{"id":94,"date":"2019-03-20T08:20:59","date_gmt":"2019-03-20T08:20:59","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/antp05.epgpbooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/?post_type=chapter&p=94"},"modified":"2019-03-20T08:35:05","modified_gmt":"2019-03-20T08:35:05","slug":"scheduling-tribal-communities-and-primitive-groups-in-india","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/antp05\/chapter\/scheduling-tribal-communities-and-primitive-groups-in-india\/","title":{"rendered":"Scheduling Tribal Communities and Primitive Groups in India"},"content":{"raw":"
\"epgp<\/a>\r\n<\/span><\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n \r\n

Prologue: <\/strong>\u2018Tribe\u2019 is a value loaded term. In India, it is essentially a polito-administrative category; therefore, for all practical- even most academic- purposes, \u201ctribe is a tribe which is included in the list of <\/span>Scheduled Tribe\u201d<\/em>, popularly called STs. The objectives of this module are: To examine the processes involved in scheduling and de- scheduling tribal communities at the level of administration as required by the Constitution of India also; and also to know the present status of <\/span>Primitive Groups<\/em> in the country.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Conceptualization of Tribe<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n

There is a close connection between Anthropology and tribal study. Though anthropology originated and developed after studying tribal communities of colonial countries of Africa and Asia including India still ethnographers is not agreed upon a common definition of the term. Let us have a quick brief appraisal of the term. The Webster Dictionary defines tribe \u2026<\/span>\u201das a social group comprising numerous<\/em> families, clans, or generations together with slaves, dependants, or adopted strangers\u2026\u201d.<\/em>In ancient Rome the word \u201c<\/span>tribus\u201d was in use to refer to division of people, etc. How to conceptualize a community as a Tribe is a complex issue for ethnographers have defined them on the basis of what they observed in the field. As a result, no common definition is acceptable. Definitions are the way of looking at a phenomenon. It varies from person to place and time.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

In general, tribal communities, as seen by the classical ethnographers, are said to be original inhabitants of a region: small, <\/span>self contained, self sufficient, isolated, homogeneous and autonomous communities. In this sense a word quite popular these days is \u201cindigenous, not in the sense of autochthones, but in the sense of being rooted to their immediate surrounding regardless of time depth. Living in that surrounding the tribesman developed their own culture in interaction with ecology in unique ways. Modern ethnographers have picked up \u201cthose ways\u201d in their own styles. In context of India,the following definition of Professor D.N. Majumdar has found wider acceptance frequently cited in govt reports and <\/span>text books:<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

\u201c A tribeis a social group with territorial affiliation, endogamous, with no specialization of functions, ruled by tribal officers, hereditary or otherwise, united in language and dialect, recognizing social distance from other tribes or castes but without any stigma attached one, beliefs and customs, illiberal of naturalization of ideas from alien sources, above all, conscious of ethnic and territorial integrations\u201d<\/em>.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Today these <\/span>criteriamay not be found in tribal communities but if a community displays three or more at a time the same can be treated as a tribe. To be sure, as a social category a Tribe is merely <\/span>a conceptual, it existed in undefined past, and what <\/span>exist today are <\/span>\u201ctribes in transition\u201d<\/em>.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Scheduling Tribal Communities and Primitive Groups in India<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n

While a detailed socio-demographic profile of the tribals will be found <\/span>in elsewhere in this module a general account of <\/span>distribution of tribal population may be summarized as below<\/span>:<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Numerical Strength of STs<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n

In the Census of 2001, the number of persons enumerated as ST was 84,326,240 (or 8.20% of the total population in the country)<\/span>.The corresponding percentages in 1951, 1961, 1971, 1981 and 1991 were 6.5, 6.87, 6.97, 7.76 and 8.08. These are <\/span>however, not fully comparable as the lists have been expanded thru time; and area restrictions of the tribal communities have been removed in several States and Union Territories. We will come to this point later on.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Numerical strength of individual STs has a wide range. As per <\/span>census of 2001, there are four communities each having more than 30 lakh persons. They are Bhil, Mina, Gond <\/span>and Santhal. On the other hand, 35 Andamanese were counted in 1991. The heavy tribal strength States in the country are, viz. Jharkhand, Odisha, Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan, Maharastra, Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh. Each contains 50 lakh more individuals. These eight States together contain 75% of total STs Population (84,326,240) in the country.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Another way of putting tribal strength is in terms of <\/span>tribal dominated States in the country. For example, Mizoram contains 94.50% of its total population. In decreasing order are Lakshadweep (94%), Nagaland (89%), Meghalaya (85.9), Arunachal Pradesh (64%), Dadar and Nagar Haveli (62%).<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

STs are scattered all over the country except Chandigarh, Panjab, Haryana, Delhi <\/span>and Puducherry.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

