Abstract
As a movement for ‘self-governance’ by adivasis living in areas classified as Khutkatti in the state of Jharkhand, Pathalgadi invoked traditional symbols and idioms to assert traditional/customary rights over land through the iteration of constitutional provisions. Across the state of Jharkhand and other contiguous states like Chhattisgarh, villagers installed stone slabs on the highway to mark the boundaries of their village. These boundaries were ‘guarded’ by villagers in the same way that a sovereign nation-state would monitor and control entry into its territorial space. The pathals were inscribed with constitutional provisions—the Fifth Schedule which recognised administrative autonomy of adivasis in the scheduled areas—and the Panchayat Extension into Scheduled Areas Act 1996, which required the consent of the gram sabha for acquisition of tribal land. The ‘self-governance’ claims by adivasis in the constitutional idiom, emulating ‘state-like’ features of sovereign states, put in place competitive logics of the state in these regions. State and state effects were simultaneously asserted in contexts where ‘weak statehood’ exists not because the state was absent but was present in ways which the adivasis did not recognise.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
The term ‘adivasi’ referring to indigenous inhabitants was first articulated by the Adivasi Maha Sabha, founded in 1938 in Chotanagpur (Hardiman 1995: 13, cited in Upadhya, 2009: 47).
- 2.
The Dhebar Commission (1960–1961) laid down the following criteria for an area to be declared a Scheduled Area under the Fifth Schedule: ‘Preponderance of tribal population, which should not be less than 50 percent; Compactness and reasonable size of the area; Underdeveloped nature of the area; and marked disparity in the economic standard of the people’. The Ministry of Tribal Affairs states that though not spelt out in the CoI, these criteria are well established and follow the principles in declaring the ‘Excluded’ and ‘Partially Excluded Areas’ under the Government of India Act, 1935, as well as those contained in Schedule ‘B’ of recommendations of the Excluded and Partially Excluded Areas Sub Committee of Constituent Assembly and later outlined by the Debhar Commission (MTA and UNDP n.d., 14–15). The States of Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Gujarat, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa, and Rajasthan have designated scheduled areas.
- 3.
Jharkhand, earlier part of Bihar, became a separate State in 2000.
- 4.
The PESA gives powers to the gram sabha over matters related to development planning, management of natural and land resources, minor forest produce, minor minerals, minor water bodies, control over local institutions, and settling disputes according to customs.
- 5.
Writ Petition no. 6872/2010 against the 30th July 2009 notification constituting the village Premnagar into a Nagar Panchayat under the Chhattisgarh Municipalities Act, 1961, by members of the erstwhile Gram Sabha of village Premnagar in the Scheduled Area district of Sarguja. A copy of the petition is with the authors.
- 6.
The Jharkhand government introduced amendments in CNTA and the Santhal Parganas Tenancy Act to remove restrictions on sale and transfer of tribal land to non-tribals. The outrage against the Bills forced the Governor to return it to the government. The government subsequently sought amendments in the Land Acquisition Act 2013, to remove the requirement of consent of 70% of those who owned the land. It also removed the provision of assessment of social impact of land acquisition.
- 7.
Birsa Munada was a tribal leader and freedom fighter with an iconic status in Jharkhand.
References
Ackerman, B. (1991). We the people: Foundations. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Arora, B. (1995). Adapting federalism to India: Multilevel and asymmetric innovations. In B. Arora & D. Verney (Eds.), Multiple identities in a single state (pp. 71–104). Konark.
Austin, G. (1966). The Indian constitution: Cornerstone of a nation. Oxford University Press.
Austin, J. (1832/1995). The province of jurisprudence determined. Cambridge University Press.
Banerjee, M., & Priyam, M. (2020). Margins and marginality. The India Forum. Retrieved April 26, 2022, from https://www.theindiaforum.in/sites/default/files/pdf/2020/06/05/margins-and-marginality.pdf.
Baxi, U. (1997). Accumulation and legitimacy: The Indian constitution and state formation. In M. P. Singh & S. K. Chaube (Eds.), Indian constitution: A review (pp. 13–27). Har-Anand.
Baxi, U. (2002). The impossibility of constitutional justice: Seismographic notes on Indian constitutionalism. In Z. Hasan, E. Sridharan, & R. Sudarshan (Eds.), India’s living constitution: Ideas, practices, controversies (pp. 31–63). Permanent Black.
Baxi, U. (2013). Preliminary notes on transformative constitutionalism. In O. Vilhena, U. Baxi, & F. Viljoen (Eds.), Transformative constitutionalism: Comparing the apex courts of Brazil, India and South Africa (pp. 19–47). Pretoria University Law Press.
Choube, K. N. (2015). The public life of a ‘progressive’ law: PESA and Gaon Ganarajya (Village Republic). Studies in Indian Politics, 3(2), 247–259.
Choube, K. N. (2016). The state, tribals and law: The politics behind the enactment of PESA and FRA. Social Action, 46(3), 355–370.
Constituent Assembly Debates (CAD), Vol. I, No. 3, 9 December 1946–27 January 1948, Lok Sabha Secretariat, Government of India, New Delhi.
