Through the Looking Glass: The Domicile Debate of Jharkhand

Author(s): NIRMAL SENGUPTA

Source: Economic and Political Weekly , NOVEMBER 8, 2014, Vol. 49, No. 45 (NOVEMBER
8, 2014), pp. 23-26
Published by: Economic and Political Weekly

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/24481270

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Economic and Political Weekly is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Economic and Political Weekly

This content downloaded from

52.66.103.4 on Sun, 31 Mar 2024 22:29:03 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 : COMMENTARY

own people (tribals)", "...The time has

Through the Looking Glass come to .. .expose them", . .If these sep
aratist (sic!) forces are not countered, it
The Domicile Debate of Jharkhand will lead to social divide and ethnic vio
lence", etc. The facts are very different.2
The locals never say Jharkhand is a state
NIRMAL SENGUPTA for scheduled tribes alone. They even in
vented a term moolvasi, comparable to
The local domicile concept is mulki of Telangana. A committee that
the chief minister of Jharkhand has
fallacious in India because every ment of the election results,
Within days after the announce
K Chandrasekhar Rao, current formed to examine the criteria for "dom
citizen has the right to move icile" consists of three non-tribals and
chief minister of Telangana state, war
freely, reside and settle in ned
anythat Andhra-domiciled employees two tribals.3 Using Stuart Corbridge's
part of the country. But would not be allowed to work in the
domicile (1988) term Kumar's piece is an example

status can be used to grantoffices

a of "perversity model" narratives on
of Telangana. In September 2001,
even before the state celebrated its first
Jharkhand movement. This kind of
privilege only if there is some
narratives abounds in media, admini
birthday, the then chief minister of
justifiable context like Jharkhand, Babulal Marandi, who was
stration and academics, on all topics not
discrimination. This article with
dealsthe Bharatiya Janata Party intro
just on domicile issue. This article shows
what is wrong in it and what should be
duced a domicile policy. He had to resign
with the domicile dispute existing
in its aftermath, but the next govern
the right kind of appreciation.
in Jharkhand state, where the
ment picked it up again. When Uttara
government is yet to complete
khand introduced its domicile policy, The
all Looking Glass
the task. hell broke loose. The matter reached Stuart Corbridge categorises accounts of
the Jharkhand movement as of four
the Supreme Court which has given
its verdict. types. One is the "sons of the soil model"
Apparently, it is a pattern emerging inof anthropologists and political scientist
states not constituted on a linguisticlike Sachchidananda and Myron Wein
er, that explains the current as the
basis. But domicile policy is not exclu
sive to such states. Most other states continuity of the past movements. Next,
have designed their domicile policies the "perversity model", favoured by offi
to exclude deemed outsiders from cer cial circles, depicts the movement as a
tain educational and job opportunities. "perverse and irrational response to the
Internationally, each country has chosenprogressive tribal policies of the post
its own domicile criteria1 for the purpose Independence administration". The third
of taxation. To avoid double taxation is the radical "internal colonialism model"
countries enter into treaties. Mauritius argued by Steve Jones and Marxist trade
has a Double Taxation Treaty with India. unionist A K Roy.4 The fourth model,5
It has so designed its domicile policy unlike the other three, rejects ethnic
that foreign institutional investors doingclosure theory and visualises the local
business exclusively in India may evadepopulation, including tribals, as non
tax by becoming domicile in Mauritius.homogeneous, dynamic communities.
It is not unusual therefore that Jhar Thereby, while using the same set of
khand government chose a domiciledata, the fourth model arrives at a char
policy for itself and that the policy favoacterisation of the Jharkhand movement
ured some and hurt some others. At theas constructivist, not primordial, devel
most it calls for a discussion of pros andoping its own identity.
cons, suggestions and alternatives. But In brief, Jharkhand politicians never
in the case of Jharkhand the reactionspractised an isolationist policy. Jaipal
were furious. Singh, the founder of the Jharkhand
About Jharkhand's domicile policy movement, accommodated local Mar
Anant Kumar wrote (2014) that the lead waris and Punjabis in his party (Sharma
ers of Jharkhand created "a fresh con
Nirmal Sengupta (nirmaLsengupta@gmaiLcom) 1990: 242). Throughout his life Jaipal
retired from the Madras Institute of
troversy leading to a divide between the Singh maintained that tribe-non-tribe
Development Studies as director and is now
settled in Kolkata.
tribals and non-tribals", "...they deman division was a census manipulation -
ded that the state should be ruled by its but for it 90% of the people of Jharkhand