To sum up, the term scheduled\/scheduling was created during the British administration. Certain areas\/tracts of British occupied territories demarcated by the then Administration. In order to protect tribal autonomy of the tribal <\/span>communities the first serious attempt was <\/span>promulgation of the Scheduled Districts Act-16 in 1874. By this <\/span>act the tribal regions were kept apart from the jurisdiction of general administration, but in case of <\/span>necessity the general law may be imposed in restricted areas by the competent authority. In 1918 Montagu <\/span>Chemsford submitted his report for the protection of backward areas\/primitive tribals; accordingly, <\/span>Government of India Act of 1919 was introduced.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Subsequently, the backward areas were classified into two groups: <\/span>Complete excluded areas<\/em> and <\/span>Modified excluded areas <\/em>(in which general laws could be imposed after modification by the Governor. In 1929, the Simon Commission suggested not to extend any representation of Tribal areas in administration because of \u201cbackwardness\u201d. Subsequently,\u2019 backward areas\u2019 and \u2018tribal tracts\u2019 were reclassified as \u2018Excluded\u2019 and \u2018Partially excluded\u2019 regions. Lusai Hilly districts, Naga Hilly districts, Kachar hills of Kachar district and north-eastern tracts were declared as Excluded areas. The British parts of Garo Hills districts, Mikir, Khasi and <\/span>Jaintiya hills (except Shillong and Cantonment\u00a0<\/span>municipalities) were declared Partially Excluded areas. In <\/span>addition tribal populated habitations and tribals living in large number were put under Excluded and Partially excluded areas respectively. These areas were kept under the jurisdiction of <\/span>Provincial administration. Further, in these areas general<\/strong> laws were not imposed <\/strong>by the Central and provincial governments. However, the Governor was given <\/span>power to impose such laws if necessary. After <\/span>Independence the same provisions were maintained in the Constitution scheduling tribal groups under its the <\/span>Schedule V and Schedule VI<\/em> to be described shortly.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Scheduling tribal communities<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n

For the first <\/span>time the tribal communities have been laid down by the term <\/span>Scheduled tribe<\/em> in the Constitution though criteria have not been laid down in it. Here reference of two Articles <\/span>are required, namely Articles 356 and 340.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Article 356(25) states-<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Scheduled tribes <\/span>means such tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within such tribes or tribal tribes as are deemed under Article 342 to be scheduled tribes for the purposes of this Constitution. Ostensibly, in this <\/span>definition no definite criteria have been laid down.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Article 342 (1) of the Constitution empowers to make <\/span>initial recommendation of the list of scheduled tribes in different States and Union territories after consulting Governors of the States\/Union territories concerned, any modification in the list can only be made by the Parliament. Clause (2) of this Article is about <\/span>amendment in the list of scheduled tribes. \u201cParliament may by law include in or excludes from the list of scheduled tribes specified in a notification issued under clause (1)\u201d noted above.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Now <\/span>issue is of determination of criteria for a tribe still to be settled by the competent authority. In the first Report of the Commissioner for Scheduled Castes and <\/span>scheduled Tribe (1951) it was stated that the State Governments were requested to suggest criteria for determining as to which tribes should be treated as Scheduled <\/span>tribes. <\/span>In Appendix IV of the Report criteria suggested by 14 State Governments were indicated. They offered conflicting views in this regard. <\/span>However the following features appeared in common:<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

1)\u00a0 Tribal origin,<\/span><\/p>\r\n

2)\u00a0<\/span>Primitive way of life and habitation in remote and less easily accessible areas,<\/span><\/p>\r\n

3) General backwardness in all respects.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

The first Commissioner, Shri L. M. Srikant had suggested a special committee should be appointed by the Government to solve the issue of deciding criteria for enlisting a tribe as <\/span>scheduled tribe. In the subsequent <\/span>years the First Backward Classes Commission (set up in 1953 under Article 240) was\u00a0<\/span>entrusted with the task of making recommendations for the revision of scheduled tribes list. This Commission laid down the criteria as follow:<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

\u201cTribes live apart in the hills and even where they live in the plains, they lead a separate excluded existence and are not assimilated in the main body of the people. Scheduled tribes may belong to any religion. They are listed as scheduled tribes because of the life led by them.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Above statement is debatable with respect to two points: Assimilation and excluded life. Some sections of tribes like the Oraon, Munda, Santhal, Gond, Bhil are very much assimilated and they do not live in isolation.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

The Present Status<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n

No serious attempts were made by the Government <\/span>till 1963. After a good deal of <\/span>deliberation the suggestions made by the Advisory Committee for the Amendment in the list of Scheduled Tribes (known as the Lokur committee) were accepted. Accordingly, the following characteristics were accepted for a community to be identified as Scheduled tribes:<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

-indications of primitive traits<\/em><\/p>\r\n \r\n

-distinctive culture,<\/em><\/p>\r\n \r\n

-shyness of contact with the community at large,<\/em><\/p>\r\n \r\n

-geographical isolation; and,<\/em><\/p>\r\n \r\n

-backwardness.<\/em><\/p>\r\n \r\n

I may <\/span>however be noted that the above criteria are not <\/span>spelt out in the Constitution but have been accepted by the Joint Advisory Parliamentary Committee for the Amendment purposes. The above criteria take into account <\/span>of the Kalelkar Committee (1955), the Advisory Committee on Revision of SC and ST lists (Lokur Committee) of 1965 and the Joint Committee of Parliament on the <\/span>scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) Orders (Amendment) Bill, 1967 known as the Chandra Committee, 1969 (Shri Anil K.Chanda also held the post of the Commissioner for SCs and STs from 1962 to 1966).<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

A Rapid review of Amendments of the lists of STs<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Reference to the fact that any amendments in the list of scheduled tribes promulgated through the Presidential Orders can be affected only by the Act of the parliament. Such amendments were made two times-1956 and 1976. It was due to <\/span>reorganization of States in 1956(States A and B were put under one and States C as Union Territories. Without taking any serious exercise tribes of one region were\u00a0<\/span>shifted to newly created regions. Disparity occurred when the erstwhile Hyderabad States was integrated with the Andhra region transferred from the erstwhile Madras state. Scheduled castes and scheduled tribes of some districts of these states got <\/span>effected.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

In 1976 the lists of SC and STs were amended by the SCs and STS Orders (Amendment) Act of 1976. In this <\/span>amendment only partial issue of area restrictions <\/span>were removed. For example, Dhobi (a scheduled caste of M.P.) was recognized only in three districts. It is to be noted that no new castes and tribes were included or excluded from the existing lists in 1976.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Anomaly in Names<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Some times when a tribal community is named in English, this name also occurs for the Hindu caste. This makes <\/span>situation worst for members of such community now demand <\/span>for their name be included in the list. In some <\/span>cases they have succeeded because of <\/span>obvious advantage of reservation. For example, in Karnataka, MALERU is <\/span>a ST in Shimoga and <\/span>Chikmaglur districts. They are economically very poor. In the same <\/span>area there is well off a Hindu caste <\/span>MAALERU. A number of persons of this caste have obtained ST certificates for enjoying the benefits.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