Deogharia, J., & Banerjee, C. (2019). Pathalgarhi’s long shadow: India’s tribal heartland wants freedom from govt control. Times of India. Retrieved June 4, 2020, from https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/pathalgarhis-long-shadow-indias-tribal-heartlandwants-freedom-from-govt-control/articleshow/67673490.cms
Derrida, J. (1992). Force of law: The ‘Mystical Foundation of Authority’. In D. Cornell, M. Rosenfeld, & D. Gray Carlson (Eds.), Deconstruction and the possibility of justice (pp. 3–67). Routledge.
Evans, P. (1997). The eclipse of the state? Reflections on stateness in an era of globalization. World Politics, 50(1), 62–87.
Hart, H. L. A. (1961). The concept of law. Oxford University Press.
Juneja, S. (2010). Chhattisgarh’s industrial jungle. Down to Earth. Retrieved September 20, 2010, from http://www.downtoearth.org.in/node/1862.
Khosla, M. (2020). India’s founding moment: The constitution of a most surprising democracy. Harvard University Press.
Kumar, N. (2018). Pathalgadi movement in Jharkhand turns toxic. Sunday guardian live. Retrieved June 4, 2020, from https://www.sundayguardianlive.com/news/pathalgadi-movement-jharkhand-turns-toxic.
Langa, P. (2006). Transformative constitutionalism. Stellenbosch L R, 17(3), 351–360.
Larsson, S. (2005). Weak states? A pursuit for a weak state definition and feasible reconstruction theories. Master’s thesis, University of Lund. Retrieved February 6, 2021, from http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/1332751.
Mathur, K. (2013). Panchayati Raj. Oxford India Short Introduction Series. OUP.
Mitchell, T. (1991). The limits of the state. The American Political Science Review, 85(1), 77–96.
Mohanty, M. (1990). Duality of the state process in India. In G. Shah (Ed.), Capitalist development: Critical essays (pp. 149–161). Popular Prakashan.
MTA and UNDP. (n.d.) Undated. Land and Governance under the Fifth Schedule: An Overview of the Law. New Delhi: Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India.
Nettl, J. P. (1968). The state as a conceptual variable. World Politics, 20(4), 559–592.
Pandey, P. (2018). Writ in stone. The Indian Express. Retrieved May 27, 2020, from https://indianexpress.com/article/india/maoism-khunti-human-trafficking-rape-district-cpi-maoist-writ-in-stone-5250216/.
Ravindranathan, N. T. (2018). A western conspiracy aimed at Balkanization of India through village republic movement part II. Retrieved June 4, 2020, from http://vpmthane.org/vpmDDSS/pdf/Article/51-
Rice, S., & Patrick, S. (2008). Index of state weakness in the developing world. Brooking Institution.
Sharma, S. (2019). What sedition cases against 10,000 adivasis in Jharkhand reveals about Indian democracy. Retrieved June 24, 2021, from https://scroll.in/article/944240/what-sedition-cases-against-10000-adivasis-in-jharkhand-reveals-about-indiandemocracy
Shrivastava, M. K. (2013). Mundari kuntkatti: An institution of customary right over land. Oriental Anthropologists, 13(2), 267–280.
Singh, M. P., & Saxena, R. (2013). Federalizing India in the age of globalization. Primus Books.
Standing, H. (1976). Munda religion and social structure. PhD thesis. SOAS University of London. https://doi.org/10.25501/SOAS.00029217
Stepan, A. (1999). Federalism and democracy: Beyond the US model. Journal of Democracy, 10(4), 19–34.
Sundar, N. (1997). Subalterns and sovereings: An anthropological history of Bastar (1854–1996). Oxford University Press.
Sundar, N. (2007). Subalterns and sovereigns: An anthropological history of Bastar (1854–2006). Oxford University Press.
Sundar, N. (Ed.). (2009). Legal grounds: Natural resource, identity, and the law in Jharkhand. Oxford University Press.
Sundar, N. (2018). Pathalgadi is nothing but constitutional messianism so why is the BJP afraid of it? The Wire. Retrieved June 4, 2020, from https://thewire.in/rights/pathalgadi-is-nothing-but-constitutional-messianism-so-why-is-the-bjp-afraid-of-it
Torpey, J. (2000). The invention of the passport. Surveillance, citizenship and the state. Cambridge University Press.
Upadhya, C. (2009). Law, custom, and Adivasi identity: Politics of land rights in Chotanagpur. In N. Sundar (Ed.), Legal grounds: Natural resource, identity, and the law in Jharkhand (pp. 30–55). Oxford University Press.
Vasan, S. (2009). Forest law, ideology and practice. In N. Sundar (Ed.), Legal grounds: Natural resource, identity, and the law in Jharkhand (pp. 113–131). Oxford University Press.
Vilhena, O., Baxi, U., & V. (Eds.). (2013). Transformative constitutionalism: Comparing the apex courts of Brazil, India and South Africa. Pretoria University Law Press.
Wahi, N., & Bhatia, A. (2018). The legal regime and political economy of land rights of scheduled tribes in the scheduled areas of India. Centre for Policy Research.
Wildlife First & Ors. v. Ministry of Forest & Environment & Ors., WPI (Civil) 109/2008. Retrieved May 5, 2022, from https://indiankanoon.org/doc/58553838/
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Roy, A., Singh, U.K. (2022). Pathalgadi Movement, Self-Governance, and the Question of ‘Weak Statehood’. In: Neubert, D., Lauth, HJ., Mohamad-Klotzbach, C. (eds) Local Self-Governance and Varieties of Statehood. Contributions to Political Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-14996-2_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-14996-2_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-14995-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-14996-2
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)