LAW AND ADMINISTRATION
IN THE EAST GODAVARI
AGENCY TRACTS
A
Critical Review
SAKTI, 1997
AGENCY: A country inhabited mainly by simple and ignorant people, who
by reason of their ignorance and excitable temperament need handling with tact
and sympathy; due to the lack of these ground conditions, they require to be
sheltered from the subtleties of law and the wiles of the more civilized
lawyers and traders of the plains.
-Anonymous
There should not be isolated communities and little republics, to be
perpetuated ever.
-Dr.K.M.Munshi
I think that we forget our responsibility, the trust that
is reposed in us by these(tribals) who require every help and protection not in
the shape of imposing ourselves upon them but in the sense of always stretching
out our hand of friendship and fellowship to let them lead their own lives.
-Jawaharlal Nehru
Indian Government concern about protecting and developing
tribals is largely rhetorical and bears little relationship to the practice of
national and state governments or parastatal organizations.
-Steve Jones,
in 'Tribal
Underdevelopment in India.'
UN Institute for
Economic Planning and Development
Seminar on Environment
and Poorly Integrated Societies, 1976.
Table of Contents
ACKNOWLEGEMENTS.........................5
PROLOGUE................................6
THE HISTORY OF
SCHEDULED AREAS IN ANDHRA PRADESH.......7
A PERSPECTIVE. .............................8
APPENDIX 1..............................20
EDUCATIONAL STTISTICS OF TRIBALS IN ANDHRA PRADESH(UPTO
1992)..20
APPENDIX 2..............................24
CHRONOLOGY OF PROTECTIVE LEGISLATION FOR SCHEDULED TRIBAL
AREAS OF ANDHRA PRADESH:
SHCEDULED AREAS, LAND, JUSTICE, RESERVATIONS............24
APPENDIX 3..............................27
PROGRESS OF RSTORATION OF LAND TO TRIBALS(TILL MARCH
1995)...27
THE CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK AND ITS DILUTION........28
THE FIFTH SCHEDULE..........................28
PRESIDENTIAL ORDERS AND THE GOVERNOR..............29
Legislative Constituencies: Necessity for
Reorganization...........30
Panchayati Raj Institutions and
Reservations.................32
Governors Reports to The President of India..................35
THE TRIBES ADVISORY COUNCEL(TAC).................39
THE JUDICIARY.............................41
APPENDIX 1..............................53
ETHNGRAPHIC INCONSITENCIES IN CENSUS RECORDS..........53
APPENDIX 2..............................55
DIFFERENT JUDGEMENTS ON TRIBAL STATUS.............55
APPENDIX 3..............................57
THE TRIBAL AND LAND ISSUES.....................58
ADMINISTRATIVE APATHY......................62
APPENDIX 1..............................81
CLASSIFICATION OF A-H RECORDS...................81
APPENDIX 2..............................82
LAWS APPLICABLE............................82
APPENDIX 3..............................83
ABSTRACT
OF LETTER FROM TCR & TI TO SECRETARY, SOCIAL WELFARE...83
THE PROBLEMS OF TRIBALS & MANAGEMENT OF FORESTS IN
EAST GODAVARI
DISTRICT......................84
APPENDIX 1...............................103
STATEMENT OF CMPARISON: MINIMUM WAGES, FSR AND AGREEMENT
RATES FOR AUNDINACIA (In Rs.)...................103
SPEEDY JUSTICE: UNFULFILLED ASPIRATIONS...........104
APPENDIX 1...............................123
COMPARISION OF FEATURES OF TELANGANA AND ANDHRA RULES...123
APPENDIX 2...............................124
PROVISIONS OF THE PANCHAYAT (EXTENSION TO THE SCHEDULED
AREAS) ACT, 1996..........................124
APPENDIX 3...............................125
APPENDIX 5...............................127
APPENDIX 6...............................129
LOK ADALAT MEETING OF 20.12.1992.................129
A SEARCH FOR ALTERNATIVES: THE SAKTI EXPERIENCE........130
LAUNCHING A
DEBATE.........................149
INDEX................................151
Prologue
"Must we weep our fathers bled?"
-Lord Byron,
in 'Prisoner of
Chillo'n
The legislation for protection of tribals and their
habitat are results of the enormous struggles tribals have put up, shedding
their blood confronting the offressive state.
All these years, in implementing the legislations and their processes,
we have cheated them and exploited their natural resources - land and forest -
through these very legislations. SAKTI,
over a decade has done its bit in checking this manipulation, recharging the
subjugated tribals to assert themselves and to fight for justice.
