24 Years After Its Formation, Jharkhand Still Awaits Its Magic Moment

On 15 November 2000, Jharkhand was carved out of Bihar, fulfilling a long-standing demand for a separate state that could focus on tribal welfare and the development of its abundant mineral resources.

The foundation day fittingly coincides with the birth anniversary of the legendary tribal leader, Birsa Munda.

The demand for a separate Jharkhand dates back to the early 20th century. Former Indian hockey captain Jaipal Singh Munda established the Adivasi Mahasabha in 1938, advocating for the creation of a tribal state.

According to the 1941 Census, the area conceptualised as Jharkhand had a 44 per cent tribal population.

Post-independence, linguistic-based state formation gained traction, sidelining Munda’s demand. The Adivasi Mahasabha was eventually disbanded, but Munda persisted, later forming the Jharkhand Party.

With the support of 33 legislators, the party called for a state comprising Chotanagpur and Santhal Pargana, along with parts of Gaya, Shahabad, and Bhagalpur in Bihar; Mirzapur in Uttar Pradesh; and districts in Madhya Pradesh and Odisha.

However, the States Reorganisation Commission rejected the proposal, citing tribal diversity and the adverse impact on Bihar, which relied on Jharkhand’s industrial contributions while its other regions were agriculturally dominant.

The movement waned over the next 15 years until Shibu Soren revived it. Soren’s politics was rooted in the struggles of the Santhal community against exploitation by outsiders (referred to as "Dikus") and corporate plunder of local resources.

Discontent over Bihar’s neglect of this mineral-rich-yet-impoverished region intensified the movement in the 1980s and 1990s.

Despite contributing over 65 per cent of Bihar’s revenue, the Jharkhand region received less than 25 per cent of the united state’s budget, leading to poor human development indices and providing an excuse for Naxalism.

The formation of Jharkhand was eventually realised under Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee's leadership. Administratively, the state was divided into five divisions: North Chotanagpur, South Chotanagpur, Kolhan, Santhal Pargana, and Palamu.

Out of them, only Santhal Pargana (seven out of 18 seats) and Kolhan regions (nine out of 14 seats) have high concentration of tribal population reflected in the assembly seats reserved for scheduled tribes.

At the time of its formation, tribals constituted only 27.66 per cent of Jharkhand’s population (1991 Census). Major tribal groups include the Santhal, Munda, Oraon, Pahadiya, and Ho. among others.

Where do promises made to tribals stand at?

For the tribal population, the promises made during the Jharkhand movement remain largely unfulfilled. The state, rich in minerals like coal, iron ore, bauxite, and uranium, has seen exploitation of its resources, but the benefits have scarcely trickled down to the indigenous people. 

Instead, large-scale mining has led to displacement, environmental degradation, and the erosion of traditional livelihoods.

The Chotanagpur Tenancy Act (CNT) and the Santhal Parganas Tenancy Act (SPT), which were enacted to protect tribal land rights, have been systematically diluted by the collusion between illegal imigrants, bureaucracy and government.

Illegal Bagladeshi immigants have been settling in tribal lands for decades. Due to their organised muscle power, they grab tribal lands through forced donation and then use it to settle their brethrens.

Muslims account for more than 38 per cent of the population in Sahibganj and Pakur, with their numbers continuing to grow. They also represent over 25 per cent of the population in Godda district, nearly 24 per cent in Deoghar district, more  than 22 per cent in Jamtara district, and over 10 per cent in Dumka district.

The second biggest cultural threat to tribals is that of Christian conversion mafias. Cross signs either outside or inside the house in remote tribal villages are common. To continue availing reservation, they do not change their religious identities on government documents.

That is why when 2011 Census revealed that tribals constitute about 26.2 per cent of the population local experts refused to believe it. Teachers, political consultants, and experts working in those areas claim that situation is worse as at least half of the tribal population has been converted.

The state government, under BJP rule, passed the Jharkhand Freedom of Religion Act in 2017 to curb forced conversions. The law has been criticised for targeting Christian missionaries while ignoring the systemic issues that push tribals towards conversion, such as poverty, lack of education, and healthcare. 

There is truth in that criticism. For a major part of its existence, Jharkhand’s development was halted by Naxalite forces. 

In his recent article, bureaucrat N N Sinha pointed out that even now the state’s road density stands at 876km per thousand square kilometre. For the context, national average is 1,520km.

Similarly, its density of metalled roads is 697 kms per thousand square kilometres, which is well below the national average of 1,079 kilometres per thousand square kilometres. The highway density in Jharkhand is also inadequate, at just 174.5 kms per thousand square kilometres, compared to the national figure of 281 kilometres per thousand square kilometres. 

Additionally, only 12 per cent of Jharkhand's national highways are four-laned, far less than the national average of 23 per cent, while a staggering 80 per cent are two-laned, significantly exceeding the national average of 52 per cent. 

These gaps have meant that even basic facilities like rural electricity has not penetrated whole of Jharkhand. Situation is worse for tribals who stay on hills.

Resultantly, the younger generation, in search of better economic opportunities, often migrates to cities. Pragmatically, it has brought changes in their livelihood, and has also resulted in dissociation from their roots.

Non-tribals, Biharis, Bengalis and Kurmis

The remaining 73.8 per cent of Jharkhand comprises non-tribal communities, including significant numbers of OBCs, Dalits, and upper-caste Hindus.

Coal belts of Dhanbad and the industrial zones of Bokaro have a predominantly non-tribal population and are economically distinct from the rest of Jharkhand. They have a substantial migrant population from Bihar, West Bengal, and Uttar Pradesh. Most of them came here to work and settled here.

In districts bordering West Bengal, like Jamtara,  Dumka and Dhanbad among others, people often travel to nearby state for better facilities. The local dialects, food habits, and even political leanings often align more closely with West Bengal than with tribal culture.

Similarly, in the western districts like Palamu, Hazaribagh and Garhwa, there is a lingering nostalgia for Bihar. Contrary to their expectation, Bihar started developing in post-Lalu era while Jharkhand was never allowed to develop properly due to political instability.

On the other hand, Kudmis have recently started agitations against Biharis and Bengalis claiming that Jharkhand belong to only Jharkhandis. Jairam Mahato, an emerging leader from the community has been vocal about the issue, resulting in fear among possibly the more wealthier section of population.

The tussle is quickly gaining the nature of oppressor-oppressed dynamics in state and has resulted in incidences of violence.

One recurring cause in all these problems is that of political instability. Jharkhand politics is mainly known for leaders switching parties on whims and fancies.

In 24 years of its existence, the state has seen 13 chief ministerial oaths taken by seven different chief ministers at different points of time.

Raghubar Das, who handled state between 2014-19 became first chief minister to run his government for full five years. His successor Hemant Soren went to jail and then came back to become chief minister again. After him taking charge, his replacement Champai Soren meanwhile left the party and joined BJP.

Similarly, BJP’s current Jharkhand chief Babulal Marandi had also formed his own party in 2006, only to return under BJP’s fold. The examples are too many for this space.

Traditionally BJP and JMM have been fighting for tribal votes. However in recent years, BJP has tried to get non-tribal votes by focussing on scheduled castes and other backward classes too. Resultantly, JMM has been able to seize the opportunity on tribal seats.

Meanwhile, with Muslim appeasing parties like Congress and Rashtriya Janata Dal contesting with it, JMM stands to gain from Muslim-tribal votes while ignoring the consequence of it for tribals.

The tribal areas need focused policies that address land rights, cultural preservation, and access to basic amenities like healthcare and education. At the same time, the non-tribal regions, with their industrial potential, require infrastructure development, investment in education, and job creation.