CHAPTER V

THE DARJEELING GORKHA HILL COUNCIL (DGHC): ANALYSIS OF ITS

ROLE AND WORKING AND OTHER RELATED ISSUES

The Tripartite Agreement between the Centre, State and GNLF brought

a relief to the hills of Darjeeling. The Agreement showed that in India,

democratic values and processes are widely prevalent and the genuine

aspirations of the people can never be crushed by the government. Though

the Gorkha people's main demand, creation of a separate state, Gorkhaland,

could not be fulfilled, Ghisingh and his men seemed satisfied with the creation

of a semi-autonomous Darjeeling Gorkha Hill Council. It was a new kind of

politico-administrative institutional framework. A framework now existed to

enable the Gorkhas to realize their aspirations, especially those pertaining to

their identity, without disturbing the parameters of West Bengal. They seemed

satisfied with their identification as Gorkhas of Indian origin. "We will no longer

be dismissed as foreigners. We have found an identity, we are first class

citizens."1.

One of the reasons for using the term "Gorkhas" was to differentiate

themselves from the Nepalese of Nepal. The Indian Nepalis and the Nepalese

of Nepal are identical having same names, physical features, traditions,

culture and language with some dialectical variations.

ANALYSIS OF THE ROLE AND FUNCTIONING OF THE DGHC

It was the triangular talks held between the Centre, State and GNLF

that resulted in the working agreement of the DGHC administration. The

DGHC elections were held on 13th December 1988, and the Council Office

was opened on 1 ylh January 1989. Ghisingh assumed office as Chief

Executive Councillor on 18th January 1989. The DGHC would be the apex

body and would replace the existing Zilla Parishad. It would have

supervisionary powers over the Panchayat Samitis and Municipal bodies in

the Darjeeling hill sub-divisions. The DGHC would have two arms namely the

127

General Council and Executive Council. The General Council consists of 42

members, amongst whom 28 are elected and 14 are nominated. The

nominated members were to consist of members of Parliament, MLAs from

Darjeeling, Kalimpong and Kurseong and the Chairman of Municipalities of

Hill Areas, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Women. There was

apprehension against the concept of nomination of members in the Executive

Council, thinking that it was a means to control over the Council from withi"n by

the State Government. Later on, the DGHC (Amendment) Act 1994 brought

some changes (Section 5 (1A)) in the Council. Amongst the 14 members, 11

were to be nominated by the Government and 3 by the Chairman. The

General Council was to formulate the Integrated Development Plan and to

implement schemes and programmes for the development of the hill areas,

but was to work within the framework of general policy and direction of the

State Government. The executive council would also be there and chairman

and vice-chairman of the general council would be ex-officio-members of the

executive council with the chairman of the general council functioning as the

Chief Executive Councillor.

The DGHC was formed under the state legislature and not by any

statute in the Parliament. No part of the Constitution was amended to include

the DGHC and no part of the Indian Constitution talks about it. The DGHC

acts an agent of the State Government of West Bengal, which is like the

Central government. It has the power to prepare development plans and

budgets for the hill areas, but all these have to be approved by the State

Government first. Moreover, they can formulate such plans taking into

consideration various national and state five year plans.

As regards to funds, the Hill Council under Act of 1988 has meager

sources of revenue. The Council has the power to levy (1) Fees on boats and

vehicles , (2)Fees for providing sanitary arrangements at such places of

worship or pilgrimage or Fairs or Melas within its jurisdiction , (3) Fees for

licenses , (4) water and lighting rate . There is a fund called Council Fund

under the General Council to perform various functions as laid down in the

Act. All funds received by the General Fund are credited to the Council Fund.

Funds are given both by the Centre and State .There are three methods of

getting funds, namely, assigned revenue, shared revenue and grants-in-aid,

128

but the Council is not empowered to expand out of the council funds, unless

such expenditure is covered by a current budget grant. "Ghisingh observed

that total grant committed by Central and State Governments was to the

extent of Rs 260 crores during 5 years in 1989-90, allocation was Rs 60

crores. At the end of the financial year, Rs 37 crores were made available to

DGHC and this fell far short of the commitments."2.

Moreover all funds have to flow through the State Government

including the Central funds. Like the Vlth Schedule Autonomous District

Councils, the DGHC cannot derive any fund from the Consolidated Fund of

the state. Article 280 deals with finance but it does not say anything about the

funds for the Autonomous District Council. Funds are given by the Centre to

the States from Consolidated Fund but there is no accountability on how or

who distributes the funds of the Autonomous District Council.