This document is intended to
sensitize the many actors and their institutions to reflect upon and also to
tribals unite and explore alternatives made appropriate for them.
Dr. Sivarama Krishna,
SAKTI.
Chapter 1
The
History of Scheduled Areas in Andhra Pradesh:
A Perspective
he Eastern Ghats from a series of scattered hills, with each
micro-habitat nurturing a culture, a lifestyle, a language. The people living in these hills have been
named Van Vasis or Girijans from
times immemorial; terminology such as 'tribes' and 'tribal' that are now
applied are contemporary innovations.
The Eastern Ghats are home to 63 such
tribal communities. Increasing mobility
over time resulted in a continuous interaction of differing cultures, marked
with antagonism when stronger groups of immigrants ventured to impose their sway
over these tribal groups. This constrained
the weaker native groups to either accede to the dominant immigrants or to flee
to remote areas.
The
tribal area of Andhra Pradesh comprise Srikakulam in the northeast to Adilabad
in the northwest, also encompassing a small pocked in Mahaboobnagar. They extend over 30,031 square kilometers,
constituting 11% of the total area of the State, with 6,232 villages in eight
districts. With the anomaly of three
Scheduled Tribes, the Yerukulas, Yanadis and Lambadas who customarily inhabit
plains villages, the remaining thirty forested hill tracts of the Scheduled
Areas. While land constitutes the principal prop of the tribals, forests
perform a indispensable role in their economy.
Forests provide them food in tubers, fruits, leaves, meat and medicinal
herbs to treat illnesses. They enjoyed
the privileges of tillage of land and collection of forest produce. It is when such privileges were interfered
with that the tribals revolted. The
British regime is replete with such tribal rising. The inability to read and write and indigence
of these tribals led plainsmen to exploit them.
The Government hence felt they should not be governed b th laws of the
land and that specific safeguards were imperative to protect them from
exploitation. Several Acts and Regulations
were thus passed from time to time.
Mr. George Russel, a member of the
Board of Revenue in the then Government of Madras was commissioned in 1822 to
analyze the socioeconomic conditions in the agency areas of Ganjam and
Vishakapatnam districts, in view of the unrest in Parlakimidi areas.
The Ganjam and Vishakapatnam Act, 1839 was the culmination of the Agent to the
State government. Since then, these
areas came to be conduct of the Agents and subordinate officers. This procedure failed to rectify the
situation in the tribal areas. The
Parlakimidi insurrection was succeeded by another rebellion in the area and
forces were deployed. This was followed
by an outbreak had to subdue an almost perpetual succession of
insurrections. During the rebellion in
the Rampa areas in 1879, the police became the specific target for tribal
wrath. The hillmen were tyrnnized by the
muttadars
and money lenders form the plains who advanced them very small sums, obtained 'ex-parte' decrees against them and occupied their lands. Trouble broke out and spread to the Golugonda
Hills of Vishakapatnam and Rekapalle of Bhadrachalam. Over five thousand square miles of forested
and hilly country was disturbed though there were no direct encounters. Police stations were attacked in isolated
areas and villagers assisted the rebels.
The Manasabadar
promulgated the widespread notion that all his acts, including the
collection of excessive rents, had authorization of the government. This spawned general distrust of the government
among the hill tribes. Government peons
and both police and forest officials began extracting cash and kind. When in 1878 the subrenters
levied a heavy tax in Rampa, the tribals rose in rebellion. Insurrections in Rampa and adjacent hill tracts
of Vishakapatnam and Jeypore continued to 1880-81. These fituris
wre carried on till 1924 under Alluri Sitarama Raju and others.
Discontent amongst the tribals
increased in the first decade of the twentieth century, when forest laws were
imposed. The Agency Tracts Interest and
Land Transfer Act, 1917 was passed to counteract the situation and to safeguard
the hill tribes from the plainsmen who had been exploiting them charging
exorbitant interests on debts and ultimately obtaining transfer of immovable
property from the hill tribes into their names.
