Bhutia-Lepcha

Bhuta-Lepcha is an ethnic grouping consisting of people of the Bhutia and Lepcha communities in Sikkim, India. Both these groups are listed as Scheduled Tribes by the Government of India.[2]

Bhutia-Lepcha
Total population
112,507
Regions with significant populations
 Sikkim, India112,507 (2011 census)[1]
Languages
Sikkimese, Nepali, Dzongkha, Tibetan, Lepcha
Religion
Buddhism, Bön, Mun

After the implementation of the recommendations of the Delimitation Commission, in 2002, 12 (out of 32) seats have been reserved for this group in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly.[3]

Reservation within Sikkim

Reservation for the Bhutia-Lepcha (BL) people started with the 1953 Sikkimese general election with six (out of 18) seats reserved in the Sikkim State Council.[4] This was changed to seven (out of 24) seats by the time of the 1970 Sikkimese general election.[5] The reservation was further increased to 15 (out of 32) seats in the first election to be based on universal suffrage in 1974. As of 2006, there are 12 seats (out of 32) reserved for the BL in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly.[6][7]

Sikkim Bhutia Lepcha Apex Committee

The Sikkim Bhutia Lepcha Apex Committee (SIBLAC) is a group striving for the political rights of ethnic groups of Sikkimese, Bhutia-Lepcha (BL) and Nepalis of Sikkimese origin.[8] In addition to the reservation for the BL in the Legislative Assembly of Sikkim, they argue for reservation in local body (panchayat) elections as well.[9]

In 1993, a case was brought in the Supreme Court of India, challenging the reservation for the BL constituencies and for the Sangha constituency in Sikkim, by Ram Chandra Poudyal[8] of the Rising Sun Party. The five-judge bench of the Supreme Court, dismissed the petition, judging that the reservations (or their quantity) aren't violating articles 14, 170(2) or 332 of the Constitution.[10][11]

In 2015, a petition was brought to the Sikkim High Court by Mr. Phigu Tshering Bhutia arguing for reassigning reservation for the Bhuti-Lepcha as well as for the Limboo-Tamang (LT), in the upcoming municipal elections, in Sikkim. The judge, Meenakshi Madan Rai, dismissed the petition, while upholding the precedent where reservation in electoral constituencies aren't subject to the scrutiny of any court of law.[12][13]

See also

References
  1. "A-11 Individual Scheduled Tribe Primary Census Abstract Data and its Appendix". www.censusindia.gov.in. Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India. Retrieved 20 November 2017.
  2. "State/Union Territory-wise list of Scheduled Tribes in India". Ministry of Tribal Affairs, India. Archived from the original on 2016-08-15. Retrieved 2015-09-19.
  3. "Sikkim - Final Publication". Election Commission of India. Retrieved 3 January 2021.
  4. Hamlet Bareh (2001). Encyclopaedia of North-East India: Sikkim. Mittal Publications. p. 16. ISBN 9788170997948.
  5. "Sikkim Darbar Gazette - Declaration of the Results of Election, 1970". 14 May 1970. pp. 59–60. Retrieved 16 June 2021.
  6. CEO Sikkim. "AC Map of Sikkim". Retrieved 6 January 2022.
  7. CEOSikkim. "Assembly constituencies Revenue Blocks". Retrieved 6 January 2022.
  8. Joydeep Sen Gupta (6 April 2019). "Sikkim's Sangha Assembly seat is a perfect example of the state's unique political process to protect minority rights - Politics News". Firstpost. Retrieved 19 January 2021.
  9. "Sikkim Bhutia Lepcha Apex Committee - About us". www.siblac.org. Retrieved 19 January 2021.
  10. "R.C. Poudyal and ANR. Vs. Union of India and ORS" (PDF). Supreme Court of India. 10 February 1993. Retrieved 20 January 2021. The reservation of seats for Bhutias and Lepchas is necessary because they constitute a minority and in the absence of reservation they may not have any representation in the Legislative Assembly. [...] That impugned provisions providing for reservation of 12 seats, out of 32 seats in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly in favour of Bhutias Lepchas, are neither unconstitutional as violative of the basic features of democracy and republicanism under the Indian Constitution nor are they violative of Articles 14, 170(2) and 332 of the Constitution. [...] The extent of reservation of seats is not violative of Article 332(3) of the Constitution.
  11. "R.C. Poudyal & ANR Vs. Union of India & Ors (1993) INSC 77 (10 February 1993)". www.latestlaws.com. Retrieved 19 January 2021.
  12. Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Meenakshi Madan Rai, Judge (30 July 2016). "Judgement - WP(C) No.60 of 2015 - Shri Phigu Tshering Bhutia vs. State of Sikkim and Others - Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India" (PDF). Sikkim High Court. Retrieved 23 January 2021. As there is a specific bar to interference by Courts in electoral matters, I would not be inclined to wade into forbidden waters
  13. "Phigu Tshering Bhutia v. State Of Sikkim and Ors". www.casemine.com. Retrieved 23 January 2021.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.