In Bihar, in districts of Bhojpur, Siwan, Gopalganj there live a backward community GORN which is altogether different from GOND, a scheduled tribe. In <\/span>Devanagri both are spelled same except a dot under\u201d D\u201d. Some Gorn members obtained certificate claiming Gond tribe. Absolutely there is no connection between Gorn and Gond. The same caste is also found in Duddhi district of Mirzapur where this was included under scheduled caste mixed with Gond tribe. Interestingly<\/span>,in un divided Uttar Pradesh there were no STs declared till <\/span>May,1967. All tribals (about 10 in number) were categorized as SCs. However, seven of them were declared as STs when the second Amendment Order came into force (see below).<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

In Bihar Kahar, a backward Hindu caste is often mixed with Kharwar, a scheduled tribe in the same district. This is because Kharwar is a gotra(clan) of Kahar. So Hindu Kahar community took benefit of that.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Scheduling a tribal group under the SCs means that <\/span>group is being treated part of untouchable Hindu caste. This is against <\/span>the social justice.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Some times surnames of <\/span>a caste and tribe <\/span>creates another problems. In Mysore, for example, Valmiki and Bedar or Bedad use surnames <\/span>Nayak. <\/span>Actually they are Denotified group in Mysore but because of surname <\/span>NAYAK some of them have claimed tribal status. Dhoba is a <\/span>sub tribe of Gond in Maharastra, but Dhobi Hindu caste (washerman) try to pass off as members of STs. The Commissioner for SCs and STs has reported at lengths such cases. (See 28th Report of the Commissioner,1986-87.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

This is one of the main reasons that any attempt to modify the lists of STs turns out difficult. Many a time local politics are involved in it as had recently happened with Jat and Gujjar (caste or tribe).<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Since 1976, the amendments in the lists of Scheduled tribes were made in1991, 1996 and 2002. Subsequently, on public and States demand pending since long the lists of both SCs and STs were modified for the first time in 2002. Reference to this will be made after a brief presentation the processes involved in scheduling (inclusion in) and <\/span>de scheduling (exclusion from) the existing lists.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Processes involved in Inclusion and Exclusion of communities<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n

The revised guidelines of modalities of deciding claims for inclusion and exclusion of the existing lists of STs were approved by the Government in 2002. According to <\/span>these guideline, only those claims agreed by the concerned State Government, the Registrar General of India, and the National Commission for the Scheduled <\/span>tribes will be take up the for consideration. It is to be stated that the concerned State and Union Territory administration recommend the proposal, the same is sent to the Registrar General of India. If the latter satisfied with the recommendation of the State\/Union Territory, recommends the same to the Central Government. Thereafter, the Government sends the same to the National Commission for the Scheduled Tribes for their recommendation. If the Commission recommends the case, the matter is presented to the Cabinet. <\/span>There after the Cabinet presents it before the Parliament in the form of a bill. If the proposal at any stage does not get <\/span>support it is returned to the State\/Union Territory administration for reconsideration. Thus the process is <\/span>complex one.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

According to the two latest Amendment Orders of 2002 and 2003, a number of scheduled tribes were deleted from the existing lists of <\/span>Sates and Union Territories, at the same time some new entries were made as shown below:<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

States\/UT<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

1.\u00a0 \u00a0Andhra Pradesh Sadhu <\/span>Andh along with <\/span>Andh, <\/span><\/p>\r\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Bodo Gadaba and 9 more subgroups with Gadaba <\/span><\/p>\r\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0KoiturwuthGond, Kalwar with Kolam, Kubi with <\/span><\/p>\r\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Konda Dhoras, Kuvinga with Kondhs, 6 <\/span>sub groups of <\/span><\/p>\r\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Koya with Koya<\/span>,Banjara with Sugalis, 3 <\/span>sub groups of\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\r\n

\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Yanadi with Yanadi, 6 <\/span>sub groups with Yerukulas.( No new group added)<\/span><\/p>\r\n

2.\u00a0 \u00a0Assam Karbi, Dimasa, Hajong, Singhpho, Khampti <\/span>and Garo Found new entries.<\/span><\/p>\r\n

3.\u00a0 \u00a0Bihar Binjhia deleted while Kawar<\/span>,Kol and Tharu found entries in the list<\/span><\/p>\r\n

4.\u00a0 \u00a0Goa Kunbi, Gawda and Velip added<\/span><\/p>\r\n

5.\u00a0 \u00a0Gujarat: Three groups omitted; three new groups added<\/span><\/p>\r\n

6.\u00a0 \u00a0Himachal Pradesh\u00a0 Two\u00a0 new groups added<\/span><\/p>\r\n

7.\u00a0 \u00a0 Jharkhand Kawar group was added<\/span><\/p>\r\n

8.\u00a0 \u00a0Kerala\u00a0 6 Groups omitted; two new groups Kurumban and Mala Panickar added<\/span><\/p>\r\n

9.\u00a0 \u00a0Madhya Pradesh Three groups omitted<\/span><\/p>\r\n

10. Maharastra\u00a0 2 groups omitted<\/span><\/p>\r\n

11.\u00a0 Manipur One group Poumai Naga added<\/span><\/p>\r\n

12. Several <\/span>sub groups were added along with major groups<\/span><\/p>\r\n

13. Rajasthan One group Tamang added<\/span><\/p>\r\n

14. Tripura\u00a0 some <\/span>sub groups added<\/span><\/p>\r\n

15. Uttar Pradesh Gond, Baiga, Sahariya, Parahiya, Panika, Agaria, Patari, Chero, Bhuiya added (Bhuxa, Raji and Tharu of Uttranchal are also in UP)<\/span><\/p>\r\n