Regarding the personnel of DGHC, there are:

1. Personnel directly recruited by the DGHC,

2. Personnel who have been transferred from Darjeeling Zilla Parishad,

3. Personnel of different service cadres and existing staff of the different

state government departments transferred to DGHC,

4. Officers of lAS, WBCS cadre and other service cadres working in the

DGHC on deputation basis, but the DGHC can appoint officers and

employees only with the approval of the government. It can appoint

employees only equivalent to groups C and D of the government.

There are 23 departments under the DGHC like Public Health (other

than TB sanitarium), Engineering, Irrigation, Tourism, Public Works

Department (Road Construction), Education (other than Higher Education),

Fisheries, Animal Resources, Agriculture , Informal and Cultural Affairs (only

Drama and Song Unit and Nepali Printing Press), Forest (other than Reserve

Forests), Labour (only Industrial Training Institutes, Tung and Creche

Houses). However, mixed personnel in the functioning of the DGHC have

brought more confusion.

The presence of two administrative and planning units in Darjeeling

have been bringing more inefficiency than development. Tourism for example,

has been given to the DGHC but there is also the West Bengal Tourism

Development Corporation. In case of land, the DGHC is given the power of

129

allotment, occupation, use or setting apart of land other than land under

reserved forest, but activities with respect to land reforms and land acquisition

are with the state. Tea gardens too have been exempted from the DGHC

authority and also the cantonment areas of Sukna, Lebong and Jalapahar.

The State Government was also forced to open a separate PWD for the

Council because the plains PWD employees working in Darjeeling and

Nargrakatta refused to work under the Council.

The DGHC has brought about some integrated development plans for

the hill areas, which include road construction, tourism, electricity and primary

education. The following data shows some of the electrification programmes

undertaken by the DGHC. It has helped to bring electrification to various

villages.

The first scheme was the District Planning Scheme (DPS) where 90

lakhs was sanctioned by West Bengal Electricity Board (WSEB). In the

second scheme known as the first phase, 19 Gram Panchayats (GP) were

included where 03 crores were sanctioned for electrification. In the third

scheme called the second phase, the West Bengal State Electricity Board

sanctioned 06 crores to the DGHC which covered 44 gram panchayats for

electrification. In the fourth scheme called the third phase, the West Bengal

Rural Electricity Development Corporation sanctioned 08 crores which

covered 37 gram panchayats.

This phase is also called the 2002-03 project and covers the following

gram panchayats and villages:-

Pokrebong GP : ( Sukhiapokhri Block) (Tamkule Rai gaon ) (under Avon

Group Tea Estate)

Raibong Tola, Gorkha Tola and Lower Thakuri gaon.

Rangbang GP: (Sukhia Block)- Rangbang basti, Gairigaon, Kotwaligaon.

Sukhia GP Block (Darjeeling Block) : Pubong Phatak in Alubari, Lepcha gaon.

Lodhama GP (Rimbick Block) : Mane dara gaon, Newar gaon, Rajbhir gaon,

Dhanbir gaon.

Sonada GP (Sukhiapohkri block): Raidhura (under Rangmuk Tea Estate).

Kurseong;

Gayabari GP (Kurseong Block): Semanatar basti, Lower Khundrukey basti,

Kopche basti.

130

Seton GP (Kurseong Block): Ghaleytar, Shelpu basti, Lower Turuk basti,

Upper and Middle Mamring basti.

Mirik:

Soureni GP (Mirik Block): Naole to Chotta Tingling Tea Gardens, Dara gaon

and Gairi gaon.

Kalimpong:

Pabringtar GP (Kalimpong Block): Deorali, Ratay, Tamyang.

Samther Basti. (Kalimpong Block: Lower Menchu.

Gorubathan GP (Gorubathan Block): Phaphar Kheti, Kwapani, Sherpatar,

Allaygaon 1&11

Rongo GP (Jaldhaka Block):

Naxalbasmey, 52 Block Dara gaon, 46 Block, Kalishar, Upper gaon and

Lower gaon, Maid an gaon, Bikh Bare, Ryang Bari, Mini gaon, Sundar gaon.

Sansey GP (Kalimpong Block):

Lower Mansong basti, Barmek Cinchona Plantation.

SOURCE: Power Department, DGHC Scheme, Oarjeeling.

In the field work survey conducted in various towns and villages in

Darjeeling, Kalimpong and Kurseong, the respondents were asked whether

they felt that the Gorkhaland agitation was productive with the formation of the

DGHC. 38% of the answered in positive, but 63% answered in the negative.

