R >TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT in MAHARASHTRA

r C h a p t e r - M l >TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT IN MAHARASHTRA C h a p t e r - III TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT IN MAHARASHTRA Introduction > Development of the tribals, whose problems are poverty along with illiteracy, exploitation, makes planning imperative. It needs hardly be emphasised that special efforts concerning tribal development planning are necessary. However, the goal of tribal development seems to be a long way. Present chapter discusses the efforts made by the Government of Maharashtra for tribal development through planning and explains the organisational set up created for promoting tribal development. As far tribal development in the context of State of Maharashtra, the efforts have all along been made by the state government right from the first five year plan consistent with the policy of the Union Government. FIVE YEAR PLANS First Five Year Plan With the beginning of first five year plan on 1st April, 1951, the experiment of planned development started but because of the lack of proper institutional set up to meet the challenging task of development, the plan did not take off. To fill this gap, the Community Development Projects were launched on 2nd October, 1952. In this gap of nearly one and half years since the beginning of the plan till the launching of community development 42 programmes, the programme implementation suffered. The programme of community development was a comprehensive one which aimed at allround development in the rural areas. Because of certain limitations, this programme did not achieve the desired results. The Balwantrai Mehta committee in 1956 while pointing out the defects clearly stated that due to lack of sufficient finance and local participation, this experiment suffered a set back. But one should carefully note here that whatever finance was available for the development of backward classes including tribal welfare was not fully utilised. Another significant point was that main reasons for lack of local participation in the government programme was that the bureaucratic machinery was not responsive to the felt needs of the people. They were bound by the ethos of regulations of administration which being a British legacy and hence did not gear up to the task of development. ^ In other words, there was lack of proper perspective in planning and implementation. In addition to this under the community development programme, it became clear that it was not possible, to cover the entire country. This may not be an exaggeration to say that all these factors combined together contributed for, not achieving the expected results to the desired extent in the first five year plan. While assessing the efforts made during first plan on tribal welfare, Elwin remarked that, it can not be considered as an attack, not can it be dropped off as a tribal. It was a beginning which can be justifiably regarded as fairly good and symbolic of what was supposed to come. 3 43 Efforts of the State Government During the period of this plan the Government of Maharashtra, adopted the policy of treating all backward classes including scheduled tribes alike, in granting the facilities. In other words State Government did not formulate any specific scheme for their welfare. ^ Obviously the Government did not set up any special machinery either at the state headquarter or at the district level for the administration of the Scheduled Areas. To rectify the defect the “Backward Class Board” in 1953 advised the state government to formulate specific schemes for backward classes including Scheduled Tribes. 5 As a result in 1954, Tribes Advisory Council came into existence, which immediately perceived the major issues involved in tribal development. It is to be noted that, this council not only suggest criteria for inclusion of certain areas in the state, in the list of Scheduled Areas, but also in 1956 suggested the criteria for determining the backwardness and thereby to make classification of tribes in the State. During this period, following the all India pattern education, economic development and communications received equal priority and was followed by medical facilities and administration. Second Five Year Plan In the second five year plan the budget allocation gave highest priority to economic development, cottage industries, forest co-operatives, followed by communication and education. The hallmark of this period was the establishment of 44 special 44 multipurpose Tribal Development Blocks throughout India out of which four were started in Maharashtra, i.e. 1) Mokhada in Thane district. 2) Peint in Nashik district. 3) Akrani Mahal in Dhule district and 4) Aheri in Chandrapur district. These blocks were more or less in the nature of pilot projects and the Government of India was responsible for sponsoring them. The significant difference between community development blocks and the special multipurpose blocks was that, later were moulded to meet the needs of tribal areas as these areas comprised hilly and forest tracts and were sparsely populated. The aim of these blocks was to bring about a speedy improvement in the economic and social conditions of the tribals for multipronged development. Specially underdeveloped but compact areas were selected. This object was sought, to be achieved by making the programme of development more intensive in character, than that undertaken in the normal community development blocks. Naturally these blocks were concentrated only on a few selected sectors with limited population and areas. The performance of the second five year plan in the State was reviewed by the working group which observed that some of the schemes like agricultural demonstration to farmers are dubious in nature as it was found that demonstration of good agriculture is meaningless to tribals who do not have the necessary 45 equipments to conduct their agricultural operations. Demonstration of cattle breeding was equally meaningless at a stage when a very small number of tribals did own cattle. It recommended for removing these two schemes and suggested for introducing schemes like providing milch animals, poultry and goats to the tribals. Further there had been no systematic survey of the potential of cottage industries among the tribals. Hence it recommended for the same. It also pointed out that there was no link between credit and marketing of goods produced by cottage industries and recommended loan cum subsidy to trained mechanics with a view to promote cottage industries among the tribals. While commenting on tribal colonisation, it observed that the scheme could not make a headway due to lack of organised leadership, so also, in the matter of providing legal help to tribals, the progress was very poor. Finally it commented that due to lack of personnel in the medical field, the scheme of providing health care suffered in Maharashtra. In other words it is clear that expected results were not achieved due to inherent defects in the planning process itself and in its implementation. ® Dhebar commission while evaluating the planning efforts for decade (1951-60) pointed that the pace of development was slow and investment was not on proper proportion with the programme. It was suggested that the tribal development blocks should concentrate on four activities such as economic development, education, health and communication and should have specific targets. The most important shortcoming observed by the 46 commission was tiiat the protective measures provided were inadequate and sporadic. It recommended for comprehensive legislation to provide effective protection to all tribals living within the scheduled areas and outside, to make developmental efforts to cover all the tribals. To realise the same it recommended that the Tribal Development Blocks be opened outside the scheduled areas also. Third Five Year Plan In the beginning of the third five year plan, though the working group, Government of India recommended 46 Tribal Development Blocks, the Ministry of Home Affairs alloted only 16 blocks on the basis of, minimum of 66.6 percent scheduled tribe population in a particular block. While commenting on the population criterion Dhebar commission remarked that by adopting population criterion considerable injustice is likely to cause to the tribals. It also recommended that all scheduled areas in the State be covered with Tribal Development Blocks. In other areas where 55 percent of tribal concentration is found, additional blocks should established on the lines of Elwin committee's report. ® Tribal Develovment Blocks As per the recommendations of Elwin committee, the programme of special multipurpose Tribal Development Blocks were modified in the third plan with reference to area and population. Unit of 25000, out of which 66.6 percent or more should be tribals as against 66000 population limit of Community Development Block was adopted. The geographical unit was kept to 150-250 sq. miles. ® 47 As the schematic budget under the special multipurpose blocks had set a rigid pattern which left no way for project officers to adjust the expenditure to the more urgent needs of the blocks, and it was discarded. However whereas the special multipurpose blocks had a total outlay of Rs. 27 lakh in the case of Tribal Development Blocks, it was reduced to Rs. 22 lakh, but the important point to be noted in this regard is that the project officers were allowed to be flexible in their approach towards expenditure to fulfill the needs. One more thing which is also to be noted here is that there was no uniformity in the rate of subsidy provided. It ranged from 25 percent to 40 percent depending upon the nature of the schemes. In Maharashtra, the rate of subsidy was increased subsequently to 50 percent as the tribals were not in a position to contribute their share to the extent of 60 to 75 percent. Also the content and procedures for preparation of surveys, working plans etc. These criteria aimed i) To ensure adequate coverage of tribal population, ii) To have compact blocks to facilitate development, iii) To avoid dilution of coverage resulting from excessive population.

Load more