Content Page Nos
Tribal India – Land and People
Yüklə 2,42 Mb.
|
- Bu səhifədəki naviqasiya:
- Table – 4.2 : Distribution of Tribal Population
- Table – 4.3 : STs Population in Central Indian States
- 4.3 Laws Concerning Tribal Lands
- Table – 4.4: Legislations for Protection of Tribal Land
- Table – 4.5 : Adivasi Land Alienation and Restoration in India
4.2 Tribal India – Land and People 4.2.1 The tribal people as they are, referred to in the law and constitution, and considered as the descendents of the original inhabitants, are largely located in the hilly tracts of Central and North Eastern India, Andaman and Nicobar Islands. Small populations are scattered in the hilly tracts of the southern states and Himachal Pradesh. While curbs on in-migration have ensured higher community concentrations in the North-Eastern States, large scale in-migration have reduced the tribal people to a minority in most of the States in the central Indian tribal tract. As will be observed later, tribal land alienation is integrally related to in-migration of non tribal people, with Dadra & Nagar Haveli as a very notable example. Table 4.2 gives an idea of the distribution of tribal communities across the nation. Table – 4.2 : Distribution of Tribal Population
Source- Based on Data from 2001 Census 4.2.2 As mentioned above, the concentration of tribal communities is in the hilly tracts of the central Indian states. Chattishgarh, which was carved out of the state of Madhya Pradesh about a decade ago, has the highest proportion of tribal people, followed by Jharkhand. Both these states were seen as tribal majority states at the formation, a fact that is far from the reality. In none of the states are the tribal people a significant proportion of the population, spread over the fertile plains and the hilly tracts, a situation that prevailed at the time of independence. However today, a significant proportion of the tribal people have been pushed out of the lower plains and are concentrated in pockets, generally in the hilly tracts with poor soils and low productivity. Table 4.3 provides tribal population in central Indian states. 4.2.3 Three hidden features of Table 4.3 are worth looking at this stage. The first is the demographic profile of the nine States to which PESA is applicable, which reveals a significant presence of tribal people therein. This dispensation placed a special responsibility on the executive to protect the tribal realm, but to little avail. This dispensation conferred enormous powers on the head of the executive. The Committee, however, notes that these powers by and large, have not been used in the last six decades in the interest of the tribals. The second is the presence of minerals in the all the states under the fifth schedule dispensation. This process of acquisition of land for development has had the effect of displacement of the tribals who have turned into ‘ecological refugees’. The process continues and the minerals which are considered as the building blocks of modern India, have put the tribal people at further risk of losing their land through acquisition and disruption of their societies and economies. A third feature is the presence of left wing extremist organizations and parties in the tribal pockets. Left without an alternative, either in the government or non government organizations, and left to a harsh fate of unmitigated exploitation, the tribal people initially gave the Naxalites succor and now have become their base. Most tribal areas in Central India are the abode to the Naxalites, whose presence is a response both to past and future land alienation, the failure of the government to live up to its constitutional mandate and the withdrawal of the state from its responsibility to protect the tribal realm. Table – 4.3 : STs Population in Central Indian States (Population in ,000)
Source- Based on Data from 2001 Census (Figures in Thousands) 4.3 Laws Concerning Tribal Lands 4.3.1 Laws concerning alienation of tribal lands began as a response of the colonial administration as a response to tribal uprisings. The first law its kind began with the Santhal Parghanas Tenancy Act in 1854, followed by the Agency Tracts Interest and Land Transfer Act in 1917, followed by the Chhota Nagpur Tenancy Act in 1924. All these acts were the precursors of modern day tenancy legislations. Land emerged as a vital issue of the peasants in the freedom movement and the Congress Party recognizing the significance of emancipation of the peasant from the clutches of the intermediaries, resolved to pass laws to that effect. Several land laws were passed during Home Rule by the local governments. Post independence the promulgations of the Abolition of Zamindari Act in 1950 followed by the passage of Tenancy legislation in 1957. Ironically the passage of Tenancy legislation resulted in a large number of tribal cultivators losing their lands to land lords using loopholes in the law and a pliant revenue administration. Ironically, the emergence of the Naxalite movement in West Bengal in late 1960s, forced state governments to re-examine the issue of tribal land alienation and realized that land loss was widespread in tribal areas. The response was a number of protective legislations across the country. The Table - 4.4 lists out protective and restorative legislations of the numerous states. The large numbers of legislations however is no guarantee or indication of efficaciousness of the legislation. Table – 4.4: Legislations for Protection of Tribal Land
