The one-day special session of the Jharkhand Assembly today passed the domicile policy amendment bill based on the land records of 1932. 

The 1932 land records were prepared and published by the British Government during the pre-independence period. 

However, several parts of these 1932 land records were either missing or were spoiled by rats inside record rooms of the state government, a random study by JharkhandStateNews has revealed.

--------------------------Advertisement--------------------------Birsa Jayanti

Three proposals connected with the amendment of the domicile Bill were submitted by the state government. The opposition leaders had appealed to transfer these proposals to the Assembly committee.

This was rejected by the ruling coalition members and all three proposals were passed by voice vote.

Speaking in favour of this bill, Chief Minister Hemant Soren said that last year he had got the “Sarna Code” ( speaking a separate religion for Adivasis) proposal passed and forwarded it to the center for approval.

“ Today is a holy day. Though lakhs of rupees were found among relatives of BJP leaders, they were not touched. If anyone is born in a poor Adivasi family, he is trapped. I am not afraid of the ED- CBI of the ruling ( read BJP )party. Even while remaining in jail,(I) will finish( ‘ supda saaf kar denge) you”( BJP), said the CM on the floor of the house.

Expressing his opinion of the domicile amendment proposals, BJP MLAs Amit Kumar Yadav said, those who lacked land records of 1932 can approach the village committee( Gram Sabha). If the Gram Sabha declares that he was a “ resident” of Jharkhand, then the question is : will he get the domicile of the state?

The CPI-ML NLA Binod Kumar Singh said that there were many landless people/ families. The bill amending the current domicile policy does not provide any provision to deal with their cases. And as such, he suggested that the three proposals of this bill seeking amendment in the domicile bill should be sent to the Assembly committee for appraisal.

Their views were ignored and the bill sought amendment in the current domicile policy to provide domicile status of the state to a person whose ancestor's name figured in 1932 land records.

must read