The object was regulation of rates of interest and transfer of land in
agency tracts of the then Ganjam, Vishakapatnam and Godavari
districts. Under the Act, interest on
any debt or liability against a member of a hill tribe could not exceed 24% per
annum and interest could not exceed the principal. The act annulled amount interest or any
collateral benefit against members of hill tribes. All transfers of immovable property, except
those favoring another member of a hill tribe, lacking prior written assent of
the Agent or any prescribed officer were made null and void. Authorities under the Act were conferred
power to expulse any person holding such property. Suits against members of hill tribes following
the coming into force of the Act could be instituted only in agency
Courts. The Agency Rules were framed in
1924, prescribing procedural mechanisms for the administration of civil justice
in agency tracts. Courts having
jurisdiction outside agency tracts would have no jurisdiction over immovable
property within the Agency tracts and objections could be appealed against only
in the High Court. The Governor, under
the supervision of the Governor - General, legislated for these underdeveloped
areas till the passing of the Government of India Act, 1935. The Governor - General was authorized to
direct the full or partial application of any Act of the Indian Legislature to
the agency areas. The administration of
the agency areas was thus a direct responsibility of the Governor, acting as
the Agent of the Governor - General .
The Government of India Act, 1935 provided that no law in force in the
country was germane (to agency areas) unless the Governor - General in Council
pronounced its applicability. Section 92
of the Act also authorized the Governor to make regulations for the peace and
prosperity of the area or a partially excluded area. The Constitution of India, which came into
force in 1950, laid down that the executive power of a State in regard to
Scheduled Areas is subject to the provisions of the 5th
Schedule. This empowered the Governor,
to direct by public notification
"notwithstanding
anything in the Constitution, that any particular Act of Parliament or of the
Legislature of the State shall not apply to a Scheduled Area or any part
thereof in the State, or shall apply with such exceptions and modifications as
he may specify in the notification and any such direction may be given with
retrospective effect."
While the 1935
Act stipulated a Special Notification to extend any act to the Scheduled areas,
the Constitution of India has reversed this.
In the absence of any Notification by the Governor, all laws and Acts
are applicable to Scheduled Areas.
There was
unrest in agency areas in the erstwhile Hyderabad State
resulting in Babjhery insurrection in 1940's.
The unrest was essentially due to alienation of tribal land to
non-tribals and exploitation by moneylenders, forest and revenue Officials. The
Police opened fire at Jodeghat
killing many Gond tribals. Professor
Haimendorf, the Austrian born English anthropologist was invited by the Nizam's
Government to research the reasons for the tribal unrest. The Nizam Government passed the Tribal Area
Regulation in 1946. This Regulation provided for notification of
tribal areas in the erstwhile Hyderabad
State on the lines of agency tracts in
the then Madras
province. The District Collector was
designated as the Agent and special Social Service Officers were commissioned
as Assistant Agents to work in the notified tribal areas. Absolute ban was imposed on the grant of pattas
over any land in notified tribal areas to a non-tribal. The civil, revenue and criminal jurisdictions
were vested in the Agent or Assistant Agent.
Prohibition was imposed on unlicensed money lenders. A list of tribal groups and tribal areas was
notified in the Telangana Area.
Permanent alienation of agricultural lands in the entire Telangana
Region, including the notified tribal areas, was prohibited unless prior written
permission from the Collector was obtained under Section 47 of the Hyderabad
Tenancy Act. Rule 42 of the Notified
Tribal Areas Rules issued under the 1949 Regulation, took away the jurisdiction
of Revenue Officers in notified tribal areas and vested them in the Agent and
Assistant Agents.
Following
the coming into force of the Constitution of India the notified tribal areas in
Telangana Region and the partially in the Andhra Region came to be known as
'Scheduled Areas' under Scheduled Areas(part A & B States) Order,
1950. Under part 5(2) of the Fifth
Schedule, the Governor moved the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer
Regulation(APLTR), 1959, repealing the Agency Tracts Interest and Land Transfer
Act 1917. The APLTR came into force on
4.3.1959 in the Scheduled Areas of Srikakulam, Vishakapatnam, East Godavari
including Bhadrachalam Division and West Godavari
and was extended to the Scheduled Areas of the Telangana region by Regulation
11 of 1963 with effect from 1-12-1963, repealing the Hyderabad Tribal Areas
Regulation of 1949. Under this
Regulation, any transfer of land by a Scheduled Tribe to anybody other than a
member of Scheduled Tribe in the Scheduled areas was null and void. The Agent or the Agency Divisional Officer
could restore property transferred in violation of this regulation to the
transferor or his heir. Land situated in
the Scheduled areas and owned by a member of Scheduled Tribe could not be
attached and sold in execution of a money decree.
However,
despite the Regulation, transfers from tribals to non-tribals were effected as
no absolute ban on transfer by circumventing the laws existed. The illiterate tribals too, could not present
evidence of infraction of the Regulation.