16. West Bengal 2 groups Limu and Tamang added<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Broadly speaking, the following reasons led to modify the existing lists of STs:<\/span><\/p>\r\n

i)\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0<\/span>Sub groups of a tribe are <\/span>integral part of the main group<\/span>;.<\/p>\r\n

ii)\u00a0 Removal of area restrictions in some cases are important; at the same time in certain cases areas inclusions are equally important;<\/span><\/p>\r\n

iii) Some communities were deleted because they have lost the traits of tribalism.<\/span><\/p>\r\n

iv)\u00a0 In some <\/span>cases synonym of names <\/span>are important these must occur in the lists.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Status of Schedule Areas and Tribal Areas<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Scheduled Areas and Tribal Areas under Article 244(1) also known as Fifth Schedule of the Constitution found some changes since its first Order in 1950. To this date, six more amendment Orders have been signed by the President. They are:<\/span><\/p>\r\n

1.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Scheduled Area (Himachal Pradesh) Order, 1975<\/span><\/p>\r\n

2.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The Scheduled Areas (State of Bihar, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Orissa Order, 1977<\/span><\/p>\r\n

3.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Scheduled Areas (Maharashtra) Order,1985<\/span><\/p>\r\n

4.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The Scheduled Areas( States of Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Madhya Pradesh) Order, 2003<\/span><\/p>\r\n

5.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The Scheduled Areas (State of Jharkhand0 Order,2007<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Due to <\/span>paucity of <\/span>space it is not possible to present state-wise position of Scheduled Areas here<\/span>.<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Tribal Areas<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n

This term generally means areas with a preponderance of tribal population; but, in the <\/span>Constitution it means specified areas within the States of Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura <\/span>and Mizoram. Details are listed under the <\/span>Scheduled VI. No amendment with respect to areas under the VI Schedule has been made by the Government since its first proclamation in 1950.<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Status of Primitive Tribal Groups<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Primitive group is a part of STs population first identified in the Fifth Five year Plan Period during which the entire tribal development programs were brought under the fold of Tribal-sub Plan (TSP). Primitive Groups in contrast to general STs communities live more or less in isolation which <\/span>show little change from time immemorial. The then the tribal department of the Ministry of Home Affairs identified the following criteria for PTGs in the country:<\/span><\/p>\r\n \r\n

-Pre agricultural level of technology,<\/em><\/p>\r\n \r\n

-low level of literacy,<\/em><\/p>\r\n \r\n

-stagnant and diminishing population.<\/em><\/p>\r\n \r\n

Accordingly, 52 communities were declared PTGs with <\/span>esmitated population of 10 lakhs. Special programs for each of them was launched. During the Sixth <\/span>Plan 20 more communities were added with <\/span>estimated population of 4 lakhs. Thus making a total <\/span>estamted population around 14 lakhs. During the Seventh <\/span>Plan the figure reached 73 PTGs. State-wise number of PTGs are listed below:<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n1.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Andhra Pradesh\u00a0\u00a0 12\r\n\r\n2.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Bihar including Jharkhand 09\r\n\r\n3.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Gujarat 05\r\n\r\n4.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Karnataka 02\r\n\r\n5.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Kerala 05\r\n\r\n6.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Madhya Pradesh including\u00a0 07\r\n\r\n7.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Maharastra\u00a0 03\r\n\r\n8.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Manipur\u00a0 01\r\n\r\n9.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Odish13\r\n\r\n10.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Rajasthan 01\r\n\r\n11.\u00a0 Tamil Nadu\u00a0 06\r\n\r\n12.\u00a0 Tripura 01\r\n\r\n13.\u00a0 Uttar Pradesh including Uttrakhand\u00a0 02\r\n\r\n14.\u00a0 West Bengal 03\r\n\r\n15.\u00a0 A &NB Is. 06\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n(Details about development programs can be found in other modules)\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nPresent status of PTGs\r\n\r\n \r\n

At present the PTGs are 75 dispersed over 17 States and one UTs. The nomenclature has been changed. Now they are categorized as Special Venerable Tribal Groups (SVTGs). Some of these\u00a0groups have special health problems and genetic abnormalities like sickle cell, anemia <\/span>and sexually transmitted diseases. Special programs have been launched for them to better their lot. The Ministry of Tribal Affairs of the Govt of India in consultation with respective States has introduced programs keeping in view of socio-ecology and their needs for them at massive scale. The Experts Committee for SVTGs <\/span>have suggested \u201cConservation-cum Development\u201d (CCP) plans for them. One such program is JanashreeBeemaYojna (JBY) under which there is <\/span>provision of life insurance for one member of the community.<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n
you can view video on Scheduling Tribal Communities and Primitive Groups in India<\/strong><\/td>\r\n\"\"<\/a><\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n<\/tbody>\r\n<\/table>\r\n \r\n\r\nReferences<\/strong>\r\n
    \r\n \t
  1. Census of India, 2001, Publication Division, New Delhi, 2006<\/li>\r\n \t
  2. B. D.Sharma, 1988 Report of the Commissioner for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, 1986-87. New Delhi<\/li>\r\n \t
  3. The Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Annual Report, 2007, New Delhi<\/li>\r\n \t
  4. A R N Srivastava and MItashree Srivastava, 2014 Sixty Years of Tribal Development, Allahabad.<\/li>\r\n \t
  5. B.K.RoyBurman, 2001 Draft Executive Report of the Tribal Studies Committee, Indian Council of Social Science Research, New Delhi.(Unpublished)<\/li>\r\n<\/ol>","rendered":"
    \"epgp<\/a>
    \n<\/span><\/div>\n

     <\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Prologue: <\/strong>\u2018Tribe\u2019 is a value loaded term. In India, it is essentially a polito-administrative category; therefore, for all practical- even most academic- purposes, \u201ctribe is a tribe which is included in the list of <\/span>Scheduled Tribe\u201d<\/em>, popularly called STs. The objectives of this module are: To examine the processes involved in scheduling and de- scheduling tribal communities at the level of administration as required by the Constitution of India also; and also to know the present status of <\/span>Primitive Groups<\/em> in the country.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Conceptualization of Tribe<\/strong><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    There is a close connection between Anthropology and tribal study. Though anthropology originated and developed after studying tribal communities of colonial countries of Africa and Asia including India still ethnographers is not agreed upon a common definition of the term. Let us have a quick brief appraisal of the term. The Webster Dictionary defines tribe \u2026<\/span>\u201das a social group comprising numerous<\/em> families, clans, or generations together with slaves, dependants, or adopted strangers\u2026\u201d.<\/em>In ancient Rome the word \u201c<\/span>tribus\u201d was in use to refer to division of people, etc. How to conceptualize a community as a Tribe is a complex issue for ethnographers have defined them on the basis of what they observed in the field. As a result, no common definition is acceptable. Definitions are the way of looking at a phenomenon. It varies from person to place and time.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    In general, tribal communities, as seen by the classical ethnographers, are said to be original inhabitants of a region: small, <\/span>self contained, self sufficient, isolated, homogeneous and autonomous communities. In this sense a word quite popular these days is \u201cindigenous, not in the sense of autochthones, but in the sense of being rooted to their immediate surrounding regardless of time depth. Living in that surrounding the tribesman developed their own culture in interaction with ecology in unique ways. Modern ethnographers have picked up \u201cthose ways\u201d in their own styles. In context of India,the following definition of Professor D.N. Majumdar has found wider acceptance frequently cited in govt reports and <\/span>text books:<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    \u201c A tribeis a social group with territorial affiliation, endogamous, with no specialization of functions, ruled by tribal officers, hereditary or otherwise, united in language and dialect, recognizing social distance from other tribes or castes but without any stigma attached one, beliefs and customs, illiberal of naturalization of ideas from alien sources, above all, conscious of ethnic and territorial integrations\u201d<\/em>.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Today these <\/span>criteriamay not be found in tribal communities but if a community displays three or more at a time the same can be treated as a tribe. To be sure, as a social category a Tribe is merely <\/span>a conceptual, it existed in undefined past, and what <\/span>exist today are <\/span>\u201ctribes in transition\u201d<\/em>.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Scheduling Tribal Communities and Primitive Groups in India<\/strong><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    While a detailed socio-demographic profile of the tribals will be found <\/span>in elsewhere in this module a general account of <\/span>distribution of tribal population may be summarized as below<\/span>:<\/strong><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Numerical Strength of STs<\/strong><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    In the Census of 2001, the number of persons enumerated as ST was 84,326,240 (or 8.20% of the total population in the country)<\/span>.The corresponding percentages in 1951, 1961, 1971, 1981 and 1991 were 6.5, 6.87, 6.97, 7.76 and 8.08. These are <\/span>however, not fully comparable as the lists have been expanded thru time; and area restrictions of the tribal communities have been removed in several States and Union Territories. We will come to this point later on.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Numerical strength of individual STs has a wide range. As per <\/span>census of 2001, there are four communities each having more than 30 lakh persons. They are Bhil, Mina, Gond <\/span>and Santhal. On the other hand, 35 Andamanese were counted in 1991. The heavy tribal strength States in the country are, viz. Jharkhand, Odisha, Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan, Maharastra, Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh. Each contains 50 lakh more individuals. These eight States together contain 75% of total STs Population (84,326,240) in the country.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Another way of putting tribal strength is in terms of <\/span>tribal dominated States in the country. For example, Mizoram contains 94.50% of its total population. In decreasing order are Lakshadweep (94%), Nagaland (89%), Meghalaya (85.9), Arunachal Pradesh (64%), Dadar and Nagar Haveli (62%).<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    STs are scattered all over the country except Chandigarh, Panjab, Haryana, Delhi <\/span>and Puducherry.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    To sum up, the term scheduled\/scheduling was created during the British administration. Certain areas\/tracts of British occupied territories demarcated by the then Administration. In order to protect tribal autonomy of the tribal <\/span>communities the first serious attempt was <\/span>promulgation of the Scheduled Districts Act-16 in 1874. By this <\/span>act the tribal regions were kept apart from the jurisdiction of general administration, but in case of <\/span>necessity the general law may be imposed in restricted areas by the competent authority. In 1918 Montagu <\/span>Chemsford submitted his report for the protection of backward areas\/primitive tribals; accordingly, <\/span>Government of India Act of 1919 was introduced.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Subsequently, the backward areas were classified into two groups: <\/span>Complete excluded areas<\/em> and <\/span>Modified excluded areas <\/em>(in which general laws could be imposed after modification by the Governor. In 1929, the Simon Commission suggested not to extend any representation of Tribal areas in administration because of \u201cbackwardness\u201d. Subsequently,\u2019 backward areas\u2019 and \u2018tribal tracts\u2019 were reclassified as \u2018Excluded\u2019 and \u2018Partially excluded\u2019 regions. Lusai Hilly districts, Naga Hilly districts, Kachar hills of Kachar district and north-eastern tracts were declared as Excluded areas. The British parts of Garo Hills districts, Mikir, Khasi and <\/span>Jaintiya hills (except Shillong and Cantonment\u00a0<\/span>municipalities) were declared Partially Excluded areas. In <\/span>addition tribal populated habitations and tribals living in large number were put under Excluded and Partially excluded areas respectively. These areas were kept under the jurisdiction of <\/span>Provincial administration. Further, in these areas general<\/strong> laws were not imposed <\/strong>by the Central and provincial governments. However, the Governor was given <\/span>power to impose such laws if necessary. After <\/span>Independence the same provisions were maintained in the Constitution scheduling tribal groups under its the <\/span>Schedule V and Schedule VI<\/em> to be described shortly.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Scheduling tribal communities<\/strong><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    For the first <\/span>time the tribal communities have been laid down by the term <\/span>Scheduled tribe<\/em> in the Constitution though criteria have not been laid down in it. Here reference of two Articles <\/span>are required, namely Articles 356 and 340.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Article 356(25) states-<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Scheduled tribes <\/span>means such tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within such tribes or tribal tribes as are deemed under Article 342 to be scheduled tribes for the purposes of this Constitution. Ostensibly, in this <\/span>definition no definite criteria have been laid down.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Article 342 (1) of the Constitution empowers to make <\/span>initial recommendation of the list of scheduled tribes in different States and Union territories after consulting Governors of the States\/Union territories concerned, any modification in the list can only be made by the Parliament. Clause (2) of this Article is about <\/span>amendment in the list of scheduled tribes. \u201cParliament may by law include in or excludes from the list of scheduled tribes specified in a notification issued under clause (1)\u201d noted above.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Now <\/span>issue is of determination of criteria for a tribe still to be settled by the competent authority. In the first Report of the Commissioner for Scheduled Castes and <\/span>scheduled Tribe (1951) it was stated that the State Governments were requested to suggest criteria for determining as to which tribes should be treated as Scheduled <\/span>tribes. <\/span>In Appendix IV of the Report criteria suggested by 14 State Governments were indicated. They offered conflicting views in this regard. <\/span>However the following features appeared in common:<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    1)\u00a0 Tribal origin,<\/span><\/p>\n