Amongst those who said "yes",

16% felt that economic conditions have improved.

56% said that after the formation of the DGHC they have greater say in

political decisions and 24% felt it has given political identity to Indian Nepalis.

Amongst those who answered in the negative, none said the earlier

system was better.

16.6% said there is not much change in economic conditions.

17.3 % felt that social conditions have deteriorated.

14.6 % said there is more partiality and favouritism,

28 % agreed on all the above three factors i.e. there is not much change in

economic conditions, social conditions have deteriorated and there is partiality

and favouritism after the formation of the OGHC and 23 % agreed on all the

above four factors.

131

Regarding another question i.e : Do you think you have benefited from

the DGHC? , asked to the respondents, 38 % answered in the positive

whereas 63% answered negatively.

Amongst those who said they (themselves as individuals) have

benefited from DGHC, 2.2 %said they have because they got loans, 68.2 %

said in terms of employment, 26.6 % in terms of education and scholarship

they had got from DGHC, and 2.2 % cited other reasons like they have got a

chance to contest in the DGHC elections.

Asked whether their village or region has improved in terms of any

available socio-economic amelilities from the DGHC, 50% answered in the

positive, 50 % answered in the negative.

Amongst those in the former group, 30 % said their village has

benefited because of construction of roads, 05 % said their village has

benefited because of supply of drinking water, 10 % said there has been

supply of electricity, 45 % said that DGHC has established schools in their

area, whereas 10 % cited other reasons like the construction of small bridges

by the DGHC in their villages (eg. In Ngassey village), made drains and wells

in landslide prone areas.

Regarding establishment of schools, it was learnt that DGHC had

made efforts to establish Madhyamik Sikshya Kendra (eg; Soreng village)

Sishu Siksha Kendra (Lodhama village). The people in various villages ( eg:

Chungthung, Chegra, Arobutiya, Lower Bong basti, Soreng, Bijanbari and

Upper Ecchey (KPG I) ) said that in various schools, mid-day meals were also

provided to children.

lnspite of some positive responses, the DGHC has been criticized of

misusing the development funds. The DGHC under GNLF has no doubt

constructed roads but there are complaints of it been carried out in haphazard

manner. It also has been said that no open tender has been issued and no

proper estimates have been carried out in handing of contracts. Moreover the

contracts to construct roads and other development work only go to a

particular section of the people and the majority of the people still suffer from

deprivation and oppression.

The Communist Party Revolutionary Marxist (CPRM), which is a

member of the opposition party, the People's Democratic Front, has brought

132

various allegations against the DGHC under the GNLF. "While the DGHC

spent 32 lakhs to construct a bridge, 16ft by 60ft near Mungpo, a similar

bridge. 20ft by 60ft was built by the PWD near Garidhuri for 08 lakhs.

Disbursing Rs 28.01 lakhs in April,1992 for construction of Raidhap drinking

water project. Work order issued to a contractor in Februar;y 1992 for laying of

pipes at Chhoto Manzing at an estimated cost of Rs.07.69 lakhs. The work,

which was scheduled to be completed within 120 days started only in 1996.

Meanwhile, material to the tune of Rs.04.58 lakhs was sanctioned during the

no work period".3.

The Chairman of the DGHC complained that the Left Front

Government was not assisting it properly for the implementation of various

programmes. He stated that there were no administrative, legislative powers

and no politico-administrative freedom. Looking into the field of education, the

DGHC has been given executive powers in the primary, secondary and higher

secondary education, but it is the state government which still holds the reins

over the secondary and higher secondary education. It was mainly because of

this, that frequent conflicts arose between the State Government and DGHC.

Formerly the State Government had instituted the School Service

Commission (Hill Region) and the GNLF had welcomed it. The first SSC

examinations were conducted in the year 2000 and around 172 candidates

were empanelled, but later all appointments were blocked as the DGHC

demanded that the SSC (Hill Region) be completely handed over to them.

The candidates still await appointment and there are complaints that the

various posts can be obtained only by some party faithfuls, without

considering educational qualifications and experience. Recently, the SSC (Hill

Region) has been brought to an end by the government. Another complaint

has been launched recently against the DGHC educational department.

Funds worth 5.5 crores had been given for the implementation of Sarva

Siksha Abhiyan for the development of primary schools across the hills, but

none of the institutions have received the amount. Though documents show

that the money was released from the District Central Co-operative Bank

between December 4th 2004 and March 23rd 2005.4.

133

What the Council is demanding is that there has to be transfer of real

powers to the DGHC, adequate flow of funds and the implementation of the

Accord in totality.

