-economic conditions have improved leaps and bounds compared to the backward tribes. Any socio-economic survey conducted now would reveal that they are the most advanced and progressive community in Manipur.

2. They are the dominant community in all spheres of life, controlling every arm of the state government. They have produced numerous doctors, engineers, lawyers, judges, military officers, academicians, multi-national professionals, IAS, IPS and officers in all India services, state services, rich businessmen etc. Their educational attainments are comparable to any advanced community in the country.

3. The Meiteis have now the OBC quota and have capitalised their inclusion in this list. So why ask for ST status when they are already SC and OBC unless there is a hidden agenda of grabbing tribal land and resources in the ‘Hill Areas’ of Manipur as another ST?

4. Interestingly, an article has been written by Dr. Arambam Birajit with the heading “Misinterpretation of Meitei as a tribe in the name of indigenous people; Meiteis have outgrown their tribal social evolution” published in ukhrultimes.com on 21st October 2023. He stated, among many other interesting discourses, that the Meitei civilisation evolved as a historical process since the time of Nongda Lairen Pakhangba (33AD) till the formation of Nation State eventually developing the Meitei identity. Dr. Arambam Birajit stated that “In many ways, without considering this journey of Meitei detribalisation process from prehistoric experiences to their transformation into Nation State, the claiming of being tribal status for the purpose of scheduled tribe status clearly smacks of intellectual and academic dishonesty.” This opinion expressed is bitter and difficult to swallow, but it is the truth.  The way forward is for the Meiteis to accept that times have changed and that they are already an advanced community.

5. They have discarded all their tribalistic characteristics, embraced a civilised way of living, evolved refined culture, dances, customs, language and traditions.

D. Hidden agenda

1. The hidden agenda behind the desire of the Meiteis to be ST is mainly to grab tribal lands in the “Hill Areas” and this has been exposed by some elected representatives from the valley. The then Union Minister of State Shri Rajkumar Ranjan Singh had clearly pointed out in para 9 of his letter to the Hon’ble Prime Minister dated 20th May 2023 that Article 371-C of the Constitution should be amended, further adding that the entire State should belong to the people of Manipur without any distinction to hill inhabitants or valley people - in the pattern of Himachal Pradesh.

2. The tribal people of Manipur should not forget that Article 371-C provides for “Special provision with respect to the State of Manipur”. The insertion of Article 371-C, the Manipur (Hill Areas) District Council Act, 1971 and notification of Presidential Order dated 20th June 1972 were made to continue the special provisions for Manipur that existed under a UT (Manipur was a Part-C state) after it becomes a full-fledged State to safeguard the interests and rights of tribal people of Manipur.

3. Tribal people, beware of the deceptive hegemonic manoeuvres of yearning to become a ST. It is not for getting more of all India services post for Meitei youth, but a ruse to fool the tribes and grab tribal lands in “hill areas” through the ST route.

4. There have been attempts to redraw district boundaries between the valley districts and hill districts in “hill areas” on the pretext of administrative convenience. This move is a direct attack on the safeguards provided to “hill areas” under Article 371-C to dilute it for taking away tribal lands in “hill areas”.

5. The Congress state government in 2015 had attempted in the Assembly to pass the Protection of Manipur Peoples (PMP) Bill 2015, the Manipur Land Revenue and Land Reforms (Seventh amendment) Bill 2015 and the Manipur Shops and Establishments (Second amendment) Bill 2015, but it was objected to by the tribes of Manipur, as it violated the constitutional provisions entailing consultation with the HAC since the legislations are envisaged to cover “hill areas”. The Congress government did not succeed on account of the provision under Article 371-C requiring consultation with Hill Areas Committee.

The boldness and the extent of manipulations being made by the MMTU and STDCM in collaboration with various arms of governance in the governments to become ST hints at the possibility of patronage enjoyed by the Meitei community from those in power. The people in mainland India, perceive Manipur as an island where Hinduism is flourishing and it would be their endeavour to further the cause of the community that is their torch bearer in the east. The tribal people should understand their situation vis a vis Meitei community and look at the political scenario for considering which political entity best serves their interest and survival.

Manipur is under President’s Rule and it has been extended for another six months. It is clear that the STDCM (Scheduled Tribe Demand Committee Manipur) is working together with the MMTU (Meetei (Meitei) Tribe Union). Their agenda to become ST is to buy tribal land in the “hill areas” and will employ various means to achieve their objective. They have already manipulated the administrative and judicial governance system and are capable of carrying out further manipulations surreptitiously in coordination with the government where they have the upper hand. Persons in high positions under PR should be weary of entertaining these organisations as their agenda is fuelled by enormous funds and has the potential of triggering a wider conflict.

The tribals of Manipur will have to unite and fight the covert aim of STDCM and MMTU to include Meitei community in the ST list to enable them to buy tribal land in the “hill areas” by becoming ST. As long as the “hill areas” are in Manipur state, the tribes must try to secure Sixth Schedule status for “hill areas” under Article 244(2) and Article 244-A of the Constitution. The tribes in “hill areas” under Sixth Schedule can protect their tribal lands from alienation by making their own tribal land laws and safeguarding them as the Bodos, Karbis, Khasis, Jaintias, Garos, etc. have done under the Sixth Schedule provisions and the Mizos of Mizoram and Nagas of Nagaland under Article 371-A and Article 371-G respectively. The apex tribal bodies of Manipur should formulate their coordinated response to counter the ST demand for Meitei community and prevent a wider conflict.

Ngaranmi Shimray

New Delhi

shimray2011@gmail.com