Avinash Azad
A pointed question raised by BJP MLA Dr. Narinder Singh Raina in the final sitting of the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly on Wednesday has brought to fore the simmering discontent among sections of displaced persons from Pakistan-Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (POJK), over alleged discrimination in grant of Scheduled Tribe (ST-II) status based on ethnicity and area of residence.
In his starred question, Dr. Raina asked the government to clarify whether it is a fact that POJK displaced persons living in Rajouri and Poonch districts have been granted ST-II status based on their Pahari ethnicity, while their relatives living in Jammu continue to be denied the same. “If so, what are the reasons for this disparity?” he questioned.
Responding to the query, the government acknowledged that ST status is determined not by area, but by ethnic and linguistic eligibility under the Constitution (Jammu and Kashmir) Scheduled Tribes Order (Amendment) Act, 2024, which recently added four new groups — Gadda Brahmin, Koli, Paddari Tribe and Pahari Ethnic Group — to the Scheduled Tribes list.
Quoting relevant provisions from the J&K Reservation Rules, 2005 as amended by S.O. 176 dated 15.03.2024, the government stated that individuals from the Pahari Ethnic Group are entitled to ST status if they fulfill all of the following:
– They must belong to the Pahari clan/community/tribe.
– They must possess a distinct cultural, ethnic, and linguistic identity.
– Their mother tongue must be Pahari and they must be active speakers of the language.
– They must furnish valid documents such as Aadhaar, Voter ID, or Domicile Certificate.
Additionally, the Tehsildar concerned has been designated the competent authority to verify and certify claims under this category.
“The Constitution (Jammu and Kashmir) Scheduled Tribe Order does not prescribe any area-based criteria for issuance of ST certificates,” the official response emphasized, making it clear that eligibility is determined solely by ethnic and linguistic identity, not by place of residence.
Dr. Raina further sought to know whether it is also a fact that people with ST-I status (already recognized Scheduled Tribes) from Rajouri and Poonch living in Jammu are receiving benefits in employment, while similarly placed Pahari ST-II individuals are not — suggesting unequal treatment.
The government reiterated its earlier position: “Any benefit available for such categories is being provided to the eligible applicants by the competent authorities after fulfilling the necessary requisites set out in the guidelines.”
While the response attempted to downplay any discrimination, the question has brought renewed attention to growing grievances among POJK displaced Pahari families residing in Jammu, many of whom allege being overlooked despite having the same lineage and linguistic background as their counterparts in Rajouri and Poonch.
The issue assumes political sensitivity as the recent extension of ST status to the Pahari Ethnic Group was a major development ahead of elections, seen as an attempt to empower underrepresented communities. However, the selective recognition and alleged inconsistencies in issuing certificates have triggered accusations of bias and bureaucratic arbitrariness.
