Some clauses of BTR pact challenged in Gauhati High Court

PIL filed by ex-MP, ex-Minister and 93 others

STAFF REPORTER

GUWAHATI: A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed before the Gauhati High Court which seeks that certain clauses of the third Bodo Accord or the BTR pact, which was signed on January 27,2020 between the Central Government, the State Government and the ABSU, UBPO and four factions of the NDFB, be declared as un-Constitutional and quashed. The High Court has asked the Union Government, the State Government and the Bodoland Territorial Council (BTC) to make their submissions in this regard within four weeks.

The petitioners include the Bodo Writer Academy, former MP Sansuma Khunggur Bwiswmuthiary, ex-Minister Chandan Brahma and 92 others.

The petitioner have submitted that certain provisions of the impugned accord violate fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 15, 19, 21, 25 and 29 of the Constitution. They have also challenged the legality of four Notifications/Orders issued in connection with the accord on September 28, 2020, January 19, 2021, June 4, 2021 and June 10, 2021, alleging that these Notifications "seek to dilute the constitutional autonomy conferred on the Council, which is damaging and detrimental to the interests of the petitioners and all the people residing in the Bodoland Territorial Region."

The petitioners further claim that the "rights of the Bodo people and in the Bodo territories are being gradually clipped at to take away the very autonomy which was guaranteed by the 2nd Bodo Accord and the Constitutional dispensation."

Some of the clauses which have been challenged pertain to the proposed exclusion of villages currently under BTAD, which are contiguous to non-Sixth Schedule areas and have majority non-tribal population; increase in constituencies of BTC up to a maximum of 60 seats after alteration in the area, without adversely affecting the existing percentage of reservation for tribals; the power vested in the Government of Assam to consider reorganizing the districts consequent to alteration of area of BTAD on administrative considerations; and allowing executive functions of BTC to be exercised through its Chief Executive Officer not below the rank of Principal Secretary to Government of Assam.

The petitioners have submitted the certain Notifications/Orders "have a deleterious effect on even what was guaranteed by the 2nd Bodo Accord."

The PIL mentions the Notification dated September 28, 2020 vide which a committee was constituted under paragraph 14 of the 6th Schedule of the Constitution for alteration of the area of BTAD; a separate Notification dated the same day vide which the name 'Bodoland Territorial Areas District' (BTAD) was changed to 'Bodoland Territorial Region'; the Notification dated January 19, 2021 whereby the services of the Deputy Commissioners in the BTAD were partially placed with the Bodoland Territorial Council in respect of all developmental activities in their respective districts with regard to the responsibilities assigned to them by the BTC authority; the Order dated June 4, 2021 vide which the Deputy Commissioners of Bodoland Territorial Region - i.e. Deputy Commissioners of Kokrajhar, Chirang, Baksa and Udalguri - were entrusted with overall monitoring and supervision of schemes pertaining to 15 subjects entrusted with the BTC; and the Notification dated June 10, 2021 whereby a new Administrative Department, 'Welfare of Bodoland Department', was created.

The petitioners have sought the court's intervention by stating that "the entire object of accepting the unique identity and culture of the Bodos and Bodoland is being constitutionally undermined."

Also Read:  Problems of Bodos living outside BTR still remain unresolved: UBPO chief Manuranjan Basumatary

Also Watch: