Syllabus: GS– II & V:  Constitutional provisions

Why in the news?

The Consultative Group of the Coordination Committee of Tribal Organisations of Assam (CCTOA) has formally rejected the recommendation of the Assam Government’s Group of Ministers (GoM) to grant Scheduled Tribe status to six communities—Tai Ahom, Chutia, Moran, Motok, Koch-Rajbongshi and Tea Tribes (Adivasis). The objections were submitted to the GoM chairperson, Dr Ranoj Pegu, in early January 2026.

What did the GoM propose?

• The GoM report (November 2025) suggested including six communities in the ST list.
• It even proposed sub-categorisation of the 6 communities as ST (Plain), ST (Hill) and ST (Valley).
• The stated aim was to address long-pending demands for social and political justice.

CCTOA’s core objections

The CCTOA, representing 14 existing Scheduled Tribes of Assam, termed the proposal “illegal, unconstitutional and politically motivated.”

Key arguments raised:

• Constitutional distinction:
  • Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes are separate constitutional categories, identified on different criteria, while the SCs are identified based on their status in the Hindu caste system, the STs are identified based on tribal characteristics.
• As per Lokur Committee (1965) criteria:
  • STs are identified based on— indications of primitive traits, distinctive culture, geographical isolation, shyness of contact with the community at large, and backwardness for the community.
  • CCTOA argues none of the six communities meet these criteria today.
• Earlier expert findings:
  • Multiple committees since Independence, including those chaired by Gopinath Bordoloi in 1947 and the Lokur Committee, had rejected ST status for these groups.
  • The Registrar General of India (2007) also rejected Assam’s proposal, citing lack of ethnographic evidence.
• OBC classification already exists:
  • All six communities are recognised as Other Backward Classes by the National Commission for Backward Classes, based on State-sponsored research.
  • Reclassifying the same groups as STs was termed legally impermissible.

Concerns over political and reservation impact

• Dilution of existing ST rights:
  • Granting ST status would reduce political representation of existing tribes in panchayats, autonomous councils, State Assembly and Parliament.
• Breach of reservation ceiling:
  • Assam already has around 59% reservation, exceeding the 50% limit laid down by the Supreme Court of India (Indra Sawhney judgment, 1992).
  • Inclusion of six more communities could push reservation beyond 70%, which CCTOA calls unconstitutional.
• Political motivation allegation:
  • Since OBCs have no political reservation in Assemblies, the demand is seen as aimed mainly at securing electoral representation, not addressing social exclusion.

Special issues highlighted

• • Tea Tribes:
    • Historically considered migrant labour communities, not indigenous tribes of Assam.
    • Earlier expert panels recommended SC or OBC status, not ST.
  • Koch vs Rajbongshi distinction:
    • CCTOA argues the GoM failed to distinguish between Koch (SC in West Bengal) and Rajbongshi (indigenous), making the recommendation flawed.
      • In the erstwhile Goalpara district, Koch means those ‘Khotri’ Hindu Bengali migrated to Goalpara district from Rongpur district of East Pakistan.
      • While Rajbongshi means indigenous peoples of Assam who were subsumed into wider Koch identity.

• Other four communities:

• • Chutiyas, Mataks, Morans, and Tai Ahoms are part of the mainstream Assamese people and neither the 1947 report nor the Lokur Committee included them as STs.

Way forward

• Respect constitutional safeguards meant for existing Scheduled Tribes.
• Strengthen OBC protections through education, employment and welfare schemes instead of reclassification.
• Transparent, independent ethnographic studies, not politically driven committees.
• Dialogue with tribal organisations before any change to reservation architecture.

Exam Hook – Key Takeaways

• Reservation is a constitutional tool, not a political instrument.
• ST status is identity-based, not poverty-based.
• Dilution of one group’s rights to accommodate another undermines social justice.

Mains Question:
“Examine the constitutional and political implications of granting Scheduled Tribe status to new communities in Assam. How can the balance between social justice and existing tribal rights be maintained?”

Source