By : H. Benjamin Mate
In my previous articles I dealt at length on issues of delimitation process to facilitate readers’ awareness on the sinister designs of the all political parties of Manipur led by the SPF Government to derail the delimitation process and thereby deprived the political rights of the tribal of Manipur bestowed by the Constitution of India under “Delimitation Act 2002.
Unfortunately, the Writ petition filed by me on behalf of various tribal organizations’, namely, ATSUM, KSO, and Kuki Chiefs’ Association and IMTDA etc…… of Manipur in the Imphal Bench of the Guwahati High Court dated December 2006 was not accorded appropriate judgment it rightfully deserved. It is evidenced now that, this was due to calibrated malafide intention and manipulations by the All Political Party Manipur in collusion with the State SPF Government.
The Honorable Guwahati High court instead, passed an order in January 19, 2007 in violation of Article 226 of the Constitution of India and Census Act & Rules of 1948 to re-count heads in 9 (Nine) sub-division of tribal District Viz, Senapati, Ukhrul and Chandel.
Being aggrieved by the Honorable High Court order of January 19.2007 a Special leave Petition was again filed by me in the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India on behalf of different tribal organization of Manipur, challenging the Imphal Bench Guwahati High Court order of January 19, 2007, in which the Honorable Supreme Court after a series of hearing on 13/07/2007 finally stayed the Guwahati High Court order as impugned and unsustainable.
In the light of new development, Honorable CM. O.Ibobi led SPF Government on dated 01.08.07 has resolved to reject the 2001 census publication against the Supreme Court order to sabotage the delimitation process in Manipur which is against the spirit and intention of constitution of India and Census Act of 1948. The gross contempt and disregard of constitutional provisions shown by the incumbent and mainstream government of Manipur goes against the very spirit of peaceful co-existence is but condemnable.
The Registrar General and Census Commissioner has stated in their counter Affidavit filed in the Supreme Court that, the Guwahati High Court has erred in allowing the Writ Petition of All Political Party Manipur under Article 226 of the Constitution of India without appreciating the fact that the evidence in the present case is in question which cannot be verified at this stage by any means by the court intervention. Even by appointing the Special Commission, the population count that existed as on 1st March, 2001 in the sub-divisions under dispute, cannot be verified in the field after a lapse of 6 (six) years due to population and demographic changes on account of new births, deaths and inbound and out-bound migration of people. As such, the order dated 19.01.2007 passed by the Guwahati High Court Imphal Bench in Writ petition (PIL) No.16/2005 is not sustainable.
It also stated that the Imphal Bench Guwahati High Court has erred seriously by passing an order which is without taking into account the scheme of Census taking under the provisions of Census Act, 1948. Census is not merely counting of heads; it is total process of collecting, compiling, evaluating, analyzing and publishing or otherwise disseminating demographic, economic and social data pertaining, at a specified time, to all persons in a country or in a well delimited country. Besides, individual enumeration which is one of the essential features, there are three other requirements of census. These are Universality, Simultaneity at a defined periodicity and with a reference date. Thus, O Ibobi led SPF Government should know that, Census by definition is not a mere head count but a much larger statistical exercise to collect data on population at the same time and with defined periodicity. In India, the census has been conducted decennially and information has been collected on the number and characteristics of population across all geographical and administrative units under the provisions of the census Act, 1948 and the Census Rules 1990 made thereunder.
The process of census taking begins with a notification by the Central Government declaring its intention to conduct census under Sections 3 of the census Act 1948. This is followed by the appointment of census commissioner and the Director of Census Operation by the Central Government under the Act, census taking is a joint effort of both the central and state Governments. Whereas, the Director of Census Operation of the State is appointed by the Central Government under section 4(1) of the Act, the Census functionaries at district and lower levels are appointed by the State Government under Section 4(2) of the Census Act. Who else was there in the dock except the Mr. O.Ibobi lead SPF Government when Census 2001 was conducted in the State of Manipur? The Manipur State Cabinet decision of 1st August, 2007 was self contradictory and a disgrace for the whole State.
There is no provision to conduct re-census in the Census Act, 1948 once the area has been censused with reference to a date and time. Section 17A which has been added after 1993 amendment, confers powers to central Government to extend the provisions of this Act, with such restrictions and modifications as if thinks fit, to pretests, pilot studies, census of houses which precede population count and post enumeration checks and evaluation studies as may be deemed necessary for the purpose of census. The Hon’ble High Court also has erred in not taking into account the broad guidelines for entertaining the PIL as laid down by the Apex Court in Gurubayoor Devaswom Managing Committee and. – Vs – (2003) 7 Sec 546. C.K.Rajan and others. As per the Apex Court’s guidelines “the dispute between two warring groups purely in the realm of private law would not be allowed to be agitated as PIL. In the present case, the High Court has not appreciated the fact that there are two rival groups pursuing claims which are contradictory. The Manipur Pradesh Congress Committee (Congress-I) and others who have filed the present PIL praying for cancellation of census results on one side. And so are the Naga People’s Organization on the other, who has filed a writ Petition ©’ No.3226/2006 in the Guwahati High Court at Guwahati praying for restoration of provisional census results.
The Register General and Census Commissioner of India while releasing the final result of the Census of India, 2001 for India and the State of Manipur under Rule 5(1) (e) of the Census Rules, 1990 had cancelled the 2001 provisional census results in respect of three sub-division of Senapati district Viz., Mao,Maram, Paomata and Purul which were found to be unreliable after detailed demographic analysis and physical examination of census records. However, the Register General and census Commissioner of India had provided the estimated population figures in respect of the three sub-divisions as there is no provision in the census Act, 1948 to conduct re-census, once an area is censused with reference to a particular date and time. The Registrar General and census Commissioner of India has acted under the Provisions of the Census Act, 1948 and the census Rules 1990 as amended from time to time. Hence, once the Census final publication is publishes there is no provision under Census Act for considering the Provisional census reports or re-census.
These are trying times for the peoples of Manipur. The land we so-called …“Jewels that dwelth the land.” Our clarion call of pan-Manipur should be furthered. This land of bounty should be vetted from anti-nationals and anti-people. At these hours let us unite our efforts in furthering peace and prosperity and to let our “thousand flowers bloom.”
---------------------------------------------
The writer is the petitioner on the Delimitation issue in the Supreme Court of India on behalf of different tribal organization of Manipur.
Source: Imphal Free Press
No comments:
Post a Comment