The people in the hill areas seem dissatisfied with the running of the

DGHC because of its structural weakness, functional limitations and

operational disabilities. Moreover they complain that there is no transparency

in governance and no democracy in its functioning. The DGHC was formed

mainly to combat regionalism but the euphoria was too short lived. Autonomy

was given to the Darjeeling hills in the form of some autonomy to the DGHC

but this autonomy was only seen as the GNLF as a political party.

There is criticism against the autocratic way of functioning of the

political leadership. The economic condition of the people has not improved,

water shortage and bad roads remain a perennial problem in the hills. There

is wide scale unemployment, rampant corruption, oppression and deprivation.

The DGHC has failed to produce concrete results for the people at large. The

interests of the minority groups like the Lepchas, Bhutias and plainsmen have

not been met either. "The DGHC, has failed to energize the tribal society".5.

The people at the grass root level are still suffering. There has to be more

decentralization and devolution of powers. "Entitlement from below rather than

endowment from above must be the order of the day".6.

ELECTIONS OF THE DGHC

The elections of the DGHC showed overwhelming support to the

GNLF. The following tables support this view.

134

ELECTIONS FOR GENERAL COUNCIL OF DGHC (1989)

Candidate Elected Party Affiliation Name of Constituency Votes Polled

Shiv Kumar Lama GNLF Rimbick Lodhama 8406

K.B.Watter ----------- --CPI(M) ___ ·Pulbazar Bijanbari 6807

Padam Lama CPI(M) Chingtong Rishihaat 7836 '

Rudra K Pradhan GNLF Singamari Tukvar Valley 7195

NetraKumar Thakuria GNLF Lebong Valley 6420

Ram Prasad Waiba GNLF Darjeeling Sadar 9620

Lal Bahadur Gurung GNLF Ghoom Jorebungalow 10545

KB Rai GNLF Lopchu Peshek 9645

Kesha~ Ch. Tamang GNLF Takdah Teesta Valley NA

Binod Lama GNLF (INI) Mongpu Latpanchar 7540

Cheten Sherpa GNLF Sukhia Maneybhanjyang NA

Dipak Gurung GNLF Pokrebung NA

L.B.Rai GNLF Mirik Valley 5446

Subhash Ghisingh GNLF Panighata (Soureni Valley) NA

N.B. Pradhan GNLF Rangbull Dhotre Rangmuk 6062

NarBahadurKhawas GNLF Sonada Tung 4050

Nimcheki Pradhan GNLF Kurseong Town 6021

Hema Delma GNLF Pankhabari Gidapahar 18820

lndra Narayan Pradhan GNLF Tindharia Sukna 10025

Benjamin Bhutia GNLF Kalimpong Khasmahal NA

Dawa Sherpa GNLF Kalimpong Town (Dr.Grahams NA

Homes)

Bijoy Kumar Rai GNLF Bong Dungra 9082

Tshering Sherpa GNLF Gidabling Sinji NA

Dawa Pakhrin GNLF Lava Pedong NA

Chandra Kumar Pradhan GNLF Algarah 8081

!. Khus Narayan Subba GNLF Gorubathan 9257

Bhakta Kumar Jairu GNLF TodayTangta Jaldhaka 6085

Source: Office of the District Magistrate, Darjeeling.

135

ELECTION RESULTS FOR GENERAL COUNCIL OF DGHC (1994)

Candidate Elected Party Affiliation Name of Constituency Votes Polled

Shiv Kumar Rai GNLF Rimbick Lodhama 7810

Prakash Thung GNLF Pulbazar Bijanbari 6973

Padam Lama CPI(M) Chingtong Rishihaat 7136

R.K Pradhan GNLF Singamari Tukvar Valley 7195

Netra K.Thakuria GNLF Lebong Valley 4281

N.K.Kumai GNLF Darjeeling Sadar I 8445

Karna B. Gurung GNLF Darjeeling Sadar II 6521

Gopimaya Gurung GNLF Ghoom Jorebungalow 7488

R.B.Rai GNLF Lopchu Peshok 7835

Keshab Lama GNLF Takdah Teesta Valley NA

KB Gurung GNLF Mongpu Latpancher 6967

Cheten Sherpa GNLF Sukhia Maneybhanjyang NA

Oipak K.Gurung GNLF Pokrobong Nagri 9102

R.P.Waiba GNLF Mlirik Valley 2445

Subhas Ghisingh GNLF Soureni Valley NA

N.B. Pradhan GNLF Rangbull Dhotre Rangmuk 8042

NB Khawas GNLF Sonada Tung 8644

Pasang Bhutia Independent Kurseong Town 678

(supported by GNLF)

