as governance had not been encouraged to filter into the grassroots level concerning the common people but had instead widened the gap between the common man and the privileged class.

It can therefore be said that most of the demands for separate states are a result of the centralization of power and arbitrary decision making.For instance, in Meghalaya,there exist twenty five Khasi states in the grassroots level without any Constitutional binding, though the fate of these states was much debated in the Constituent Assembly,their powers and functions remain a blur.Though their total territory forms the major part of Meghalaya,these grassroots levels of administration are marginalized in spite of the fact that these twenty five states signed the Instrument of Accession to India during 1948–49 but however did not sign the Instrument of Merger with India.Their demand today however is not for separation but for the conferring of a Constitutional status so as there is a direct participation in development and the working of a democracy.

Though in the north eastern region,the parent state of Assam was split in the formation of the seven sister states which now also includes Sikkim under the North Eastern Areas Reorganization Act 1971,there is a simmering undercurrent of discontentment of the various ethnic groups inhabiting the region

The other reasons that have sparked off the demand for separate states,besides empowerment for development work are ethnic safeguards especially for minorities.Though in Assam,the Bodoland Territorial Council has been created for the Bodo people,yet it is found that the non–Bodo people are demanding ethnic safeguards.Another reason is the demand for the recognition of the birthright claimed by certain sections also on the basis of linguistic protection and peoples aspirations which was the outcome of the creation of Meghalaya out of Assam which in turn was the result of the move to make Assamese the official of the then Assam.This had sparked off the Hill State Movement which had the unique distinction of a struggle which was throughout non–violent during which not a single stone was thrown.

Assam,which is one of the largest and most populous states in the region faces the threat of further division as there is the demand for upgrading the Bodoland Territorial Council into a full-fledged state.The chief minister of Assam Tarun Gogoi was quick to react to this demand by saying that there would be no further division of Assam even as he made it clear that he is open to the idea of appointing a second state reorganization commission.Gogoi had said that he had earlier warned the central leadership not to carve out Telangana out of Andhra Pradesh which has now led to many fissiparous tendencies.

The Assam chief minister is also facing the demands for separation of the Karbi Anglong district which was followed by acts of violence by way of the burning of government offices in Diphu–the district headquarters and in other parts of the district.Other modes of agitation also took place in Bodo dominated areas which included the calls for bandhs and strikes.It may be recalled here that the Karbi Anglong district,earlier known as the Mikir and North Cachar Hills was given the option to join either Assam or Meghalaya during the formation of the state of Meghalaya.At that time,the Mikir and Cachar Hills had chosen to join Assam.History has now therefore been reversed after a span of forty years.

Assam is faced with yet another demand from the Koch community for a Kamatapur state spearheaded by the All Koch Rajbongshi Students Union which had staged road and rail blockades.The agitators have based the demand on historical reasons of the erstwhile Kamatapur kingdom comprising Koch and Rajbongshi dominated areas of lower Assam extending to West Bengal.

Another historical based demand is the movement for a Greater Cooch Behar state comprising parts of Assam and West Bengal.The agitators have claimed that this demand is both legitimate and justified.The Telangana fallout,has therefore also affected not only the north east but also West Bengal which is also facing a Gorkhaland demand by the Gorkha Janmukti Morcha.Agitations to this effect had paralyzed the Darjeeling district in particular.

The chief minister of Assam Tarun Gogoi had met the Prime Minister Dr.Manmohan Singh to apprise him of these demands for Bodoland and Gorkhaland which the chief minister said was a matter of concern.He had stressed on the continuation of living together as a joint family but whether the demands are genuine or not,they have to be sorted out,the chief minister stressed.

However,as far as the Gorkhaland demand is concerned,differences have arisen between the Gorkha Janmukti Morcha and the Akhil Bharatiya Gorkha League which had taken a decision to back out from the Gorkhaland agitation and not to attend any meeting of the Gorkhaland Joint Action Committee.The Akhil Bharatiya Gorkha League has demanded that members of the Gorkha Janmukti Morcha resign as members of the Gorkhaland Territorial Administration,which is an autonomous body for the development of the Hill areas.The Gorkha Janmukti Morcha leaders have been accused of playing a double standard role in fighting for a separate Gorkhaland but at the same time in continuing as members of the Autonomous Hill Development Council.

In Tripura,the Indigenous Peoples Front of Tripura had also raked up the demand for a separate state for tribals by upgrading the Tripura Tribal Areas Autonomous Council into a full–fledged state havig a jurisdiction of two thirds of the state’s geographical area.However,major political parties in Tripura have opposed the separate state demand, blaming the Congress–led UPA government in New Delhi for conceding to the demand for a separate Telangana.Meanwhile the Tripura Indigenous Peoples Front has organized rallies in stepping up the demand.

In Nagaland,the National Socialist Council of Nagaland(NSCN IM)of the Isak Muivah group is also demanding for a separate Greater Nagaland comprising the present state of Nagaland with the adjoining Naga populated areas of neighbouring states such as Assam,Manipur and Arunachal Pradesh.However,all these neighbouring states have been opposing the demand of the NSCN(IM)which is based on ethnic identity.

Meghalaya has two major ethnic communities,the Achik of the Garos in western Meghalaya and the Hynniewtrep which are predominant in Eastern Meghalaya comprising the Khasi Jaintia and Ri–Bhoi areas.This ethnic division has always been the dividing line of the state in two sectors in almost all aspects, whether in the development sphere,administration and also in the language and culture of the people.It is on this basis that there has always been a demand for a separate Achikland or Garo state as the leaders of the movement are claiming that the people are now more responsive to the demand. Political parties such as the Garo National Council are spearheading the demand and the National Peoples Party(NPP)is not opposed to the demand which is now being spearheaded by the Garo Hills State Movement Committee. The Committee had appealed to all communities living in the Garo Hills to participate in the demand,in demonstrations and other agitations.The chief minister of Meghalaya Dr.Mukul Sangma has however opposed the bifurcation of Meghalaya though he has admitted that this demand has been there for a long time now.

On the other hand,in the land of Ri–Hynniewtrep,the Hills State Peoples Party has been demanding for a separate Khasi–Jaintia state and the demand was made the plank during the last general elections to the Meghalaya Legislative Assembly.There was however a very poor response from the electorate to the demands of a Garoland as also to the Khasi–Jaintia state as these demands lacked political clout.

The Telangana statehood issue has been there since 1956 and was not considered even during the tenure of the States Reorganization Commission but has come out as a major decision of New Delhi in spite of the fact that this would spark off similar demands as at present,in ethnic communities settled in pockets of the larger states like West Bengal and the north eastern region.There has been opposition as well as support for the creation of these states.Debates for and against the cause are presently going on,yet the decision lies in the Union government leadership.

Already there are autonomous administrative bodies such as the territorial councils,the district councils and traditional administrative institutions like the Dorbars of the Syiems,Dolois and Nokmas in Meghalaya. Yet,all of these seem to be prisoners of a centralized government which dictates terms and conditions without considering the existing ground conditions especially at the grassroots level.

A realistic political view and suitable Constitutional measures should serve as a solution on involvement of smaller ethnic communities in decision making of genuine needs right from the state government level and that they be made independent and responsive according to the needs of the situations,in all spheres and aspects as equal partners in running a democratic country so as to meet out their demands.

U Sumar Sing Sawian