Economie & Political weekly QQS3 November 8, 2014 vol xlix no 45 23

This content downloaded from

52.66.103.4 on Sun, 31 Mar 2024 22:29:03 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
COMMENTARY :

would be adivasis.6 It was the ground of tribe/adivasi has become so very Ever since the coal mines and Tata
reality, not political opportunism. Even inclusive that it is used to buttress sub- Steel Plant came up over here in early
in Uttar Pradesh (up) the administration national passion. In addition, they have 20th century, people poured in from
had a change of heart and decided that coined a new term, moolvasi, meaning near and far-off areas. Old census data
some communities who were given original settler, which must clear all compiled by both Corbridge (1988) and
scheduled and backward caste tags in confusions. But outside,9 there are many Ekka (2001) show that in-migration was
the past might be retagged as "sched- who suffer from hangovers. more or less steady till 1931. Then it
uled tribes". As a result the scheduled Lest it is misinterpreted let me add started increasing rapidly. The table
tribe population in up, enumerated at that the individual community identities shows some data about in-migration
1.08 lakhs in 2001 Census increased by have not been lost. Old discourse on how (Sengupta 1982:13-14).
950.6% in the next census reaching a to develop tribal people was shaped by Table: Persons by Mother Tongue in Districts Now
Table: Persons by Mother Tongue
count of 11.34 lakhs. two schools of scholarly thoughts. One inJharkhand inJharkhand
MotherTongue
MotherTongue No
No of Speakers of
(000') Speakers
Census Year: (
On paper, the tribe-non-tribe sépara- advocated integration of tribals as citi 1951 1961 1971

tion is thorough. Not so in reality. No zens of a nation state and the other Punjabi 30 57 64

wonder that those dealing with virtual sought their assimilation into the Hindu Gujarati 8 18 21

tribes and those with the real ones differ fold losing their distinct identities. In an Telugu 18 36 32

in their perceptions. Xaxa (1999: 3595) incisive article Xaxa (2005) opines that Tamil 6 15 14

explained it as follows: the relevant sections of the Constitution Source: Table D-l-O)-Mother-Tongue, in Part ll-ATables,
r . . . j v • 1 . • Vol V, Bihar, Census 1951: Table C-V, Mother-Tongue in Part
There is an important gap in the sense in r citizens and the special provisions ll-C, Social and Cultural Tables, Vol IV, Bih
which the term tribe is used and understood meant for the tribes rather agree with andStateTablesC-V-A,Distributionof
, , , ,, , . ^ 1-1 1 -1 • (i). Social Cultural Tables, Series 1, All India, Census 1971.
by the tribals ...and by others, especially the integration philosophy, not
administrators, lawyers and academicians. Further, the Constitutio
For the latter, communities are tribes only if for diyersi ^ int tion
they are so listed in the Constitution.7 , ,
such subjects like protection and promo-
Tribes, on the other hand, do not tion of tribal languag
view tribe in the sense of a politico- tion apart from
administrative category. Rather they the implementation
view themselves as belonging to the provisions rested
same community, irrespective of wheth- the larger societ
er a group or segment of it is listed or not state policies, adm
listed in the Constitution. By virtue of parties. Of late, t
this bond of emotions they are also the ed by the growin
adivasis or the indigenous people though the tribals. Thus
the Constitution does not recognise ferent tribal/ad
them as tribes. Jharkhand have come together to exer- were classified in linguistics as forms of
Many leading anthropologists were eise the autonomy right they achieved, Bengali. Hence, it was not possible to es
aware of this unreal division. They pro- on the other, they are pursuing their timate the number of Bengali immi
duced cogent arguments against it (for separate identities by actively promoting grants, since there were numerous Ben
details see Sengupta 1988; Corbridge their diverse languages, cultures, eus- gali migrants. But far more than just
1988:143-46). In the 1970-80S, when the toms and traditions. When India chose numbers, the migrants from these two
present phase of Jharkhand autonomy this path of unity in diversity, others said regions wielded immense power on
movement began, local intelligentsia that we were playing with fire. Cynical Jharkhand region by using their special
brought these scholarly critical writings experts had predicted that India's demo- dispensations. In turn, in the 19th century
to the attention of the masses. Hundreds cracy would collapse because of ling- when Jharkhand was a part of Bengal,
of local publications, of all possible uistic and cultural diversity.10 We have popular movements were directed pri
forms, were circulating in Jharkhand proved them wrong. In Jharkhand there marily against Bengali exploiters11 con
carrying such efforts.8 They succeeded are intercommunity tensions, as in temptuously called dikus. In this phase,
in contesting morally the tribe-non- other states. But that is how Indian it is mainly against the partisan Bihari
tribe dichotomy and sealed whatever democracy thrives. immigrants (Ahmed 2002), loathingly
cracks had appeared in the organic referred to as non-tribals.
composition of the local society. By the Injustice and Aftermath The table poi
time Jharkhand state was formed, Moving to India during Partition in 1947, in-migration. T
Jharkhandis could question the narrow about 2,000 Hindu and Sikh families tapered off fr
official notion of tribe that make them had settled in Jharkhand. They fear period of rap
minority in their homeland (Ekka 2001). losing their homes after the domicile then severa
Today within Jharkhand, the connotation question was raked up (Agarwal 2013). in Jharkh

