Copyright infringement not intended

Picture Courtesy:  THE HINDU

Context

The Assam Cabinet approved a report by a Group of Ministers (GoM) recommending Scheduled Tribe (ST) status for six communities: Tai Ahom, Chutia, Moran, Motok, Koch-Rajbongshi, and the Tea Tribes (Adivasis).

Who are Scheduled Tribes (STs)?

Scheduled Tribes (STs) are indigenous communities officially recognized by the government for special protection and assistance due to their extreme social, educational, and economic backwardness.

The term 'Scheduled Tribes' first appeared in the Constitution. 

• Article 366 (25) defines STs as communities deemed under Article 342 to be Scheduled Tribes for the purposes of the Constitution.

According to the 2011 Census, STs account for 104 million people, representing 8.6% of India's population, largely residing in forest and hilly regions.

Granting Scheduled Tribe (ST) Status in India 

Constitutional Framework for Identifying STs

Article 366(25): Provides a procedural definition, stating that Scheduled Tribes are "such tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within such tribes or tribal communities as are deemed under Article 342 to be Scheduled Tribes for the purposes of this Constitution."

Article 342: Specific mechanism for notification.

• Clause (1): The President of India is empowered to specify the communities to be deemed as STs in a particular State or Union Territory.  
• Clause (2): It grants the Parliament the exclusive power to include or exclude any community from the ST list through a legislative act. Once Parliament enacts a law, the Presidential order cannot be modified by a subsequent notification.

The Five Criteria for Inclusion (Lokur Committee, 1965)

Though the Constitution lacks specific criteria, the government uses the Lokur Committee guidelines (1965). The Registrar General of India vets proposals based on these five indicators:

• Indications of Primitive Traits: Evidence of traditional, archaic lifestyles and pre-agricultural economic practices.
• Distinctive Culture: Unique cultural attributes, including language, folklore, traditions, and social customs.
• Geographical Isolation: Historical habitation in remote and inaccessible areas, leading to minimal contact with the wider population.
• Shyness of Contact: A demonstrable reluctance to interact and integrate with the community at large.
• Backwardness: Social, educational, and economic backwardness compared to the general population.

These criteria are criticized as being outdated and rigid. A High-Level Committee under Prof. Virginius Xaxa (2014) recommended moving away from terms like "primitive" and focus on a community's history of socio-economic disadvantage and exploitation.

Procedure for Granting ST Status

State Government Recommendation: The process must originate from the respective State or UT government with a detailed proposal, including an ethnographic report justifying the claim.

Ministry of Tribal Affairs Review: The proposal is sent to the Union Ministry of Tribal Affairs, which acts as the nodal ministry and conducts an initial examination.

Scrutiny by Registrar General of India (RGI): The proposal is forwarded to the Office of the RGI (under the Ministry of Home Affairs). The RGI's approval, based on the Lokur Committee criteria, is mandatory for the process to move forward.

Consultation with National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST): After RGI's concurrence, the proposal is sent to the NCST, a constitutional body under Article 338A, for its recommendation.

Union Cabinet Approval: Once the NCST approves, the Ministry of Tribal Affairs prepares a cabinet note for the Union Cabinet's final decision.

Parliamentary Legislation & Presidential Assent: Following Cabinet approval, a bill to amend the Constitution (Scheduled Tribes) Order, 1950, is introduced in Parliament. The bill must be passed by both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha, after which it receives the President's assent to become law.

Benefits & Safeguards for Scheduled Tribes

Inclusion in the ST list provides communities with access to a range of constitutional safeguards and affirmative action policies aimed at their upliftment.

Political Safeguards

• Reservation of seats in Lok Sabha (Article 330) and State Legislative Assemblies (Article 332).
• Reservation of seats in Panchayats (Article 243D) and Municipalities (Article 243T).

Educational & Economic Safeguards

• Reservation in government educational institutions (Article 15(4)).
• Reservation in government jobs and services (Article 16(4), 16(4A)).
• Special welfare schemes, scholarships, and financial assistance for education and entrepreneurship (e.g., Post-Matric Scholarship, National Overseas Scholarship).
• Promotion of educational and economic interests by the State (Article 46).

Protective Safeguards

• Special provisions for administration under the Fifth and Sixth Schedules of the Constitution.
• Protection of land rights and prevention of land alienation through state-specific laws.
• Implementation of laws like the PESA Act, 1996, and the Forest Rights Act, 2006.

Challenge

Outdated and Subjective Criteria: The 1965 Lokur Committee criteria are widely considered outdated. Terms like "primitive traits" are condescending, and "geographical isolation" is increasingly irrelevant.

Rigidity of the Process: The RGI's strict adherence to the old criteria acts as a major bottleneck, leading to the rejection of many state-backed proposals.

Political Mobilization: Political aspirations often drive the demand for ST status, as it shifts electoral dynamics by granting reservation to large communities.

Opposition from Existing STs: Existing tribal groups often oppose adding new ones, fearing their reservation benefits will dilute and competition for scarce resources will increase.

Exclusive Power of Parliament: In State of Maharashtra vs Milind & Ors. (2001), the Supreme Court ruled that only Parliament can amend the ST list in the Presidential Order; courts and state governments lack this authority.

Way Forward

Modernize Criteria: Review and update the criteria for inclusion, incorporating recommendations from the Prof. Virginius Xaxa Committee (2014), which emphasize socio-economic disadvantage over obsolete traits like "primitiveness."

Ensure a Transparent, Time-Bound Process: Establish a clear and time-bound framework for the disposal of state recommendations to reduce delays and potential political manipulation.

Adopt a Data-Driven Approach: Make decisions on robust, contemporary, and independent ethnographic and socio-economic data rather than outdated records.

Strengthen Institutions: Enhance the anthropological expertise within the RGI's office and empower the NCST with more resources to conduct fair assessments.

Conclusion

The process of granting ST status requires a modernizing framework and multi-layered procedure with transparent identification criteria to ensure constitutional safeguards reach the most deserving communities and promote inclusive development.

 Source: THE HINDU