The Manipur High Court has directed the State Government to submit its recommendation for inclusion of Meetei/Meitei community in the Scheduled Tribes list of the Constitution to the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Govt. of India, within four weeks from the date of reciept of the Court's order.
With respect to a writ petition No. 229 of 2023 before a bench of Acting Chief Justice MR. Muralidaran, on Wednesday, the court gave a judgement and order (oral), which directed the Manipur Government to submit the recommendation in reply to the letter dated 29.5.2013 of the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India.
The order states, "The first respondent (Manipur Govt) shall consider the case of the petitioners (Meetei/Meitei Tribe Union) for inclusion of the Meetei/Meitei community in the Scheduled Tribe list, expeditiously, preferably within a period four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order in terms of the averments set out in the writ petition and in the line of the order passed in WP(C) No. 4281 of 2002 dated 26.05.2003 by the Gauhati High Court."
The Meetei (Meitei) Tribe Union had filed the writ petition for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the State government to submit recommendation in reply to the Letter No.1902005/2012- C&IM dated 29.5.2013 of the Government of India, Ministry of Tribal Affairs within a period of two months or within a time frame and to include Meetei/Meitei community in the Schedule Tribe list of Indian Constitution as a “tribe among tribes of Manipur”, maintaining the tribal status of Meetei/Meitei existed before 21.9.1949 i.e. before signing of the Merger Agreement as part of the terms and conditions of the Merger Agreement of Manipur into the Indian Union and also direction on the Union Ministry of Tribal Affairs to restore the Scheduled Tribe status of Meetei/Meitei community.
In support of the prayer made, Mr. Ajoy Pebam, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the status of Meetei/Meitei community before the execution of the Merger Agreement dated 21.9.1949 as “tribe among tribes of Manipur” and while merging Manipur with the Union of India, the Meetei/Meitei has lost the identity of tribe and, therefore, Meetei/Meitei should be included as a tribe among the tribes of Manipur so as to preserve the said community and save the ancestral land, tradition, culture and language.
By placing on record various documentary references, which are annexed with the writ petition, the learned counsel further submitted that during the preparation of Scheduled Tribe lists of India under Article 342 of the Constitution of India, the Meetei/Meitei community are left out. But there are documentary evidence wherein showing the earlier Meetei/Meitei community also belonged to tribe community.
The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that as per Article 342(1) and 366 (19) (23) (25) of the Constitution of India, the Meetei/Meitei community should be restored the tribe status by recognizing as a tribe/tribal community as the Meitei are still tribe, but the status of Meitei community were left out while preparation of Scheduled Tribe lists. Moreover, the originality, genuineness and distinctness of the Meetei/Meitei was better known by the customary institutions of Manipur, State Government and Central Government Agencies as tribe. In this regard, various individuals, organizations including the petitioners have submitted several representations to the concerned authorities for inclusion by restoring the Scheduled Tribe status of the Meeitei/Meitei community to the List of Scheduled Tribes.
The learned counsel further submitted that in reply to the representation submitted by Scheduled Tribe Demand Committee, the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India wrote a letter dated 29.5.2013 to the Government of Manipur whereby requesting for specific recommendation along with the latest socio-economic survey and ethnographic report. Despite the letter dated 29.5.2013, the Government of Manipur failed to submit the recommendation to the reason best known to them. In fact, the representation dated 18.4.2022 submitted by the petitioners was forwarded by the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs to the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India for necessary action.
According to the learned counsel, Meitei community is the one of major/principal tribe of Manipur which is not recommended by the State Government. Hence, the petitioners have been advised to file the present writ petition.
By placing on record, the order dated 26.5.2003 of the Gauhati High Court made in W.P.(C) No.4281 of 2002, the learned counsel submitted that pursuant to the said order, Chongthu, Khoibu and Mate have been included in the List of Scheduled Tribes and now there are 34 numbers of tribal community of Manipur were included in the List of Scheduled Tribe of the Indian Constitution, but Meetei/Meitei tribe was left out.
Arguing so, the learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for allowing of the writ petition.
The Court heard the submissions of the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondent Union of India and the learned Government Advocate for the respondent State on the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that as per the order of the Gauhati High Court dated 26.5.2003 passed in W.P.(C) No.4281 of 2002, Chongthu, Khoibu and Mate have been included in the List of Scheduled Tribes.
Taking aid of the said order dated 26.5.2003 of the Gauhati High Court, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that similar recommendation may be made by this Court to the respondent authorities to include Meetei/Meitei community as Scheduled Tribe List of the Constitution of India.
On 18.4. 2022, the Meetei (Meitei) Tribe Union submitted a representation to the Union Minister of Tribal Affairs with a copy to 12 authorities, including the Chief Secretary, Government of Manipur seeking inclusion of Meetei/Meitei Tribe of Manipur in the list of Scheduled Tribe under Indian Constitution.
On 31.5.2022, the Ministry of Tribal Affairs forwarded the said representation to the Secretary, Government of Manipur. In the said forwarding letter, it was stated that the Scheduled Tribes (STs) are notified under Article 342 of the Constitution. Government of India had on 15.6.1999 (and further revised on 25.6.2002) approved modalities for determining claims for inclusion in and other modifications in list of STs. As per those modalities only proposals recommended and justified by the state Government concerned and agreed to by RGI as well as NCSI are considered for amendment of legislation. All the actions are taken as per approved modalities. The recommendation of the concerned State Government is pre-requisite to process the case further, it stated.
Thus, from the letter correspondence of the Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India, the Court found it clear that there appears that a recommendation of the State Government is pending for inclusion of the Meetei/Meitei community in the Scheduled Tribes list of the Constitution of India.
At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Government of Manipur has been totally violating the right to equality and right to life with dignity which are enshrined under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, as in the case of other tribe of the State, the State Government had recommended without any hesitation but in the case of the Meitei community which are also one of the major/principal tribe of Manipur are not recommended by the State Government. The Court finds some force in the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, as the petitioners and other Unions are fighting long years for inclusion of Meetei/Meitei community in the tribe list of Manipur.
Nothing has been produced by the respondents, particularly the respondent State to show that they have sent reply to the letter dated 29.5.2013 of the Government of India, Ministry of Tribal Affairs. Thus, the issue of inclusion of Meetei/Meitei community in the Scheduled Tribes list of the Constitution is pending for nearly ten years and above.
Therefore, the court observed that as no satisfactory explanation was forthcoming from the side of the respondent State for not submitting the recommendation for the last 10 years, it would be appropriate to direct the respondent State to submit its recommendation to the Ministry of Tribal Affairs within a reasonable time.
In the result, the writ petition was disposed off
The Hills Journal
K. Salbung, Churachandpur
Manipur-795128