24 November 8, 2014 vol XLix no 45 Q253 Economic & Political weekly

This content downloaded from

52.66.103.4 on Sun, 31 Mar 2024 22:29:03 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 ; COMMENTARY

state, but primarily from north Bihar, re- the stranglehold. Statehood only creates state name. Subsequently, the govern
ceived jobs. Though they too were from a favourable condition for such action. circulated a set of guidelines and
the same state, the neighbouring locals tions for implementation of its resolve,
were overlooked. Out of a total of 4,284 Domicile Criterion Clashes broke out betwee
employees in the Heavy Engineering Sensing the widespread public discon- gainers and losers, just as it w
Corporation, at Ranchi, there were only tent, the steel plant administrators not the forward and backward c
335 tribals (Sharma 1990: 285). The dis- only changed the names like ArrahMor, in 1978. The initiative of th
crimination was conspicuous. Original- but also issued an internal circular government was challenge
ly, important junctions of Bokaro Steel directing plant officials to engage only terest litigation. In a mom
City were named after Bhojpur region - the locals for the unskilled worker cate- ment12 a five-member be
ArrahMor, ChhapraMor, BaliaMor (Sen- gory jobs. At that time I was studying High Court made it clear t
gupta 1982:13). After there was a public scheduled castes in the adjacent Chas certain provisions of the Co
outcry, the names were changed. Land town. I saw how excited the able-bodied affirmative action, even o
acquisition by mines and industries Bauris were hoping, for the first time, to residence, is allowed. The b
made lakhs of local people refugees of get a job in the giant-size plant next the Jharkhand government o
development. Earlier, when working door. In this period senior officials in of several technical lacunae, p
conditions were very bad, mine owners some of the public sector units in in the definition of the term
used to engage locals as miners. When Jharkhand had issued similar directives dent". The judgment was e
in 1971 coal mines were nationalised hoping to bring in some humane face to certain parts of the notific
and job conditions were sure to improve, development. But junior officials could well conceived and is based
in a single week thousands of telegrams easily scuttle this initiative by interpret- objective criterion. In our c
were sent from Dhanbad district to Ar- ing any village within the state as local. ion, the State Government m
rah, Balia, Chhapra informing that jobs The law was on their side. However, this vised in considering the questio
were available. It was believed that outreach effort of the public sector offi- the aforesaid Notification or t
r, , , ,. . , , . . , . , ... and guidelines contained therein with suit
50,000 Jharkhandi mmers lost their cials found several enthusiasts am
jobs at this point of time (ibid: 15). At a the civil administrators; those w
later date Singh (1994: 286-90) de- days when special programmes for t
scribed how in blatant violation of rules, poor were not yet invented. Th
universities located in Jharkhand region brought it to the attention of
were recruiting only north Biharis for chief minister who convened a
Class m and iv category jobs. When the ty meeting to arrive at a definit
autonomous state was established in cal". In March 1982, Bihar gove
2000, such issues were foremost in the notified the decisions of the mee
minds of everyone. No wonder the first cordingly, the nodal base of the dé
chief minister of Jharkhand attended to tion was "district", and a perso
this issue almost immediately after he local to a district if his/her forefa
came to power. name appeared in the record of rights Gove
Hanumantha Rao (2010) has argued linked with the last survey of that
that formation of smaller states like Jhar- trict. On a different issue Bih
khand or Telangana has become neces- ready on the road of affirmative
sary due to persistent, even increasing In 1978, Karpoori Thakur intro
intrastate disparities in development in reservation for the backward c
larger states. Within the parent states, government jobs. But the 1982 N
he explains, the backward regions do tion about local persons was n
not have political clout in decision-mak- lowed up by affirmative action.
ing regarding public investment and ernment made a general appeal to
provision for jobs. I would add that, employers to accord preferential t
statehood by itself may not be enough to ment to local persons as defi
usher in a new power equation that may Jharkhand state was formed
do justice to the erstwhile sufferers. If ember 2000. The new governm
the division is on linguistic basis the ves- soned that the 1982 Circular
tiges of the mother states would government was still in force i
automatically be on the back foot. But Jharkhand and they need not for
non-linguistic states like Jharkhand, another domicile policy for initia
Uttarakhand, Chhattisgarh and Telan- firmative action. Its content was
gana need affirmative action to break sued in September 2001 changing
Economic & Political weekly B253 November 8, 2014 vol xlix no 45 25

