Meitei Alliance urges President to scan WKZIC's claims
Source: Chronicle News Service
Imphal, October 19 2024:
Meitei Alliance has urged the President of India to reassess the erroneous claims made by the World Kuki-Zo Intellectual Council (WKZIC) in a memorandum submitted to the latter recently.
In a memorandum submitted to the President of India, the Meitei Alliance urged the President to reexamine the WKZIC's claims, stating that the WKZIC memorandum, dated October 13, contained incorrect information about the number and names of districts in Manipur in 1972 .
The memo further appealed to the President not to take any actions based on misinformation, and called for a careful review of the state's administrative history as presented by the Alliance which provided a detailed historical account of Manipur's administrative divisions to set the record straight.
The Alliance asserted that the WKZIC's portrayal of the administrative structure of Manipur in 1972 is factually incorrect.
According to the Alliance, Manipur's administrative divisions have undergone several reorganisations over the years, none of which align with the information presented by WKZIC.
In its submission, the Alliance detailed the evolution of the state's administrative framework, beginning from the British colonial period and continuing through to the present day.
During the British Protectorate System (1824-1947), several temporary subdivisions were created for administrative convenience," the Alliance reminded, explaining that this policy of reorganising districts and subdivisions was purely for administrative purposes, not based on ethnic or tribal lines.
"From 1893 to 1906, five divisions were established: Mao Lam, Tankhul Lam, Moirang Lam, and Kapui Lam.
In 1919, three subdivisions were created: the South-West Area with its headquarters at Churachandpur, the North-West Area headquartered in Tamenglong, and the North-East Area with its headquarters at Ukhrul," it pointed out.
It, however, noted that in 1929, these subdivisions were abolished, and by 1932, Tamenglong Subdivision was re-established.
In 1933, Sadar and Ukhrul subdivisions were created.
According to the Alliance, after Manipur's integration into India in 1949, the Manipur Administration Order defined the state's territory as the entirety of the area then within Manipur.
"In 1950, the whole state was a single district with eight subdivisions: Sadar, Thoubal, Ukhrul, Churachandpur, Tamenglong, Mao, Tengnoupal, and Jiribam," the Alliance further reminded.
"In 1969, five districts were created: Manipur Central, Manipur West, Manipur North, Manipur South, and Manipur East.
The group contends that there were no new districts created in 1972, directly contradicting the WKZIC's claim that Sadar Hills and Tengnoupal were districts at that time".
The Alliance further explained that in 1974, a sixth district, Tengnoupal, was created by carving out three subdivisions - Tengnoupal, Chakpikarong, and Chandel - from the Manipur Central District.
"In 1983, Thoubal and Bishnupur districts were created from the Manipur Central district, and the remaining part of the district was renamed Imphal district.
That same year, the names of several other districts were changed: Manipur North District became Senapati, Manipur West District was renamed Tamenglong, Manipur South District became Churachandpur, and Manipur East District became Ukhrul.
By 1996, Imphal district was further split into Imphal East and Imphal West, bringing the total number of districts to nine".
The memo elaborated that a major reorganisation occurred in 2016 when the state expanded to 16 districts, adding that "This was achieved by bifurcating several existing districts.
Imphal East was split to create Jiribam, Senapati was divided to form Kangpokpi, and Thoubal was split to create Kakching".
Similarly, Chandel was bifurcated to form Tengnoupal, Ukhrul was split to create Kamjong, Churachandpur was divided to form Pherzawl, and Tamenglong was split to form Noney.
The Alliance clarified that no subdivision or district was ever created along ethnic, tribal, or community lines but solely for administrative convenience.
"The WKZIC's attempt to associate districts with specific communities is a misrepresentation of the facts," the memorandum indicated, reiterating the fact that the creation of districts never conferred exclusive rights to any tribe or community and that any attempt to suggest otherwise is historically inaccurate.
Comment