Hema Lama GNLF Onkhabari Gedhapahar 7773

lndra N. Pradhan GNLF Tindharia Sukna 8878

C.K .. Pradhan GNLF Kalimpong Khasmahal NA

Tara Sundas CPI(M) Bong Dungra 7068

Tshering Sherpa GNLF Gidabling Sinji NA

Dawa Pakhrin GNLF Lava Pedong NA

Reshan Rai GNLF Algarah 8082

Khus Narayan Subba GNLF Gorubathan 8949

Bhakta Kumar Jairu Independent Today Tangta Jaladhaka 5095

(supported by GNLF)

Source : Office of the District Magistrate , Darjeeling.

The results indicate the anger of the Gorkhas against past regimes,

whether the Left or the Congress. The Congress had been totally wiped out

though the Left managed to make a light presence. In 1989, out of the 28

136

seats. 26 were won by the GNLF, the CPI (M) managed 02 seats from the

Pulbazar-Bijanbari and Chingtong-Rishihaat constituencies.

The Congress was nowhere in the political scene. In 1994 again,

majority was won by the GNLF, two seats by CPI (M) ( Chingtong-Rishihaat

and Bong Dungra) and two by Independent candidates supported by the

GNLF.

Democracy means, of, by and for the people but in most cases, it

means for, by and of the majority group. Nepalis or the Gorkhas are the

dominant community in the Darjeeling Hills, who form around 65 % of the

population. Minority groups include the Lepchas and Bhutias amongst others.

Lepchas comprise 12 %, Bhutias 13 % and Plainsmen about 10% of the

population. "Minorities tend to suffer disproportionately from a democratic

deficit in terms of numbers and influence in many political systems."?.

Analyzing the elections of the DGHC General Council, the results

showed only one non-Nepali Councillor in both 1989 and 1994. (viz Benjamin

Bhutia in 1989 and Pasang Bhutia in 1994), who are both from the Bhutia

ethnic group.

The Lepchas, Bhutias and Nepalis in spite of having cultural, traditional

and linguistic dissimilarities fought against the Bengali domination together.

T B.Subba calls this "negative solidarity." It was the fear of being wiped

away as a single group that brought them together to pose a united front

against Bengali chauvinism. As the Lepchas and Bhutias were in minority they

did not oppose the Gorkhaland movement.

NEW DEMANDS AND CLAIMS OF THE GNLF: ELECTIONS OF 1999

Ghisingh had assured that he would not raise the demand for a

separate state again, but in 1992 he sought to bring out the matter again

indirectly. He specifically brought out Article VIII of the Indo-Nepal Treaty of

1950.1t was claimed that the 1950 Treaty cancels all previous treaties,

agreements and engagements entered into on behalf of India between the

British Government and the Government of Nepal. Both the Central and State

Governments were called to clarify the legal status of the said land, failing

137

which, the GNLF party would admit that the real masters of the said land are

no one except the Gorkhas. On the contrary, it was told that Article VIII

actually says "So far as matters dealt with herein are concerned, the Treaty

cancels all previous treaties."8.

Only the subject matters dealt within that particular treaty were to be

revoked. The treaty had no concern with boundaries and ownership of lands.

It was said that the Treaty at Segauli (1815) and the Indo-Nepal Treaty of

Peace and Friendship ( 1950) do not deal with the same subject and therefore

cannot operate to terminate the earlier treaty of Segauli of 1815.

Nevertheless, the G N LF boycotted the 1996, 1998 and 1999

Parliamentary elections, maintaining that Darjeeling Hills had never been

incorporated into the Indian territory and they had been deceived and

betrayed for long.9. It was mainly because of this that it was possible for the

CPI (M) candidates to win the votes during these periods.ln December 1996,

the hill unit of the CPI (M) had broken away from its parent body of the state

to form the Communist Party Revolutionary Marxist (CPRM) mainly because it

too supported the formation of a separate state of Gorkhaland unlike the CPI

(M).1 0 The CPRM, Congress, All India Gorkha League (AIGL), BJP and

GNLF (C) now form the People's Democratic Front (PDF), the coalition group

against the GNLF.

In spite of much criticism leveled against the DGHC under GNLF

leadership, the DGHC elections held on March 171h 1999, showed

overwhelming support to the GNLF. The following table shows the election

results of 1999 to the DGHC.