This content downloaded from

52.66.103.4 on Sun, 31 Mar 2024 22:29:03 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 to 1985, exactly 15 years before the date
of formation of the state. In the appeal
that followed in March 2014, the Supreme
Court upheld this decision of the judicial
bench, thus creating a landmark judg
ment for domicile policy within India.
These judgments of two high courts
and the Supreme Court dispel the popu
lar notion that local domicile concept is
fallacious in India because every citizen
has the right to move freely, reside, and
settle in any part of the country. But
domicile status can be used to grant a
privilege only if there is some justifiable
context (like discrimination). Signi
ficantly, eager to set right historic injus
tice, the new states tend to propose very
old cut-off dates. The last survey of
Jharkhand districts was in the 1930s.
The Mulki rule was promulgated by
Nizamin in 1919. Uttarakhand Kranti
Dal pushed for 1950 as the cut-off year.
The judges also made it clear that very
old cut-off dates cannot be agreed upon.
Drawing distinction between simple and
permanent residence, the courts man
dated 15 years previous to state forma
tion as another requirement for getting
domicile status. These judgments may
have much wider impact than just on
Jharkhand or Uttarakhand.
NOTES
1 In the United States where states also collect
taxes, each state has its own domicile policy.
2 Contrary to what is commonly believed eco
nomic performance of Jharkhand state is not
too bad. C H Hanumantha Rao (2010) has been
repeatedly stressing through his writings that
smaller States like Uttarakhand, Chhattisgarh
and Jharkhand were able to achieve much
higher growth rates in their gross state dome
stic product (GSDP) than the targets set for
them by the Planning Commission in the first
ever plan they faced. Also, their growth rates
were significantly higher than those achieved
by their parent states.
3 The committee members are Bandhu Tirkey With its easy-to-use features, the CD-ROM will be a convenient resource for soc
(Independent), Sanjay Singh Yadav (Rashtriya
Janata Dal), Sarafraj Ahmed (Congress), Lobin
Hembrom (Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM))
and Vidyut Varan Mahto (JMM).
4 The late Ram Dayal Munda and S Bosu Mullick
did a yeomen service by reprinting together
many of the articles related to the Jharkhand
movement. The publisher made the book free
ly downloadable. For all those reprinted
articles cited here the page numbers are as in
this compilation, Munda and Mullick (2003:
78-85).
5 This is now known as "constructivist" model.
6 For example, see his presidential speech to All
India Adivasi Mahasabha 1948 reproduced in
Munda and Bosu Mullick (ed.) (2003: 2-14).
He began by explaining "why I have always
maintained that the census figures had to be
26
52.66.103.4 on Sun, 31 Mar 2024 22:29:03 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
quadrupled to get a correct estimate of the 22(i): 1-42; reprinted in Munda and Bosu M
aboriginal people of this country" (p 2). lick (ed.), (2003): 131-70.
No one, including the government officials has Ekka, Alexius (2001): "Jharkhand Tribals: Are T
ever defined who is a tribe, nor is it possible to Really a Minority?", Economic & Politic
do so by any physical, social or cultural fea
Weekly, 35(52-53): 4610-12.
ture. A community is a tribe in India if it gets
Hanumantha, Rao, C H (2010): Regional Dis
included in the scheduled tribe list of the Indi
ties, Smaller States and Statehood for Telang
an Constitution.
(New Delhi: Academic Foundation).
I made some of those available to English Kumar, Anant (2014): "The Politics behind J
speaking outsiders (viz articles by B K Mehta, khand's Domicile Policy", Economic & Polit
A K Jha and B P Keshri in Sengupta (ed.), Weekly, 26 April.
(1982).