    2)\u00a0<\/span>Primitive way of life and habitation in remote and less easily accessible areas,<\/span><\/p>\n

    3) General backwardness in all respects.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    The first Commissioner, Shri L. M. Srikant had suggested a special committee should be appointed by the Government to solve the issue of deciding criteria for enlisting a tribe as <\/span>scheduled tribe. In the subsequent <\/span>years the First Backward Classes Commission (set up in 1953 under Article 240) was\u00a0<\/span>entrusted with the task of making recommendations for the revision of scheduled tribes list. This Commission laid down the criteria as follow:<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    \u201cTribes live apart in the hills and even where they live in the plains, they lead a separate excluded existence and are not assimilated in the main body of the people. Scheduled tribes may belong to any religion. They are listed as scheduled tribes because of the life led by them.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Above statement is debatable with respect to two points: Assimilation and excluded life. Some sections of tribes like the Oraon, Munda, Santhal, Gond, Bhil are very much assimilated and they do not live in isolation.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    The Present Status<\/strong><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    No serious attempts were made by the Government <\/span>till 1963. After a good deal of <\/span>deliberation the suggestions made by the Advisory Committee for the Amendment in the list of Scheduled Tribes (known as the Lokur committee) were accepted. Accordingly, the following characteristics were accepted for a community to be identified as Scheduled tribes:<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    -indications of primitive traits<\/em><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    -distinctive culture,<\/em><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    -shyness of contact with the community at large,<\/em><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    -geographical isolation; and,<\/em><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    -backwardness.<\/em><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    I may <\/span>however be noted that the above criteria are not <\/span>spelt out in the Constitution but have been accepted by the Joint Advisory Parliamentary Committee for the Amendment purposes. The above criteria take into account <\/span>of the Kalelkar Committee (1955), the Advisory Committee on Revision of SC and ST lists (Lokur Committee) of 1965 and the Joint Committee of Parliament on the <\/span>scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) Orders (Amendment) Bill, 1967 known as the Chandra Committee, 1969 (Shri Anil K.Chanda also held the post of the Commissioner for SCs and STs from 1962 to 1966).<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    A Rapid review of Amendments of the lists of STs<\/strong><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Reference to the fact that any amendments in the list of scheduled tribes promulgated through the Presidential Orders can be affected only by the Act of the parliament. Such amendments were made two times-1956 and 1976. It was due to <\/span>reorganization of States in 1956(States A and B were put under one and States C as Union Territories. Without taking any serious exercise tribes of one region were\u00a0<\/span>shifted to newly created regions. Disparity occurred when the erstwhile Hyderabad States was integrated with the Andhra region transferred from the erstwhile Madras state. Scheduled castes and scheduled tribes of some districts of these states got <\/span>effected.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    In 1976 the lists of SC and STs were amended by the SCs and STS Orders (Amendment) Act of 1976. In this <\/span>amendment only partial issue of area restrictions <\/span>were removed. For example, Dhobi (a scheduled caste of M.P.) was recognized only in three districts. It is to be noted that no new castes and tribes were included or excluded from the existing lists in 1976.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Anomaly in Names<\/strong><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Some times when a tribal community is named in English, this name also occurs for the Hindu caste. This makes <\/span>situation worst for members of such community now demand <\/span>for their name be included in the list. In some <\/span>cases they have succeeded because of <\/span>obvious advantage of reservation. For example, in Karnataka, MALERU is <\/span>a ST in Shimoga and <\/span>Chikmaglur districts. They are economically very poor. In the same <\/span>area there is well off a Hindu caste <\/span>MAALERU. A number of persons of this caste have obtained ST certificates for enjoying the benefits.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    In Bihar, in districts of Bhojpur, Siwan, Gopalganj there live a backward community GORN which is altogether different from GOND, a scheduled tribe. In <\/span>Devanagri both are spelled same except a dot under\u201d D\u201d. Some Gorn members obtained certificate claiming Gond tribe. Absolutely there is no connection between Gorn and Gond. The same caste is also found in Duddhi district of Mirzapur where this was included under scheduled caste mixed with Gond tribe. Interestingly<\/span>,in un divided Uttar Pradesh there were no STs declared till <\/span>May,1967. All tribals (about 10 in number) were categorized as SCs. However, seven of them were declared as STs when the second Amendment Order came into force (see below).<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    In Bihar Kahar, a backward Hindu caste is often mixed with Kharwar, a scheduled tribe in the same district. This is because Kharwar is a gotra(clan) of Kahar. So Hindu Kahar community took benefit of that.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Scheduling a tribal group under the SCs means that <\/span>group is being treated part of untouchable Hindu caste. This is against <\/span>the social justice.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Some times surnames of <\/span>a caste and tribe <\/span>creates another problems. In Mysore, for example, Valmiki and Bedar or Bedad use surnames <\/span>Nayak. <\/span>Actually they are Denotified group in Mysore but because of surname <\/span>NAYAK some of them have claimed tribal status. Dhoba is a <\/span>sub tribe of Gond in Maharastra, but Dhobi Hindu caste (washerman) try to pass off as members of STs. The Commissioner for SCs and STs has reported at lengths such cases. (See 28th Report of the Commissioner,1986-87.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    This is one of the main reasons that any attempt to modify the lists of STs turns out difficult. Many a time local politics are involved in it as had recently happened with Jat and Gujjar (caste or tribe).<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Since 1976, the amendments in the lists of Scheduled tribes were made in1991, 1996 and 2002. Subsequently, on public and States demand pending since long the lists of both SCs and STs were modified for the first time in 2002. Reference to this will be made after a brief presentation the processes involved in scheduling (inclusion in) and <\/span>de scheduling (exclusion from) the existing lists.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Processes involved in Inclusion and Exclusion of communities<\/strong><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    The revised guidelines of modalities of deciding claims for inclusion and exclusion of the existing lists of STs were approved by the Government in 2002. According to <\/span>these guideline, only those claims agreed by the concerned State Government, the Registrar General of India, and the National Commission for the Scheduled <\/span>tribes will be take up the for consideration. It is to be stated that the concerned State and Union Territory administration recommend the proposal, the same is sent to the Registrar General of India. If the latter satisfied with the recommendation of the State\/Union Territory, recommends the same to the Central Government. Thereafter, the Government sends the same to the National Commission for the Scheduled Tribes for their recommendation. If the Commission recommends the case, the matter is presented to the Cabinet. <\/span>There after the Cabinet presents it before the Parliament in the form of a bill. If the proposal at any stage does not get <\/span>support it is returned to the State\/Union Territory administration for reconsideration. Thus the process is <\/span>complex one.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    According to the two latest Amendment Orders of 2002 and 2003, a number of scheduled tribes were deleted from the existing lists of <\/span>Sates and Union Territories, at the same time some new entries were made as shown below:<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    States\/UT<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    1.\u00a0 \u00a0Andhra Pradesh Sadhu <\/span>Andh along with <\/span>Andh, <\/span><\/p>\n