138

RESULTS OF ELECTIONS TO DGHC 1999 ·--

CANDIDATE PARTY NAME OF VOTES GOT TOTAL

ELECTED AFFILIATION CONSTITUENCY ELECTORS

S.K.Lama GNLF Rimbock - Lodhama 4764 14,779

Prakash Theeng GNLF Pulbazar Bijanbari 5638 14,145

Aitaraj Dewan GNLF Chongtong Rishihaat 5096 15,383

R. K Pradhan GNLF Singamari Tukvar Valley 2897 18,562 ·-

Amar. 8 Thapa GNLF Darjeeling Sadar I 4480 17,340

Karna.B Gorkha GNLF Darjeeling Sadar II 5418 18.459

Gopi Maya Gurung GNLF Ghoom Jorebungalow 5954 19,545

Bhanu Lama already GNLF backed Lopchu Peshok

declared victorious Independent I unopposed Candidate

I.N.Norbu Tamang GNLF Tukdah Teesta Valley 6924 19,703

Kul Bahadur Gurung GNLF Mungpoo Latpancher 7625 19,334

N.K.Kumai GNLF Sukhia Maneybhanjyang 4685 17,854

Deepak Gurung GNLF Pokrebung Nagri 7582 I 17,360

Basant Kumar Rai United Front Mirik Valley 4298 17,441

Subhash Ghisingh GNLF Soureni Panghatta 9062 17,412

N.B.Pradhan GNLF Rangbull Dhoteria 6750 16,231

Rangmuk

N.B. Khawas GNLF Sonada Tung 8755 18,948

Nim Cheki Pradhan GNLF Kurseong Town 5467 19,808

Rajen Dewan United Front Pankhabari Giddapahar 5719 17,802

I.N. Pradhan GNLF Tindharia Sukna 7636 '17,596

C.K.Pradhan GNLF Kalimpong Khasmahal 7525 16,252

Dawa Sherpa GNLF Kalimpong Town Dr. 5897 17,829

Graham's Homes

Hangu Limbu GNLF Bong Dungra 5565 20,127

Tshering Sherpa GNLF GidablingSinji 8059 18,257

Dawa Pakhrin GNLF Lava Pedong 8139 17,290

Roshan Rai GNLF Algarah 7333 16,159

K.N.Subba GNLF Gorubathan 7276 16,180

Shakarmani Rai Independent Today- Tangta Jaldhaka 5178 16,404

Source : Office of the District Magistrate , Darjeeling.

139

If we see the above table, it can be said that in almost all

constituencies, the GNLF was victorious. The United Front won only in two

constituencies, namely, in Mirik Valley and Pankhabari - Gidapahar. An

Independent candidate won in Today Tangta Jaldhaka with 5178 votes. The

GNLF victories were won by large numbers of votes polled. Its main political

plank was the demand for the creation of a separate state, but it had another

issue too, that is, the territorial status of Darjeeling would be decided by

Supreme Court of Nepal because, the Indian Supreme Court had put off the

case of Darjeeling as "No man's Land" without a hearing. All other parties in

the hills also had used the Gorkhaland demand as its main manifesto "For all

political parties to survive, playing the ethnic card becomes an imperative."11.

Looking at the ethnic category of the 28 elected councillors to the

DGHC, the Bhutia and Lepcha representation is nil. The Lepchas, the original

inhabitants of Darjeeling or "Mayel Lyang" as they fondly call it, feel they are

exploited and discriminated in their own land. They have been numerically

swept by the majority of the ethnic group, the Nepal is.

In the· Parliamentary elections held in May 2004, the Congress

candidate (It is part of the five party opposition alliance in the hills) Mr. Dawa

Norbula, backed by the GNLF won. Dawa Norbula is one of the Congress

veterans in the hills. A lawyer by profession and a Bhutia ethnically, he is one

of the few Bhutia politicians in the Darjeeling hills.12. '

The Lepchas and Bhutias, even while nursing apprehension against

the Nepalis who are the majority group, nevertheless support them in their

main demand - formation of Gorkhaland. Being the numerically inferior

groups, they can never hope to challenge the ethnic group in power, knowing

that they will be crushed in the long run.

THE OBC ISSUE: DEMAND TO INCLUDE ALL NEPALIS AS OTHER

BACKWARD CLASSES

Looking at the scenario in the post DGHC period, there is actually no

difference in the pre-DGHC and post-DGHC Darjeeling. There is a lot of

bureaucratization in the way of the functioning of the Council and the

participation of the hill people in decision making is far from satisfactory. The

140

hill people have already suffered a great deal of oppression and deprivation.

On top of this, people at the top have failed to understand the genuine needs,

problems and aspirations of the people. The way the Nepalis pf Darjeeling

were identified and categorized as Backward Classes is another failed

attempt to understand them in a better perspective.

The Mandai Commission's visit to Darjeeling in 1980 had used

scientific and sound principles to identify backward classes. The Mandai

Commission has basically a Hindu-centric approach but this was irrelevant in

the multi - religious and plural society of Darjeeling. The caste system has

never been rigid here and there has never been caste based violence. It had

thus failed to understand and comprehend the complex nature of the Nepali

society. The Nepali community is a super structure of various communities.

Economically, politically, educationally, they are all backward and politically

under represented. Taking into consideration, the points mentioned by the

Kaka Kalekar Commission (1955), to identify communities as backward, four

criteria have to be identified.

I. Low social position in the traditional caste hierarchical Hindu society

II. Lack of general educational advancement among the majority of the

caste I community

Ill. Inadequate or lack of representation in government services

IV. Inadequate representation in trade, commerce and industry. 13.

From the above, the first criteria cannot be applied in the case of the

Nepali society, it being a multi- religious and plural one. But taking the other

points into consideration, the entire Gorkha community would be categorized

as backward. Unfortunately, later only some communities were identified as

backward.

The Mandai Commission submitted its report in 1980 and was placed

before Parliament in April 1982, but the report was kept in the backburner by

the Congress Government. It was only on August ih 1990, that the then

Prime Minister, Mr. V P Singh of the National Front Government announced

that the Mandai Commission Report would be implemented, giving job

reservations of 27 % to Other Backward Classes. This was to the already

existing reservations for Scheduled Castes and Tribes, which was 22.5 %. It

141

was following this that the West Bengal Government set up the "Other

Backward Classes Committee" on March 151h 1994, vide MP-8 (1) /94.

Various Nepali communities competed to get OBC status. Aware of the

various privileges and facilities in education and employment got by the

Bhutias, Yolmos Lepchas and Sherpas, who are the Scheduled Tribes of the

region, some of the Nepalis even tried to project themselves as Non - Hindu

Tamang Buddhist, mainly to be identified as Scheduled Tribes. All political

parties, the CPI (M), GNLFand AIGL demanded that all Nepalis should be

included as OBCs. They were anxious that if only a few Nepali groups were

classified as Other Backward Classes, it would split the Nepali society.

The West Bengal Government in 1995 had recognized only some of

the Nepali castes and sub-castes as OBCs, namely, Bhujel, Newar, Mangar

(Thapa, Rana),Nambung, Sampang, Bungcheng, Thami, Jogi and Dhimal. 14.

In neighboring Sikkim, Sikkim Government Gazetteer on OBC had laid

down "After having examined the recommendations of the Mandai

Commission with respect to declaring Socially and Educationally Backward

Classes (SEBC) or Other Backward Classes (OBC) in Sikkim, the State

Government hereby recognizes the following communities as Socially and

Educationally Backward Classes or OBCs for the state of Sikkim. Namely,

Bhujel, Gurung, Limboo, Rai, Mangar, Sunuwar and Tamang .(Limboo

includes Tseng, Subba and Yakthungba. Sunuwar includes Koincha I

Mukhia).15.

In fact the division of the Nepali community into OBC and NBC (Newar,

Bahun and Chettri) or the exclusion of the NBC in the OBC was blamed on

the Sikkim Sang ram Paris had (SSP) leader, Mr. N B Bhandari. Soon after the

Sikkim Democratic Front (SDF) leader, Mr. Pawan Chamling became the

Chief Minister of Sikkim in the first week of April 1995, the Official Language

Bill was passed. This provided official recognition to six more languages

namely, Rai, Newar, Tamang, Sherpa, Mangar and Gurung, in addition to the

already existing languages of Nepali, Lepcha, Bhutia and Limbu, thus taking

the number of official languages in the state to ten. 16.

As pointed out earlier, the Nepali community consists of coming

together of various people having their own cultures and tradition. No one

particular tradition can be pinpointed of being typically Nepali. They have

142

been living in harmony with each other, assimilation and acculturation among

them has taken place. It would be a danger to the entire Nepali community if

anyone of these communities would adopt a separate ethnic identity. There is

no clear cut line of demarcation between the forward and backward classes

too.

It was mainly because of this that the leaders of both Darjeeling and

Sikkim demanded the same backward class status to the entire Gorkhas

under the DGHC and Sikkim. Discrepancies would lead to social tension and

would affect the peaceful community sense that was prevalent till present.

