Irang Part-I VA Board negates, clarifies
Source: The Sangai Express

Imphal, December 06 2014 : Reacting to the statement of Bena Nguang (Thonglang Atongba) VA (TAVA) which alleged that an illegal land boundary map of 11 Nepalese Blocks under Irang Part-I in Senapati district has been submitted to the Government, the GB/Chairman of Irang Part-I VA Board today clarified that the statement issued by the TAVA was totally baseless, concocted and devoid of any historical facts and reality.

"It seems to be done intentionally to mislead and misinform the administration with a view to deprive the poor people of Gorkha minority community from enjoying developmental works," said a statement issued by Hari Prasad Nepal, GB/Chairman, Irang Part-I VA Board.

The Nepalese of these 11 villages of Irang Part-I have been living within the Irang Part-I Nepali Grazing Reserve Area since time immemorial and not within the jurisdiction of Thonglang Atongba village, it asserted.

Irang Grazing Reserve was granted to Nepali community on April 23, 1920 by the then British Political Agent.

In 1933 Irang grazing reserve was divided into two parts � Irang Part-I and Irang Part-II for administrative convenience.

Since then the people of the area have been paying grazing tax to the Government, it pointed out.

When Manipur become a full-fledged State and process for delimitation of Assembly Constituency on territorial basis was undertaken, the Nepali villages of Irang Part-I and Part-II (Nepali Grazing Reserve Area) came under 50 Kangpokpi (General) AC and the Thonglang Atongba village came under 49 Tadubi AC as a separate village.

Under no circumstances the Nepali villages of Irang Pt-I pay land taxes to Thonglang Atongba village.

However there might have been some occasions wherein the Nepali people pay Rs 50 per house per annum to NSCN-IM as house tax but this should not be and cannot be treated a land tax to Thonglang Atongba Village Authority, it further asserted.

The Nepalese inhabitants of 11 villages of Irang Part-I have their own way and practices of village administration and enjoying all the basic amenities of the Govt like school education, road, provisions of drinking water, MGNREGS etc like other communities and hence the question of keeping these 11 village under Thonglang Atongba Village Authority does not arise, it posited.

In this regard mention may be made for the fact that in 1953, SDO Tamenglong, DC Imphal and Chief Commissioner, Manipur under different cases directed the Thonglang Atongba village not to encroach and interfere within the Irang part-I Nepali Grazing Reserve, it recalled.

Since these 11 Nepalese villages of Irang Part-I had never come under the jurisdiction of Thonglang Atongba Village Authority in their entire historical existence, taking the permission/assent of Thonglang Atongba Village Authority does arise at all in the process of IPPE Survey for MGNREGS under DRDA Senapati, it added.

Threat, physical assaults and other type of torture to the Nepali people of Irang Part-I is their habitual practices, the statement maintained.

The census report of 2011 shows Thonglang Atongba village is a separate Naga inhabited village and 11 villages of Irang Part-I are also separate villages inhabited by Nepali community and implementation of various development schemes in all these Nepali villages need not seek prior permission from the Thonglang Atongba Village Authority.

Regarding the warning for fixing Govt responsibilities for occurrence of unwanted incident between the two communities indicates the intension for criminal activities of Thonglang Atongba Village Authority in future.

Therefore, it appealed to the authority concerned to provide proper security for protection of the Nepali community of 11 villages of Irang part-I within Kangpokpi subdivision of Senapati district before the unwanted activities as cautioned by the Thonglang Atongba Village Authority occurred.

Comment