    \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Bodo Gadaba and 9 more subgroups with Gadaba <\/span><\/p>\n

    \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0KoiturwuthGond, Kalwar with Kolam, Kubi with <\/span><\/p>\n

    \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Konda Dhoras, Kuvinga with Kondhs, 6 <\/span>sub groups of <\/span><\/p>\n

    \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Koya with Koya<\/span>,Banjara with Sugalis, 3 <\/span>sub groups of\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

    \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Yanadi with Yanadi, 6 <\/span>sub groups with Yerukulas.( No new group added)<\/span><\/p>\n

    2.\u00a0 \u00a0Assam Karbi, Dimasa, Hajong, Singhpho, Khampti <\/span>and Garo Found new entries.<\/span><\/p>\n

    3.\u00a0 \u00a0Bihar Binjhia deleted while Kawar<\/span>,Kol and Tharu found entries in the list<\/span><\/p>\n

    4.\u00a0 \u00a0Goa Kunbi, Gawda and Velip added<\/span><\/p>\n

    5.\u00a0 \u00a0Gujarat: Three groups omitted; three new groups added<\/span><\/p>\n

    6.\u00a0 \u00a0Himachal Pradesh\u00a0 Two\u00a0 new groups added<\/span><\/p>\n

    7.\u00a0 \u00a0 Jharkhand Kawar group was added<\/span><\/p>\n

    8.\u00a0 \u00a0Kerala\u00a0 6 Groups omitted; two new groups Kurumban and Mala Panickar added<\/span><\/p>\n

    9.\u00a0 \u00a0Madhya Pradesh Three groups omitted<\/span><\/p>\n

    10. Maharastra\u00a0 2 groups omitted<\/span><\/p>\n

    11.\u00a0 Manipur One group Poumai Naga added<\/span><\/p>\n

    12. Several <\/span>sub groups were added along with major groups<\/span><\/p>\n

    13. Rajasthan One group Tamang added<\/span><\/p>\n

    14. Tripura\u00a0 some <\/span>sub groups added<\/span><\/p>\n

    15. Uttar Pradesh Gond, Baiga, Sahariya, Parahiya, Panika, Agaria, Patari, Chero, Bhuiya added (Bhuxa, Raji and Tharu of Uttranchal are also in UP)<\/span><\/p>\n