4.3.2 The list of legislations is long and impressive, however, not only have the prohibitory legislations failed to stem the tide of tribal land alienation, these laws have also failed to restore the lands of over half of tribal claimants for restoration. Take the case of Kerala, a recognized progressive state. The law of restoration was passed in 1975, made applicable in 1986, but ironically less than two decades after the law was passed, the legislature passed a law rescinding or withdrawing the law passed in 1975 on the grounds that the law cannot be implemented as eviction of the illegal encroachers on tribal land would result in law and order problems. This fact has been acknowledged by the state government. The President of India, however, rejected the law pertaining to withdrawal of the application of the Tribal Land Restoration Act of 1975. So the state of Kerala continued in the situation of a legal impasse till the High Court of the state directed it to implement the Act, which continues to drag its feet. The Committee understands the dilemma with which the state government of Keral is faced- where it to do justice to the margainalised sections of the society like the tribals it stands to antagonise such people who have stand to profit from the encroachment over the tribal rights. This would be true of all state governments facing this kind of challenge. This also has its political ramification. A state seeking to implement restoration laws runs the risk of losing vital grassroots leadership and cadre of the party, a vital link towards mobilization of the ‘masses’ so very necessary for success at the hustings. This presents a Hobson’s choice which few state governments would readily acknowledge. Table 4.5 provides data on the tribal land alienation in states with Schedule V areas. Table – 4.5 : Adivasi Land Alienation and Restoration in India
Source: MoRD – GoI & States 4.3.3 Looking closely at restoration claims, the Table 4.5 is revealing. States with Fifth Schedule districts, with the exception of Gujarat where one observes a very high percentage decisions in favour of the tribal claimants, the picture in the other states of the number of rejected claims is disturbing. The percentage of rejected claims is very high in the states of Assam, Andhra Pradesh, Chattishgarh, Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra, crossing the half way mark in four of the five states, notwithstanding the ‘legal presumption’ being in favour of the tribal person. It appears that the burden of proof was placed on the tribal claimant to his/her disadvantage, when the spirit of the law was the opposite. Even in these states, handing over of actual possession remains a question mark. The case of Madhya Pradesh is alarming. The number of rejected and pending claims accounts for 90 percent of the total claims, while it is 76 percent in the state of Assam, 69 percent in Orissa, 56 percent in Maharashtra, and 52 percent in Chattishgarh. This leads to the conclusion that the present schematic and legal arrangement for the restoration of tribal lands has not been successful on account of a number of factors including the political ramifications of such steps, the ineffective and inefficient revenue machinery and the convergence of interests amongst the political groups, the bureaucracy and the classes alienating the tribal lands. The Committee attributes the failure of the state governments to act on behalf of the tribals to a political choice. 4.3.4 Second, operation of the principle of estoppels, which could apply to a large number of the rejected claims. Studies of restoration in Thane district of Maharashtra indicate that a large number of claims for restoration were cases filed on behalf of tenants who were eligible for the right of ownership under the tenancy act, but whose names were deleted illegally. As a large number of proceedings were filed suo moto by the revenue officials after examination of the records and no notice was served on the claimant, these cases were disposed off. The present legal system will exclude all such claims in the future on grounds of estoppels. Similar legal reasoning can be extended to other states as well. Third, the issue is that of un-recorded tenants or those whose tenancies were illegally terminated or surrendered, needs special attention. The absence of records and shifting the burden to the tribal claimant have also excluded large numbers of tribal claimants from their right to the land. Yüklə 2,42 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||