Manipur High Court alters March 2023 judgment; pivotal paragraph on Meitei Community’s ST inclusion removed

Imphal: In a significant turn of events, the Manipur High Court, on February 21, amended its March 2023 judgement, removing a pivotal paragraph that had directed the state government to consider including the Meitei community in the Scheduled Tribes (ST) list. This decision, stemming from a review petition, has sparked renewed ethnic tensions in Manipur, particularly between the Meiteis and the tribal Kuki-Zo communities, who clashed over the sensitive issue of ST status following the initial ruling.

The contentious Paragraph 17(iii) had initially mandated the Manipur government to swiftly consider the inclusion of the Meitei community in the ST list. However, the recent revision follows the court’s acknowledgment of the Supreme Court’s decision in ‘State of Maharashtra -vs- Milind and Others.’ The apex court had emphasised that courts cannot expand jurisdiction to determine the inclusion of specific cases, sub-castes, groups, or parts of tribes or sub-tribes in the Presidential Orders under Articles 341 and 342. The Supreme Court clarified that such orders can only be amended or varied by legislation enacted by Parliament.

The decision to delete Paragraph 17(iii) came after a comprehensive examination of the procedure outlined by the Centre for inclusion or exclusion from the Scheduled Tribe list, as detailed in the Annual Report, 2013-14, of the Ministry of Tribal Affairs. Additionally, the court considered the Constitutional Bench’s decision in ‘State of Maharashtra V. Milind & Ors’ to arrive at its conclusion.

The court’s order, as stated, reads, “I am satisfied and of the view that the direction given at Para No. 17(iii)…needs to be deleted…as the direction given at Para No. 17(iii) is against the observation made in the Constitution Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.”

The petitioner, in a brief submitted to the court, highlighted the historical context of the Meitei community in Manipur. Describing the Meitei/Meitei as one of the indigenous tribes in the region, the petitioner emphasised Manipur’s history as an independent sovereignty until British conquest in 1891. The Meitei/Meitei community was specifically left out when the list of Scheduled Tribes under the Indian Union was prepared before the Manipur Merger Agreement in 1949.

The petitioner argued that the status of the Meitei/Meitei community before the execution of the Merger Agreement in 1949 as a “Tribe among Tribes of Manipur” should be maintained. The Manipur Merger Agreement between the Maharaja of Manipur and the Government of India undertook certain terms and conditions to preserve various laws, customs, and conventions prevailing in the state. However, the Meitei/Meitei community lost its identity as a tribe during the merger with the Union of India in 1949.

This historical context adds layers to the ongoing debate, underscoring the complexities of identity, sovereignty, and tribal classification in Manipur. The revision of the high court’s judgement not only impacts the legal status of the Meitei community but also rekindles historical grievances, potentially deepening the existing fault lines in Manipur’s ethnic landscape. As stakeholders grapple with the repercussions, the delicate balance of ethnic relations in Manipur hangs in the balance, awaiting a resolution that accommodates the diverse identities that shape the cultural mosaic of the state.