Most lands of tribals were under lease or mortgage to non-tribal, and
ultimately culminated in transfer of ownership rights. The validity of the Regulation of 1959 was
challenged in the Andhra Pradesh High Court.
The Division Bench of the Court, in their judgement on 17.9.1969, upheld
the validity of the Regulation and dismissed the Writ Petition with costs. Although the Regulation was passed in 1959,
the rules under it were not framed until 1969; and special machinery for
implementation of the Regulation was contrived only in 1976.
Exploitation
of tribals by a large number of immigrant non-tribals, alienation of tribal
land to non-tribals, and money lending by non-tribals were the primary reasons
for tribal discontent and the naxalite insurrection in the Srikakulam agency in
the 1970's. To thwart any further
alienation of tribal land to non-tribals living in Scheduled areas, the Andhra
Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer (Amendment) Regulation, 1970 was
passed. The amended Regulation
prohibited transfer of land, excepting in favor of tribals. Additionally, the regulation divested the
Agent of authority to permit tribals transfer to their lands. A rule was also incorporated, stating "where
a non-tribals is in possession of land in the Scheduled Areas, he or his
predecessors in interest shall be deemed to have acquired it through transfer
from a tribal." Consequently, the onus
was on the non-tribal to demonstrate that he acquired the land lawfully.
Partitions and devolution by succession, however, were permitted. If a
non-tribal was unable to sell his land to tribal on reasonable terms, it was
open to him to relinquish the land to the Government, which would then be
obliged to acquire it on payment of appropriate compensation in accordance with
Section 10 of the Andhra Pradesh Ceiling on Agriculture Holdings Act,
1961. An amendment was made in 1971
enabling tribals and non-tribals in agency areas to mortgage without possession
any immovable property (situated in the Scheduled areas) to a cooperative bank
or any other financial Institution approved by the State Government. Subsequently, the 1978 amendment of the 1970
Regulation declared all offenses (under this regulation) as cognizable and
provided for a penalty of one year rigorous imprisonment of fine upto Rs.2000.
The
Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer (Amendment) Regulation I of 1970
was challenged in the High Court, which dismissed the Writ Petition with costs.
The non-tribal petitioners then preferred a Civil Appeal to the Supreme Court,
which delivered judgement in July 1988 dismissing the appeals. The Court observed that all land in the
tribal areas originally belonged to the tribals, and non-tribals, in search of
land and new economic possibilities, infiltrated into tribal areas. The economically advanced and politically
more powerful non-tribals triggered a struggle for land in which aboriginal
tribes were usually the losers and deprived of their ancestral land, turned
into impoverished landless laborers. The Supreme Court further observed:
"the change of ownership was the
result of exploitation arising in the context of dubious and unconscionable
money lending operations the course of trade.
Transfer by non-tribal to non-tribal would bot diminish the pool and
would maintain status-quo. It would be
unjust, unfair and highly unreasonable merely to freeze the situation instead
of reversing the injustice and restoring the status quo ante. It would be
adding insult to injury to impose such a disability on the tribals (the victims
of oppression and exploitation themselves) and discriminate against them in
this regard whilst leaving the non-tribals to thrive on the fruits of their
exploitation at the cost of tribals."
The non-tribals population in
the Scheduled areas expanded from 9 lakhs to 14 lakhs between 1971-81 but tribal
population declined from 50% to 47%. The Tribes Advisory Council (TAC),
in their meeting held in 1984 recommended retrospective effect to APLTR 1959
from 1917 in the Andhra Region and from 1949 in the Telangana Region. The TAC meetings were held 5 times, and on
29-03-1988, the request of non-tribals, to amend Regulation 1 of 1970 to
facilitate transfer of land from one non-tribal to another non-tribal was
rejected. On 23-12-1988, the majority of
non-official members recommended repeal of the Regulation 1 of 1970 to
facilitate the non-tribals to sell their lands to non-tribals.
With
the vast progress in communications and facilities in the Scheduled Areas,
repeal of 1/70 would have to effect of opening up flood gates, resulting
further exploitation of the tribals.
Large
number of tribals practice agriculture as share croppers and tenants on maktha
and other intermediary tenures. Repeal of 1/70 would result in these lands
being sold away by non-tribal landlords to other non-tribals, and eviction of
tribals. Marginalization would push them further into forests; and eviction of
tribals. Marginalization would push them
further into forests; confrontations with forest officials would ensue. Inasmuch as the fact that the tribal land
base is undergoing a process of eorsion due to belated and apathetic execution
of land laws in Scheduled areas, it is obvious that the proposed repeal is
altogether unjustified.
