Page 31 - DSOC201_SOCIAL_STRUCTURE_AND_SOCIAL_CHANGE_ENGLISH

Social Structure and Social Change

Notes 2. Reform movements, emulating the pattern of the higher Hindu castes like the Bhagat movement
among the Oraon, Vaishnavite movement among the Bhumi and Kehr movement among the
Santhals.
3. Political movements for tribal states within the Indian Union in the post-Independence period
like Jharkhand movement in Chotanagpur and Orissa, Hill states movement in Assam and
Madhya Pradesh, etc.
4. Secessionist movements like the Naga and Mizo movements.
5. Movement relating to agrarian unrest like Naxalbari movement (1967) and Birsadal movement
(1968-69).
If we take into consideration all the tribal movements, including the Naga revolution (which
began in 1948 and continued up to 1972 when the new elected government came to power and the
Naga insurgency was controlled), the Mizo movement (guerrilla warfare which ended with the
formation of Meghalaya state in April 1970, created out of Assam and Mizoram in 1972), the Gond
Raj movement (of Gonds of Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra, started in 1941 for a separate state,
reaching its peak in 1962-63), the Naxalite movements (of the tribals in Bihar, West Bengal, Andhra
Pradesh and Assam), the Agrarian movements (of the Gonds and the Bhils in Madhya Pradesh),
and the forest-based movements (of the Gonds for getting customary rights in the forests), it could
be said that the tribal unrest and the resultant movements were mainly movements launched for
liberation from (i) oppression and discrimination, (ii) neglect and backwardness, and (iii) a
government which was callous to the tribals’ plight marked by poverty, hunger, unemployment
and exploitation. Recently, a growing interest has been shown by scholars and politicians in the
tribal movement in Chotanagpur in Bihar. This movement is popularly called the Jharkhand
movement. The Oraon, the Munda and the Hos are the major tribal communities in Chotanagpur.
Their total population is about 50 lakhs comprising 10 per cent of the total population of the state.
This movement was started in 1928 by Chotanagar Unnati Samaj under the leadership of a few
educated tribal Christians. Later on, the Samaj was renamed Adibasi Sabha. In 1938, it declared
itself a political party fighting for tribal interests, when it took the name of Jharkhand Party. The
BJP-led government proposed in late 1998 and early 1999 to create a separate Jharkhand state
(called Vananchal state comprising six districts and two divisions, Chotanagpur and Santhal
Parganas of Bihar).
Two instances of tribal exploitation are highlighted here to explain the cause of their movements.
At the time of independence, there existed a government order in Andhra Pradesh according to
which all land transactions had to be in favour of the tribals. In 1974, the then Congress government
passed an order which permitted non-tribals to own 15 acres (5 wet and 10 dry) of land in the area.
After this order, non-tribals took away a sizeable part of tribal land. Tribals claimed that about
30,000 acres of land had passed into the hands of non-tribals between 1974 and 1984. During this
period, about 2,000 cases of land disputes were lodged in courts and about 400 tribals convicted.
The Telugu Desam government quashed the Congress government order in 1984 because of which
non-tribals took a defensive position. Tribals were organised by extremists against the non-tribal
feudal classes. There were series of incidents of violence between Gonds (tribals) and non-tribals.
The non-tribals put up a fight. They burned tribal huntments, criminally assaulted women, wounded
and killed the tribals and forced them to do bonded labour for them. In another incident, 21 non-
tribals who were allegedly stealing firewood from a forest were caught by the tribals and taken to
their village and kept imprisoned till the police rescued them.
The second case refers to a tribal convention organised in February, 1984 in Vidarbha region near
Nagpur in Maharashtra. The venue was a small village called Kamalpur, with a population of
1,000 persons. The convention was expected to be attended by 20,000 persons. It was to be
inaugurated by the President of Nagpur High Court Bar Association and presided over by eminent
persons like a playwright, a film director and a cine artist. Two days before the conference, all
routes leading to the venue were sealed, about 1,000 persons were arrested, and prohibitory
orders banning the assembly of five or more persons were issued. Interestingly, the persons
arrested were charged for carrying objectionable literature, felling trees in forests, and theft of

26 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY