The Legacy of Scheduled Areas: Tribal Governance Under British Colonial Rule

Understanding Scheduled Areas Under British Rule

Scheduled Areas were regions dominated by tribal communities that received special administrative treatment during the British colonial period. This classification was due to their unique socio-political and cultural contexts, which necessitated a different approach to governance. The initial identification of these areas was formalized through the Scheduled Districts Act of 1874, which exempted them from the standard laws applied across British India.

Reasons for Special Laws in Tribal Areas

The British colonial administration struggled to exert control over these tribal regions, largely because of their challenging terrain, the resistance exhibited by Adivasis, and the perceived lack of economic interest. Consequently, special laws were enacted, permitting governance through indirect methods or minimal intervention, while often upholding traditional tribal customs.

Administrative Classifications of Tribal Regions

After the Government of India Act of 1919, the British categorized tribal areas into two primary groups:

• Wholly Excluded Areas: These regions were entirely outside the provincial legislature's jurisdiction and governed exclusively by the Governor. An example is parts of Chotanagpur (now in Jharkhand), known for significant tribal uprisings such as the Birsa Munda rebellion.
• Partially Excluded Areas: These areas were overseen jointly by the Governor and the Governor-General-in-Council, with legislative laws only applicable with the Governor’s approval. Examples include:
  • Garo Hills and Khasi Hills (present-day Meghalaya)
  • Lushai Hills (present-day Mizoram)
  • Parts of Odisha and Madhya Pradesh

Impact of the Government of India Act, 1935

The Government of India Act, 1935 solidified the classifications of excluded and partially excluded areas, empowering Governors to rule directly while limiting legislative interference. This act reinforced the notion of administrative autonomy for these tribal regions.

Administrative Categories Under British Rule

During the British Crown's rule, there were four main categories of administrative divisions:

• Presidency Areas: Regions under direct British control (e.g., Bombay, Madras, Bengal).
• Residency Areas: Princely states managed by British 'Residents' (e.g., Hyderabad, Bhopal).
• Agency (Tribal) Areas: Local self-governance with British agents overseeing (e.g., Ganjam Agency in Odisha).
• Excluded Areas (Northeast): Areas with minimal British oversight, holding symbolic authority (e.g., Naga Hills, Lushai Hills).

Colonial Policies and Tribal Autonomy

Although tribal areas maintained a degree of autonomy through customary practices and limited legislative intervention, these colonial policies ultimately isolated tribal communities, hindering their political and economic integration into the broader national fabric.

Insights from the Simon Commission Report of 1930

The Simon Commission Report indicated that the excluded and partially excluded areas encompassed about 120,000 square miles with a population of approximately 11 million. It highlighted the necessity for distinct administrative strategies for these regions.

Post-Independence Developments

Following independence, the Indian Constitution enshrined special provisions for tribal areas in Article 244 and the Fifth and Sixth Schedules, which continued to uphold the autonomy established during colonial times while encouraging integration.

Gradual Integration of Excluded Areas

Excluded and partially excluded areas were not immediately merged into mainstream India due to their cultural uniqueness, challenging geography, and fears of potential resistance. Regions like Nagaland and Mizoram were given time-bound autonomy to facilitate gradual integration.

Princely States and Tribal Governance

Tribal princely states acceded to India through the Instruments of Accession, with many, such as Bastar (Chhattisgarh), eventually falling under the protections of the Fifth Schedule.

Long-term Implications of Colonial Framework

This historical framework significantly influenced future policies, helping to safeguard tribal rights concerning land, culture, and governance. Contemporary laws, including the PESA (1996) and Forest Rights Act (2006), can trace their lineage back to these early protective measures.

Significance of February 27, 1947

On this date, three sub-committees of the Constituent Assembly presented reports advocating for the protection of tribal rights. These recommendations played a crucial role in shaping Article 244 and establishing a governance framework based on schedules.

Differences Between the Fifth and Sixth Schedules

• Fifth Schedule: Applicable to tribal areas in mainland India (e.g., Jharkhand, Odisha).
• Sixth Schedule: Pertains to northeastern regions, featuring autonomous district councils (e.g., Assam, Meghalaya).

British Avoidance of Direct Rule

The British often opted against direct rule in many tribal regions due to minimal economic incentives and persistent resistance from tribal groups, opting instead for indirect governance through local agents or chiefs to maintain peace.

Post-Independence Internal Conflicts

The lack of integration in excluded areas has led to feelings of alienation and armed resistance in regions like Nagaland, Manipur, and central Indian tribal belts, resulting in enduring conflicts over autonomy and governance.

Quotation for Future Civil Servants: “Justice for the weakest is the truest measure of a nation’s strength.”