Today under the DGHC, all Nepali communities including the Rai,

Mangar, Gurung, Bhujel, Jogi, Thami, Newar, Sunuwar have been included in

the OBC list except the Bahuns and the Chettris. Even the Nepali Scheduled

Castes namely the Kamis, Damais and Sarkis were to be included as Other

Backward Classes. An Anti-Casteism Forum had been formed requesting the

Nepali Scheduled Castes to be OBCs. But it was the tireless efforts of the All

India Nepali Scheduled Caste Association (AINSCA), an apolitical and non­

governmental organization that succeeded in excluding the Nepali Scheduled

Castes from being included in the OBC list. Today they are still included as

Scheduled Castes, a facility they have been enjoying since August 101h 1950.

CONCLUSION

The Tripartite talks between the Centre, State and GNLF in 1988

had given a semi-autonomous council to the hill people of Darjeeling, the

Darjeeling Gorkha Hill Council. The people seemed pleased with the insertion

of the word "Gorkha" in the Council as they felt their identity issue would be

solved. They would now identify themselves as Gorkhas of Indian origin,

different from the Nepalese of Nepal. The DGHC was to meet the demands

and needs of the local community, so that people could have a stronger voice

in decision making, planning and implementation of development objectives.

Unfortunately, the running of the DGHC under the GNLF showed that it

added many woes to the already existing problems of the people, instead of

solving them. The State Government is also to be blamed. Although the

DGHC enjoys freedom to prepare development plans and budgets for the hill

143

areas, they cannot be implemented without the approval of the State

Government. Moreover, it has been created under an act of the state

legislature and not under an act of Parliament. Its creation is political rather

than constitutional. The DGHC is run only by a handful of politicians and the

local people still suffer from oppression and deprivation. The granting of the

OBC status only to some Nepali communities is another failed attempt by the

government to understand the Nepali society with all its complexities.

NOTES AND REFERENCES

1. Himalaya Today, New Delhi, September 1988.

2. Quoted in Dr. D K Sarkar and Dr Dhrubjyoti Bhawmick, Empowering

Darjeeling Hills: An Experience with Darjeeling Gorkha Hill Council,

Indian Publishers Distributors, Delhi ,2000, pp.1 00.

3. The Telegraph, Calcutta, July 30th 2005.

4. The Telegraph, Calcutta, June 5th 2006.

5. Dilip Sarkar and D Bhawmick, op.cit., pp.173.

6. ibid., pp. 175.

7. A S Narang, "Ethnic Conflicts and Minority Rights," Economic and

Political Weekly, July 6th 2002, pp. 2696-2699.

8. Article VIII of the Treaty of Peace and Friendship between Nepal and

India, dated July 31st 1950.

9. Earlier the GNLF had helped the Congress candidate to win the 1989

and 1991 elections.

10. Leaders of CPRM include two time MP and former State Animal

Husbandry Minister, Mr. Tamang Dawa Lama, former Lok Sabha

member, Mr. R B Rai and party spokesman, Mr. D S Bomzon.

11. Mr. R B Rai's comment, The Statesman, March 18th 1999.

12. Very few Bhutias are seen playing an active role in politics in the

Darjeeling Hills and there are even fewer Bhutia politicians. The other

well known Bhutia politicians in the hills were Sonam Wangyal Ladenla,

who has already been mentioned in the earlier chapters. The next

important Bhutia politician was Mr. Tenzing Wangdi from Kalimpong.

144

He was the first from Darjeeling to graduate from Presidency College,

Calcutta and in 1929 he completed his law studies from Calcutta

University. He was a member of the Congress party and contested

elections for the Legislative Assembly from the hills, from the Naxalbari

- Phansidewa constituency and remained undefeated for three terms.

He also became the Deputy Minister in Charge of Scheduled Castes

and Scheduled Tribes Welfare. Information got from personal interview

with Dr. Sonam Wangyal Bhutia, a practicing Doctor and Writer.

13. A S Narang, Indian Government and Politics, Gitanjali Publishing

House, New Delhi, 1992, pp. 607.

14. Tl1e Calcutta Gazette, December 151 1995, Government of West

Bengal, Scheduled Castes and Tribes Welfare Department.

15. Sikkim Government Gazette on OBC, Gangtok, June 2nd 1994, No.60.

Government of Sikkim, Welfare Department, Gangtok.

16. Mr. P K Chamling as Cabinet Minister had been expelled from the Nar

Bahadur Bhandari government for inciting the Mongoloid section of the

Nepali community.

145