The
notification recognizing the Lambadas
as a Scheduled Tribe in 1976 appended over a million people to the numbers of
the Scheduled Tribes. Economically
stronger, politically articulate and highly enterprising as the Lambadas are,
their inclusion has further diminished the finite economic, educational and
employment benefits available to the tribal. Considerable discontent, especially among
tribal youth has resulted.
Mobile
Sub Divisional Magistrates(MSDMs) were appointed in 1974 in place of Sub
Divisional Magistrates(SDMs). While a
new Criminal Procedure Code(CrPC) was introduced all over the country in 1974,
the old CrPC, by a Special Notification, continued to remain in force in the
Scheduled Areas of the State. While more
and more posts in the Tribal Welfare and other government departments were
reserved for tribals in 1987, these were monopolized by a few relatively
advanced tribes. The year also saw the
passing of the Andhra Pradesh Mandal Praja Parishad Act, which failed to take
into account the contiguity of tribal areas.
Likewise, the Karshaka Parishad Ordinance of 1988 ignored provision of
reservation for Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes. The reorganization of agency areas into Zilla
Praja Parishad Territorial Constituencies and Mandal Praja Parishad Territorial
Constituencies following the 73rd and 74th Amendments tot
he Panchayati Raj Act in 1995 threw open constituencies with tribal majority to
other backward classes. Panchayat
elections all over the Scheduled Areas were quashed in the ensuing litigation. Now, following the recommendations of the
Bhuria Committee, the Provisions of the Panchayats (Extension to the Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996 has been
passed, allowing proportional representation to non-tribals, with 50%
reservation for tribals in addition to posts of Panchayat Presidents. As to how the State would operationalise the
provisions of the Act, which make consonance to customary laws, social and
religious practices and traditions of community resource management mandatory
in State legislation on Panchayats, when no other government department other
than Panchayat Raj institutions fall under the purview of the Act remains a
wide open question.
The
period between 1960 and 1990 saw the conceding of several mining leases to
non-tribals. Vast tracts of forests in
the agency areas were laid open to the ravages of graphite and laterite
mining. Despite cancellation of these
leases following litigation in 1993, the government approached the Tribes
Advisory Council to seek ratification for the issue of such leases and licenses. This approach was, however rejected twice by
the Council. The High Court subsequently
entered the arena again, compounding matters with a judgement in a related
mining case that the government cannot be equated with a person, and as such, is free to grant leases. The Supreme Court has
since stayed this order.
All
the legislation and land restoration notwithstanding, land remains a burning
issue in the agency areas. The recent
appointment of a Settlement Officer in the West Godavari District to settle lands of non-tribals is
adequate evidence of this. The
restoration has been minimal and newspaper columns continue to overflow with
reports of taut situations and tribal - non-tribal conflict. New and ingenious methods of occupying land
are being used by non-tribals besides the age old methods, while the government
remains blind to these happenings, thus abetting such manipulation.
In
the recent tribal land controversy in Kerala,
the Governor there returned the impugned Bill; the second time received and
forwarded it to the President. All state
governments await the President's decision with bated breath to follow
suit. The press has reported that the
Government of India filed an affidavit in the High Court of Kerala that the
proposed amendment is bad in law. Will the long suffering tribal finally find
redress? Or will he be hounded out his lands and to eventual extinction? Only
time will tell.
C O N C E PT U AL P E RS P EC T I V E S : T R I B A L vis-à-vis S
T A T E
Appendix 1
Educational Statistics of Tribals
in Andhra Pradesh (upto 1992)
Table 1
|
Sl.No.
|
Tribe
|
Total Population
|
% to total S.T. matriculate & above
|
Matriculates & above S.T.s
|
% Total
|
|
1.
|
Andh
|
5994
|
0.2
|
19
|
0.1
|
|
2.
|
Bagatha
|
87994
|
2.8
|
316
|
2.0
|
|
3.
|
Bhil
|
251
|
0.008
|
9
|
0.06
|
|
4.
|
Chenchu
|
28434
|
0.9
|
107
|
0.7
|
|
5.
|
Godabas
|
27732
|
0.9
|
62
|
0.4
|
|
6.
|
Gond
|
169477
|
5.3
|
372
|
2.4
|
|
7.
|
Gondu
|
8971
|
0.3
|
229
|
1.5
|
|
8.
|
Hill Reddis
|
398
|
0.01
|
20
|
0.1
|
|
9.
