Division plans

Hillman the analyst, KalimNews, 29 May 2014: Response to The Statesman 24 May 2014 item “Division Plans” perceived in creating a separate new district of Alipurduar by bifurcating Jalpaiguri District is seen as an ominous sign that all is not well in West Bengal. Particularly realising, at the back of the mind, that bifurcating Jalpaiguri District from the Jalpaiguri Dooars formally acceded territories of the Kingdom of Bhutan (11 Dooars in West Bengal & 7 Dooars in Assam) which territorial lines are once again being redefined to assuage towards concurring an important event which may unfurl after completing the formation of a new BJP mandated govt. at the Centre. 

This is reading in lines between of the recent notification issued by the Govt. of West Bengal on 10 December 2013 for the establishment of a Tribes Advisory Council (TAC) ascertaining the State, once again incorporated within the provisions of the Fifth Schedule. The last time such a constitutional event (Fifth Schedule) was applied during the period 1952-56 when TAC was first established as a separate system of administration than that generally applied to the State. It is important to realise that before West Bengal Province effectively became a state of the Union, TAC is seen to have been marginalised beyond the point of recognition - for a period of 57 years (1956-2013).

It becomes equally important therefore to raise the question as to the reason why TAC had to disappear in creating a separate administration, a new state if you will, from Provincial Bengal was bifurcated in to West Bengal Province in 1947 (as well as the Province of East Bengal) under the Radcliffe Boundary Commission.  According to this writer’s constitutional perspective since that period till 1950 when the Constitution was promulgated many of the existing Provinces were further territorially enlarged by attachment/absorption of areas determined by the Act of 1935 and phrased as “Excluded & Partially Excluded Areas”(E&PEA). Such areas were further declared by an Order of 1936 enumerating the areas in detail in every Province within British India.

Though many of the E&PEA were within the territories of Provincial British India, it is of great import in coming to grip of the realisation that these areas were practically outside the purview of both the Central and Provincial legislation. It is this very prerogative on basis of which TAC was established during the period 1952-56 which perceptually indicates the concept constitutionally speaking West Bengal Province was territorially conceived to become a new Province based on the Partially Excluded Area (Botia, Chakma, Kuki, Lepcha, Munda, Magh, Mro, Oroan, Santal, Tippera, any other tribe notified by the Provincial Govt.) of Darjeeling District as the legal right for self determination. Conversely, the Excluded Area of the (CHT) Chittagong Hill Tracts (Chakma, Bomong, Mong) which tribes constituted the legal basis for creating a separate unit, as the Province of East Bengal.

Strange to relate this story however many readers unacquainted with the legality of new state formation or the right of self determination by the indigenous people (read in the Constitution as the national minorities) which is entirely different to the minorities based on language, script, religion, class or creed. It might be added here the so called Scheduled Castes (SC) were in fact in ancient times the indigenous people of India but in time relegated to a position depressed by the more aggressive invaders from the western lands. Infact the epics and the history of India is primarily based on the class struggle between the so called Devas and Asuras. The word caste is a foreign vocabulary, suggesting Portuguese immigrants substituting at one point of time within Hinduism the Brahmin Sanskrit term ‘varna’ (colour of skin), now within the classification of the fourfold determination of casteism. This is only to suggest the idea that the so called lowest caste, the Sudras, is believed, anthropologically and ethnologically a separate group inhabiting India since ancient times prior to the advent of the Indo-Aryans (Iranians). In other words, Sudras (Asuras) were the present ancestors of the autochthones now referred to as the Adhivasis (under Article 342 as the Scheduled Tribes).  

                                            

It is now reckoned with the present indication of bifurcating Jalpaiguri District seems more of a determination towards precipitating a definite end in view – i.e. to divide Jalpaiguri District from the original Bengal Dooars being the ceded area of Bhutan (Treaty of Sinchula 29 Nov 1865, Treaty of Punakha 8 Jan 1910, Indo-Bhutan Treaty 22 Sept 1949, Indo-Bhutan Friendship Treaty 8 Feb 2007). The last Treaty 2007is significantly redressed in the sense that the paragraph on the annual gratuity payment of Rs.5 lakhs to the Govt. of Bhutan is completely unmentioned and omitted. This attaches importance in understanding that the last straw of attachment which Bhutan may have had on account of its previous treaties with India concerning the 18 Dooars has been unilaterally arbitrarily withdrawn. The implicit understanding from it arises that these areas are provided safeguards in the Constitution of India under the Fifth Schedule. It is presumed under such circumstances TAC has once again been resumed to its original place after 1956.

In the spirit of the above context is also attached the importance of the Sikkim Government Resolution No.3 of 2011 (29 March 2011) which subject matter demands the formation of Gorkhaland State - the ultimate and permanent solution. This Resolution passed by the Sikkim State Assembly unanimously expresses unambiguously the concept of the idea, Sikkim too is releasing its rights to its ceded territories comprising the four subdivisions of Darjeeling District.

On account of the above two deliberations cited above, one can infer the position of Sikkim and Bhutan in respect of its ceded territories are outside their jurisdiction which inversely implies that these territories are now completely under the provision of the Fifth Schedule in the Constitution of India. The projection of the trajectory is now palpable in detecting that in course of time after completing the formality of scheduling the area (Article 339) will be provided the constitutional guarantee to the inhabitants of the concerned areas to demand a separate state or Union territory determined by law.

If at all one considers the above dimensions truly holding water then it also behooves to interpret the fact that since the acceded territories of Bhutan comprise the 18 Dooars (11 Bengal & 7 Assam) the future state/UT perceived out of the said areas is implicit that the new State /UT is bound to also contain the territorial areas of Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC), which happens to form the major portion of the Assam Dooars. With this constitutional visible sight in mind would the new State/UT afford the suitability of the name of Gorkhaland state or will it be more conducive for all sections of the people concerned across the length and breadth of the area under discussion be under the nomenclature, properly as State/UT of Darjeeling & Dooars.

 

After all there should be no hassle regarding the construction of the name as long as it is generally accepted by all the participants concerned - after all the whole exercise of state formation is a process of integration - to be identified as an Indian. 

                                      

Karma T.Pempahishey (Hillman-The Analyst) is a regular columnist and champions on the  demand of separate statehood raised in the Darjeeling hills.