People Initiative

Dalit Resource Centre, Gaya, Bihar

Gaya, one of the oldest district of the state of Bihar is spread in an area of 4976 sq. km and is a part of the fertile stretch of Middle Gangetic plain nestled between the Ganges river and the Chotanagpur plateau occasionally interspersed with barren hills. The slope is gentle in the northern inter-fluvial part and is gets gradually sharper towards the south. Although, it is criss-crossed by numerous streams and rivers because of the character of the slope water holding capacity decreases towards the south. Rainfall is restricted mostly to the Monsoon season that defines the seasonal nature of agricultural activities. The rich alluvial soil of the district supports intensive agricultural practices.

The proposed project area consists of four administrative blocks viz. Wazirganj, Manpur, Paraiya and Mohra of Gaya district. Except Mohra all the three blocks of Wazirganj, Manpur and Paraiya shares the boundary with district headquarter of Gaya. Wazirganj is located in the Sout-east, Manpur in the eastern side and Paraiya towards the western side of the district head quarter of Gaya (refer to the sketch map of Gaya district provided..). Mohra the relatively a new block curved out from the erstwhile Atri block is located towards the north-east side of the Gaya. All these blocks are well connected through train and bus routes with district head quarter of Gaya. The interior villages are connected through kaatcha roads that joins the main roads leading the Gaya town.

Among the four selected blocks Wazirganj is the most populous¹ (1,79,084) followed by Manpur (1,08,608), Paraiya (83,838), and Mohra (77,278). All these blocks are characterised by high concentration of Scheduled Caste population- Wazirganj (33%), Manpur (37%), Paraiya (30%), Mohra (29%) and low literacy rate all falling below the national average - Wazirganj (51.09%), Paraiya (51.46%), Manpur (48.77%) and Mohra (46.71%). Most importantly the difference between the male and female literacy is significantly high- Wazirganj (26.21%), Paraiya (32.40%), Manpur (24.0%), Mohra (27.63%). Out of their total population of 1.4 million in the state of Bihar the literacy  Musahars is  one such group where the literacy is abnormally low- 4.0% for male and 0.3% for female² in comparision to the national average of 70%. Even Gaya district has the average literacy rate of 50%. They are primarily agricultural labourer (95.3%) and have the lowest percentage of workers as cultivators of land (2.5%)³.

Conceptualisation and Design

Land is considered as a chief entitlement in an agrarian society. However, even in the days of sufficient land availability, the Musahars never enjoyed the right over the minimum ownership of land in a larger context particularly Homestead land unlike many other Dalits. Homestead land in this case consists of two categories I) Raiyat Homestead Land II) Gair Majarua Homestead Land. The Raiyati Homestead Land in the case of Musahars has been mainly the small plot of land (it was/is usually almost a 4 kattha plot measuring 5400-6700 sq. ft) that was provided to him/her by the Maliks to settle down. The concept evolved as a necessity condition under the Kamiauti system that required permanency of labour throughout the year for agriculture as well maintenance of tank irrigation in the Magadh region. When a Raiyat gets a new Kamia and he has to provide him with a house and some land, he either does so with his own land or asks the landlords for a house and some land for the purpose. In the former case the Kamia is clearly a service Jagirdar of the Raiyat. In the later case he is also if the landlord settles the land in question with the Raiyat, but if, as is sometimes done the landlord gives over the land direct to the Kamia, reserving a right over calling of the services the latter, then the land is clearly not the Raiyat’s and the Kamia was treated in record as non-agricultural tenant of the village and not given a separate Khatian [record of right]. The legal document of ownership of Raiyati Homestead Land is known as Paarchcha.