|
Jatapas
|
86506
|
2.7
|
212
|
1.3
|
|
10.
|
Kammara
|
36548
|
1.2
|
109
|
0.7
|
|
11.
|
Kattunayakan
|
399
|
0.01
|
7
|
0.04
|
|
12.
|
Kolam
|
21842
|
0.7
|
63
|
0.4
|
|
13.
|
Konda Doras
|
139238
|
4.4
|
268
|
1.7
|
|
14.
|
Konda Kapus
|
28033
|
0.9
|
963
|
6.1
|
|
15.
|
Konda Reddis
|
54685
|
1.7
|
239
|
1.5
|
|
16.
|
Khonds
|
39408
|
1.2
|
28
|
0.2
|
|
17.
|
Kotia
|
31466
|
1.0
|
342
|
2.2
|
|
18.
|
Koya
|
413
|
11.3
|
17
|
7.1
|
|
19.
|
Malis
|
2467
|
0.08
|
16
|
0.1
|
|
20.
|
Manna Doras
|
18964
|
0.6
|
52
|
0.33
|
|
21.
|
Mukha Doras
|
17456
|
0.5
|
22
|
0.14
|
|
22.
|
Nayaks
|
6532
|
0.2
|
9
|
0.06
|
|
23.
|
Pardhan
|
16023
|
0.5
|
136
|
0.86
|
|
24.
|
Poorja
|
16479
|
0.5
|
8
|
0.05
|
|
25.
|
Reddi Dhora
|
5286
|
0.2
|
12
|
0.08
|
|
26.
|
Rona, Rena
|
233
|
0.007
|
4
|
0.03
|
|
27.
|
Savaras
|
82101
|
2.6
|
134
|
0.9
|
|
28.
|
Sugalis
|
1158342
|
36.5
|
4009
|
25.5
|
|
29.
|
Thoti
|
1416
|
0.04
|
17
|
0.1
|
|
30.
|
Valmiki
|
42944
|
1.4
|
550
|
3.5
|
|
31.
|
Yanadi
|
320444
|
10.1
|
1270
|
8.1
|
|
32.
|
Yerukula
|
300557
|
9.5
|
4308
|
27.4
|
|
|
Total S.Ts in A.P.
|
31,76,001
|
100%
|
15,734
|
100%
|
Table 2
Community Wise
Admissions into Polytechnic Courses
During 1989-90,
1990-91 and 1991-92
|
Sl.No.
|
Community
|
1989-90
|
1990-91
|
1991-92
|
|
1.
|
Lambada
|
351
|
378
|
326
|
|
2.
|
Yerukala
|
211
|
200
|
215
|
|
3.
|
Koya
|
42
|
35
|
8
|
|
4.
|
Yanadi
|
63
|
42
|
49
|
|
5.
|
Bagatha
|
18
|
14
|
5
|
|
6.
|
Gadaba
|
-
|
-
|
2
|
|
7.
|
Jatapa
|
4
|
3
|
6
|
|
8.
|
Kapu Savara
|
-
|
6
|
5
|
|
9.
|
Valmiki
|
30
|
21
|
12
|
|
10.
|
Konda Reddi
|
2
|
2
|
4
|
|
11.
|
Konda Dora
|
14
|
11
|
4
|
|
12.
|
Savara
|
-
|
-
|
1
|
|
13.
|
Kammara
|
12
|
1
|
4
|
|
14.
|
Naikpodu
|
8
|
6
|
1
|
|
15.
|
Gond
|
11
|
-
|
1
|
|
16.
|
Pardhan
|
6
|
2
|
40
|
|
17.
|
Bentho-Oriya
|
4
|
-
|
-
|
|
18.
|
Manne Dora
|
-
|
-
|
1
|
|
19.
|
Goudu
|
3
|
1
|
-
|
|
20.
|
Thoti
|
4
|
-
|
-
|
|
21.
|
Kuliya
|
-
|
-
|
1
|
|
22.
|
Holva
|
1
|
-
|
-
|
|
23.
|
Nayaka
|
6
|
-
|
-
|
|
24.
|
Chenchu
|
4
|
1
|
3
|
|
25.
|
Kotiya
|
-
|
-
|
1
|
|
|
Total
|
794
|
728
|
748
|
Table 3
Community Wise
Admissions into M.B.B.S. Courses
During 1989-90,
1990-91 and 1991-92
|
Sl.No.
|
Community
|
1989-90
|
1990-91
|
1991-92
|
|
1.