    16. West Bengal 2 groups Limu and Tamang added<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Broadly speaking, the following reasons led to modify the existing lists of STs:<\/span><\/p>\n

    i)\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0<\/span>Sub groups of a tribe are <\/span>integral part of the main group<\/span>;.<\/p>\n

    ii)\u00a0 Removal of area restrictions in some cases are important; at the same time in certain cases areas inclusions are equally important;<\/span><\/p>\n

    iii) Some communities were deleted because they have lost the traits of tribalism.<\/span><\/p>\n

    iv)\u00a0 In some <\/span>cases synonym of names <\/span>are important these must occur in the lists.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Status of Schedule Areas and Tribal Areas<\/strong><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Scheduled Areas and Tribal Areas under Article 244(1) also known as Fifth Schedule of the Constitution found some changes since its first Order in 1950. To this date, six more amendment Orders have been signed by the President. They are:<\/span><\/p>\n

    1.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Scheduled Area (Himachal Pradesh) Order, 1975<\/span><\/p>\n

    2.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The Scheduled Areas (State of Bihar, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Orissa Order, 1977<\/span><\/p>\n

    3.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Scheduled Areas (Maharashtra) Order,1985<\/span><\/p>\n

    4.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The Scheduled Areas( States of Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and Madhya Pradesh) Order, 2003<\/span><\/p>\n

    5.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The Scheduled Areas (State of Jharkhand0 Order,2007<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Due to <\/span>paucity of <\/span>space it is not possible to present state-wise position of Scheduled Areas here<\/span>.<\/strong><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Tribal Areas<\/strong><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    This term generally means areas with a preponderance of tribal population; but, in the <\/span>Constitution it means specified areas within the States of Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura <\/span>and Mizoram. Details are listed under the <\/span>Scheduled VI. No amendment with respect to areas under the VI Schedule has been made by the Government since its first proclamation in 1950.<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Status of Primitive Tribal Groups<\/strong><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Primitive group is a part of STs population first identified in the Fifth Five year Plan Period during which the entire tribal development programs were brought under the fold of Tribal-sub Plan (TSP). Primitive Groups in contrast to general STs communities live more or less in isolation which <\/span>show little change from time immemorial. The then the tribal department of the Ministry of Home Affairs identified the following criteria for PTGs in the country:<\/span><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    -Pre agricultural level of technology,<\/em><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    -low level of literacy,<\/em><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    -stagnant and diminishing population.<\/em><\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Accordingly, 52 communities were declared PTGs with <\/span>esmitated population of 10 lakhs. Special programs for each of them was launched. During the Sixth <\/span>Plan 20 more communities were added with <\/span>estimated population of 4 lakhs. Thus making a total <\/span>estamted population around 14 lakhs. During the Seventh <\/span>Plan the figure reached 73 PTGs. State-wise number of PTGs are listed below:<\/span><\/p>\n

    \n

     <\/p>\n

    1.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Andhra Pradesh\u00a0\u00a0 12<\/p>\n

    2.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Bihar including Jharkhand 09<\/p>\n

    3.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Gujarat 05<\/p>\n

    4.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Karnataka 02<\/p>\n

    5.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Kerala 05<\/p>\n

    6.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Madhya Pradesh including\u00a0 07<\/p>\n

    7.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Maharastra\u00a0 03<\/p>\n

    8.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Manipur\u00a0 01<\/p>\n

    9.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Odish13<\/p>\n

    10.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Rajasthan 01<\/p>\n

    11.\u00a0 Tamil Nadu\u00a0 06<\/p>\n

    12.\u00a0 Tripura 01<\/p>\n

    13.\u00a0 Uttar Pradesh including Uttrakhand\u00a0 02<\/p>\n

    14.\u00a0 West Bengal 03<\/p>\n

    15.\u00a0 A &NB Is. 06<\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    (Details about development programs can be found in other modules)<\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Present status of PTGs<\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n

    At present the PTGs are 75 dispersed over 17 States and one UTs. The nomenclature has been changed. Now they are categorized as Special Venerable Tribal Groups (SVTGs). Some of these\u00a0groups have special health problems and genetic abnormalities like sickle cell, anemia <\/span>and sexually transmitted diseases. Special programs have been launched for them to better their lot. The Ministry of Tribal Affairs of the Govt of India in consultation with respective States has introduced programs keeping in view of socio-ecology and their needs for them at massive scale. The Experts Committee for SVTGs <\/span>have suggested \u201cConservation-cum Development\u201d (CCP) plans for them. One such program is JanashreeBeemaYojna (JBY) under which there is <\/span>provision of life insurance for one member of the community.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
    you can view video on Scheduling Tribal Communities and Primitive Groups in India<\/strong><\/td>\n\"\"<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

     <\/p>\n

    References<\/strong><\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Census of India, 2001, Publication Division, New Delhi, 2006<\/li>\n
    2. B. D.Sharma, 1988 Report of the Commissioner for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, 1986-87. New Delhi<\/li>\n
    3. The Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Annual Report, 2007, New Delhi<\/li>\n
    4. A R N Srivastava and MItashree Srivastava, 2014 Sixty Years of Tribal Development, Allahabad.<\/li>\n
    5. B.K.RoyBurman, 2001 Draft Executive Report of the Tribal Studies Committee, Indian Council of Social Science Research, New Delhi.(Unpublished)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"menu_order":10,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":["dr-mitashree-srivastava"],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[64],"license":[],"class_list":["post-94","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry","contributor-dr-mitashree-srivastava"],"part":3,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/antp05\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/94","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/antp05\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/antp05\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/antp05\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/antp05\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/94\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":100,"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/antp05\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/94\/revisions\/100"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/antp05\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/3"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/antp05\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/94\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/antp05\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=94"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/antp05\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=94"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/antp05\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=94"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/antp05\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=94"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}