Munda, Ram Dayal and S Bosu Mullick, ed. (20
Interestingly, in tea garden areas local people Indigenous Peoples Struggle for Autonomy
call migrant workers, most of whom are from India, Document No 108, International Wo
Jharkhand - adivasis. The local tribes there
group on Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA), Cop
fore think it is derogatory to be called adivasi
hagen, available at: http://www.iwgia.or
(Roy Burman 2009). South Indian tribes tend
iwgia_files_publications_files/oi2ojharkha
to think adivasi is a pejorative which evokes _movement.pdf
primitive image (Bijoy 2001).
Pfeffer, Georg and Deepak Kumar Behera,
For example, Selig S Harrisson's popular book (2002): Contemporary Society Tribal Studi
India: The Most Dangerous Decade, published in
i960.
Volume 5: The Concept of Tribal Society (N
Delhi: Concept Publishing).
In his Santal Dictionary, written in 1934, Roy, Burman, J J (2009): "Adivasi: A Content
Büdding wrote that the Santal understanding
Term to Denote Tribes as Indigenous Peoples
of deko (diku) was that of a Hindu or Bengali of India", Mainstream, 47(32): 14-17.
the better class, not low-caste Hindus as, e g,
Harrison, Selig S (i960): India: The Most Dan
Doms, Bauris, Hadis (cited in Pfeffer and
ous Decades (New Jersey, United States: Pr
Behera 2002:113-14).
eton University Press).
Prashant Vidyarthy and Suman Kr vs State of
Sengupta, Nirmal, ed. (1982): Fourth World D
Jharkhand and Ors on 27 November 2002.
mics; Jharkhand (New Delhi: Authors' Guild)
- (1988): "Reappraising Tribal Movements", E
REFERENCES nomic & Political Weekly, 7-28 May reprinted
Munda and Bosu Mullick (ed.), (2003): 333-4
Ahmed, Farzand (2002): "Dangerous Divide:
Sharma, K L (1990): "Jharkhand Movement: T
Jharkhand C M Babulal Marandi's Domicile
Questions of Identity and Sub-nationality
Policy Brings Tribals, Non-tribals Social
on theAction, 40(4): 370-81; reprinted in M
Warpath", India Today, 5 August. da and Bosu Mullick (ed.), (2003): 232-42.
Agarwal, N K (2013): "Jharkhand's Domicile
Singh,Policy
Amar Kumar (1994): "Jharkhander Kat
Worries Landless Hindu Migrants from Pakiof Swadeshi Colonisation", Social Ch
A Tale
stan", The Times of India, 31 July. nge, 24(1-2): 3-38, reprinted in Munda and Bo
Bijoy, C R (2001): "The Adivasis of India: AMullick
History (ed.), (2003): 274-317.
of Discrimination, Conflict, and Resistance",
Xaxa, Virginius (1999): "Tribes as Indigenous
Racism, Indigenous Affairs (Journalple of of
theIndia", Economic & Political Weekl
IWGIA), 1/01: 54-61. 34(51): 3589-95
Corbridge, Stuart (1988): "The Ideology- of Tribal
(2005): "Politics of Language, Religion
Economy and Society: Politics inIdentity:
the Tribes in India", Economic & Politic
Jharkhand, 1950-80", Modern Asian Studies,
Weekly, 40(13), 1363-70.
Economic&PoliticalwEEKLY
EPW 5-Year CD-ROM 2004-08 on a Single D
The digital versions of Economic and Political Weekly for 2004, 2005,2006,2
are now available on a single disk. The CD-ROM contains the complete text
published from 2004 to 2008 and comes equipped with a powerful search, tools to he
research and utilities to make your browsing experience productive.The contents of
are organised as in the print edition, with articles laid out in individual sections in
researchers and executives in government and non-government organisations,social
activists, students, corporate and public sector executives and journalists.
Price for 5 year CD-ROM (in INDIA)
Individuals - Rs 1500
Institutions - Rs 2500
To order the CD-ROM send a bank draft payable at Mumbai in favour of Economic a
Weekly.
Any queries please email: circulation@epw.in
Circulation Manager,
Economic and Political Weekly
320-321, A to Z Industrial Estate, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai 400 013, India
November 8, 2014 vol XLix no 45 0353 Economic & Political weekly
This content downloaded from