|
Lambada
|
32
|
28
|
30
|
|
2.
|
Yerukala
|
17
|
21
|
25
|
|
3.
|
Yanadi
|
4
|
7
|
1
|
|
4.
|
Koya
|
2
|
1
|
4
|
|
5.
|
Valmiki
|
2
|
-
|
1
|
|
6.
|
Bagatha
|
2
|
-
|
-
|
|
7.
|
Jatapa
|
1
|
1
|
-
|
|
8.
|
Godaba
|
1
|
-
|
-
|
|
9.
|
Konda Dora
|
-
|
1
|
-
|
|
10.
|
Bentho-Oriya
|
-
|
1
|
-
|
|
11.
|
Kotia
|
-
|
1
|
-
|
|
|
Total
|
61
|
61
|
61
|
Table 4
Community Wise
Admissions into B.E./B.Tech. Courses During 1989-90, 1990-91
and 1991-92
|
Sl.No.
|
Community
|
1989-90
|
1990-91
|
1991-92
|
|
1.
|
Lambada
|
88
|
99
|
106
|
|
2.
|
Yerukala
|
52
|
52
|
53
|
|
3.
|
Yanadi
|
5
|
13
|
12
|
|
4.
|
Koya
|
14
|
6
|
13
|
|
5.
|
Valmiki
|
6
|
4
|
1
|
|
6.
|
Konda Dora
|
4
|
3
|
4
|
|
7.
|
Bagatha
|
2
|
5
|
2
|
|
8.
|
Gond
|
1
|
1
|
4
|
|
9.
|
Japata
|
-
|
1
|
2
|
|
10.
|
Pardhan
|
1
|
-
|
-
|
|
11.
|
Bentho-Oriya
|
1
|
-
|
-
|
|
12.
|
Nayaka
|
-
|
1
|
-
|
|
13.
|
Kapu Savara
|
-
|
-
|
1
|
|
14.
|
Gadaba
|
-
|
-
|
1
|
|
|
Total
|
174
|
185
|
199
|
Table 5
Community Wise
Admissions into B.V.Sc./B.Sc. Agriculture During 1989-90, 1990-91 and 1991-92
|
Sl.No.
|
Community
|
1989-90
|
1990-91
|
1991-92
|
|
1.
|
Lambada
|
24
|
23
|
23
|
|
2.
|
Yerukala
|
10
|
13
|
12
|
|
3.
|
Koya
|
4
|
3
|
3
|
|
4.
|
Yanadi
|
2
|
3
|
3
|
|
5.
|
Valmiki
|
3
|
4
|
1
|
|
6.
|
Bagatha
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
|
7.
|
Jatapa
|
1
|
-
|
2
|
|
8.
|
Kotiya
|
1
|
-
|
-
|
|
9.
|
Pardhan
|
-
|
-
|
1
|
|
10.
|
Mali Savara
|
-
|
1
|
-
|
|
|
Total
|
47
|
47
|
47
|
Appendix 2
Chronology of Protective
legislation for Scheduled Tribal Areas of
Andhra Pradesh: Scheduled Areas,
Land, Justice, Reservations
Table 1
|
Year
|
Legislation/Rule
|
Comments
|
|
Scheduled Area
|
|
1839
|
Ganjam &
Vishakapatnam Act
|
Tribal areas were
removed from the purview of general laws and the Collector was clothed with
extraordinary powers for administration of criminal and civil justice by
declaring him as Agent to the Governor in Madras Presidency.
|
|
1874
|
The Schedule
Districts Act
|
Tribal areas were
notified as Scheduled Districts all over India
|
|
1918
|
Rules under the
Agency Tracts Interest and Land Transfer Act
|
Tribes were notified
|
|
1946
|
The Andhra
(Telangana Tribal Areas) Regulation 1359 Fasli
|
|
|
1947, June30
|
|
Deleting certain
villages in West Godavari agency area,
Visakha agency area
|
|
1949
|
The notified tribal
Areas Rules
|
|
|
1950
|
The Constitution
(Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes Order)
The Scheduled
Areas(Part-A & B, States) Order
|
|
|
1951
|
Madras Scheduled Areas (Cesser) Order, 51
|
Deleting certain
villages in the Vishaka agency areas
|
|
Land
|
|
1917
|
The Agency Tracts
Interests and Land Transfer Act
|
To check usurious
money lending and land alienation in favour of members other than hill tribes
in the Agency tracts. Under this Act,
a non-tribal could purchase land from a tribal only with permission of the
Agent.
|
|
1959
|
Andhra Pradesh
Scheduled Areas
Land Transfer
Regulation
|
Purchase land from a
tribal is prohibited
Suo moto powers were given to authorities for the first time
|
|
1969
|
G.O.Ms. No.971 dated
7.10.1969
|
Prohibiting
assignment of land to non-tribals.
