ST
status to pharis
Sir,
Apropos
the two news items "GUF questions
locus-standi of promising ST status to
Paharis" and "Pharis Forum
reacts to utterances by GUF" which
appeared in this paper on 04.02.2004
& 05.02.2004 dated respectively.
Gujjar United Front demonstrates that
Pahari speaking people are
constitutionally ineligible for this
status whereas Pahari Forum on the other
end stakes the demand for ST status on
the grounds that they reside along the
Line of Actual Control and far flung
areas in extreme backwardness. For quite
sometime, this demand of Scheduled tribe
status has also been highlighted on
linguistic ground i.e Pahari speaking
feature. It is beyond any doubt that many
people live along the Line of Actual
Control vis-a-vis far flung areas. It is
also very right that many people speak
Pahari. But their is still a pertinent
question to be answered. If the
constitutional provisions meant for
granting Scheduled Tribe status to any
tribe or community are reviewed, and kind
of doubt can be cleared without resorting
into illusioned ideas. The term
'Scheduled Tribes' first appeared in
Article 366(25) of India Constitution as
"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, which is partly reproduced
here, prescribes procedure to be followed
in the matter of specification of
schedule tribes. "The President may,
with respect to any State or Union
territory, and where it is a state, after
consultation with the Governor there of
by public notification, specify the
tribes or tribal communities or parts of
or groups within tribes or tribal
communities which shall, of the purposes
of this constitution, is deemed to be
scheduled tribes in relation to that
state or Union Territory, as the case may
be." Thus the condition is crystal
clear and is devoid of any doubt or
confusion. For a scheduled tribal status,
one should belong to some specific tribe.
The residential and linguistic characters
are not at all the prerequisites for this
kind of status. Living along the Line of
Actual Control means a case for ALC
(Actual Line of Control) and that of
backward areas means RBA (Residents of
backward areas) status. These two kinds
of status have already been granted to
the inhabitants of respective locations.
Similarly, if Pahari speaking aspect is
considered, this itself has germinated
confusing opinion amongst all that who
is/isn't Pahari. Because Pahari is not a
language (more appropriately a dialect)
that is and can be spoken by a particular
tribe. Many Dogra/Kashmir brethren speak
Pahari fluently and better than any
other. Very unfortunate part of this
movement is that Paharis never claim that
they are tribal, why?. For two reasons,
one is they actually are not a tribe and
second, they don't want this adjective.
It may not
be out of place to mention here that if
ST status has been granted to Gujjars,
Bakerwals and Gaddies of Jammu and
Kashmir State it is because they are
tribal and nomadic. This was their long
pending but constitutional right which
was finally accorded to them. Gen.
Secretary, Pahari Forum has pointed out
in this press release that Pahari were
ignored because of political compulsion
of the then Prime Minister. But this was
not so. If it would have been a political
compulsion, the Gujjars, Bakerwal and
Gaddies tribes would have never been
granted this status.
Yours etc...
Zabeer Ahmed Bajjar
H.No. 339/4
Sanjay Nagar, Jammu
|