Land less poor tribals in possession of Government lands to the extent
of 2.5 acres wet, 5 acres of dry land for a period of net less than 10 years
should not be evicted.
|
|
1970
|
Amendment to 1959
reg.
|
Absolute prohibition
on transfer of land other than to scheduled tribe even by non-tribals
Onus of proof on
non-tribal
|
|
1971
|
G.O.Ms.No.41
|
Partial modification
of G.O.971 in case of landless poor harijans, the condition of 10 years
period stipulated therein need not be insisted upon.
|
|
1974
|
G.O.Ms.No.634, dated
19 August 1974
G.O.Ms.No.951
|
Acquisition of land
sites for provision of houses to harijans
|
|
1978
|
Further Amendment to
LTR
|
All offenses under
the regulation made cognizable with 1 year rigorous imprisonment
|
|
1990
|
G.O.Ms.No.741 dated
9.8.1990
|
Delegation of
Director of Settlement Post to the Collector under 2/69 Regulation
|
|
1996
|
|
Appointment of
Settlement officer under 2/70 Regulation to expedite claims of non-tribals in
the agency areas of West Godavari
|
|
Justice
|
|
1924
|
|
Agency rules were
issued for the guidance of the Agents to the Governor. Rules are framed by Madras Government.
|
|
1949
|
The Notified tribal
Areas Rules
|
Rules are framed by Hyderabad State (Telangana Areas)
|
|
1963
|
1959 Rules replace
1949 Rules
|
|
|
1974
|
Old CrPC continued
|
|
|
1990
|
Mobile Sub
Divisional Magistrates appointed
|
|
|
Reservations
|
|
Jobs
|
Political
|
|
1936 Reservations
for jobs
|
|
|
|
1963 Reservations
for Legislative Assemblies and Lok Sabha
Reservations for
Panchayati Raj posts
|
|
1986 100%
Reservations for certain categories of jobs in Tribal Welfare Department and
50% reservations in other departments
Jobs of Village
Administrative officers reserved (G.O.Ms.No.272 Social Welfare Department, 29
Oct.1986)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 2
Abolition of
Intermediary Tenures and Ryotwari Settlement in Scheduled Areas
|
1969
|
The Andhra Pradesh
Mutta & Mahals (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari Regulation)
The abolition of
intermediary tenures such as muttas
and mahals
|
|
|
1970
|
Andhra Pradesh
Scheduled Area Ryotwari Settlement Regulation
|
The regulation
applies to the land other than those comprised within muttas and mahals.
Conferred pattas to all Ryots in the erstwhile estates
|
|
1990
|
Delegation of DOS
powers to Collectors (2/69 Regulation)
|
|
|
1996
|
Appointment to
Settlement Officer under 2/70 to expedite the claims of non-tribals in the
agency areas
|
|
|
|
|
No.
|
Extent in Acres
|
|
01.
|
Non-tribals occupied
tribal land
|
|
|
|
02.
|
Cases
|
|
|
|
03.
|
Cased disposed off
|
|
|
|
04.
|
Case which land
restored to tribals
|
|
|
|
05.
|
Cases pending
|
|
|
* as per Adangal
Source:
Appendix 3
Progress of Restoration of Land
to Tribals (till March 1995)
|
Sl.
|
Description
|
Figures
|
|
01.
|
Total No. of
Non-Tribal Occupations as per adangal
|
63,004
|
|
02.
|
Extent of land
covered under 1. above
|
2,60,522.84
Acres
|
|
03.
|
No. of cases in
which enquiries are initiated
|
56,544
|
|
04.
|
Extent of land
covered under 3. above
|
2,46,002.51
Acres
|
|
05.
|
No. of cases
disposed off
|
47,803
|
|
06.
|
Extent of land
covered under 5. above
|
2.15,435.02
Acres
|
|
07.
|
No. of cases in
which land was restored to tribals
|
22,614
|
|
08.
|
Extent of land
restored to tribals
|
91,937,19 Acres
|
|
09.
|
No. of cases pending
disposal
|
11,482
|
|
10.
|
Extent of land
covered under 9. above
|
33,430.47 Acres
|