In the post-Independent period the initiation towards legislative measures towards providing the right of their Raiyati Homesteads to Kamias began in 1947. Such measures took the form of an Act- called The Bihar Privileged persons Homestead Tenancy Act which begin to operate from 18th February, 1948. The Act promises to provide legal right of ownership of Homesteads to Musahar households who had been living in their Homesteads for a decade in their production of documents of possession. It also notes that the right over their Homesteads in not “transferable” under any circumstances. The Act since then had been active and had been revised on many occasions under the directive judgements passed by the High court and since then many new clauses were included within it as per requirement. Under the present administrative and legal system (please refer to the diagram below) Block level the main official who is responsible for verifying the evidence of possession of Homestead land is the Karamachari who in most of the cases verifies the possession of Homestead land on the basis of oral testimonies of the Mukhiaya or head of the Panchayats where Mushars have no say over the whole process. The process of getting Paarchchas for Raiyati Homestead Land is given in the fig 1.

Another critical dimension to the issue of Homestead land had been the right over the Gair Majarua Malik Land. Initially this category of land under the feudal system was under the possession of Maliks. To mention here in the post-Independent period the Musahar population itself witnessed manifold population growth and their small plot of Raiyat Homestead Land could not sustain the extending families under such population pressure which further pushed them into Gair Majarua Malik Land that now mostly consists pines of dried up ahars and pastureland. Under the new land and revenue administration this category of land has been put under the jurisdiction of Land and Revenue Departments. It is directly regulated by government officials of Land and Revenue Departments (please refer to the diagram given below). Here the system of getting right over Gair Majarua Malik Land is called “Bandobasti” and the legal document of evidence is called as “Parwana”.

With regard to the assessment of Homestead Lands of Musahars in Bihar there has been a total absence of studies taking into account the present ground reality. A recent household survey carried out by the Planning Commission revealed that out of 392 Scheduled Caste households only 18.4% own cultivable land, and 11.2% possesses assets. The study found that the Musahar and the Chaupal have neither land nor agricultural assets. According to the study, the pattern of landownership and assets in Bihar clearly indicate a differentiation at two levels: a) between castes with land and agricultural assets (Chamar, Dusadh, Dhobi), and castes without these (Musahar and Chaupal)⁴. In a pilot survey carried out by Deshkal society with its two collaborative partners Gram Nirman Kendra and Lok Shakti Shikshan Sanstha in the year 2005 in the proposed area of the project consisting of the four Blocks of Gaya district found that out of the approximately 5000 Musahar households some 2200 households do not posses “Parcha” and “Parwana” of their Homesteads. Exact number of Musahar household that do not have documents can only be assessed after a detail survey of the area. More importantly there is regional and local variation of those who have received legal documents of their Homesteads and those who have not any documents of their Homesteads. In this regard the proposed target of the project is approximately 1,000 Musahar householdsm in 110 villages in four blocks who are still struggling to receive their “Parchas” of their Homestead land.

The main critical issue involving the Homestead lands is the issue of “evidence”. Although, The Bihar Privileged persons Homestead Tenancy Act provided a fresh leash of life to the Musahars a critical issue the right from the colonial days of Musahars right over Homesteads had been the dispute over “evidence”. Evidence in the case of Musahars under Zamindari had been the “words of mouth” of the elders rather than any legal documents. The Zamindars in their inaugural acts of generosity of providing Homesteads to them the “evidence” had never been a matter dispute since bondage run on the laws of inheritance. The legalisation of the debt-bondage under the “contract system” in colonial periods created another crisis among the Kamias that has persisted till today. Because of the overempowering presence of orality in their culture and everyday life the Musahars have never learned the habit of keeping “paper documents” since they believe their inalienable right can not be congealed in peace of paper. In this regard there we propose to consider the “oral testimonies” of the Musahars as legal documents of evidence of their right over Homesteads which is to be cross-checked by the Mukhiyas of the village.

More importantly Homestead land not only provided material basis for dwelling but the Musahars have developed a sense of belongingness to their Homesteads since they have been living in their small plot for centuries together. In this case Homestead has been an inalienable part of their identity a legacy left by the feudal Maliks. Development programmes especially those trying to provide them housing facilities created a furore among them as those programmes (for e.g. Indira Awas Yojana) tried to relocate the Musahars. In this context Bhagwati Devi the late women parliamentarian who belong the Musahar community fought for issue of Homestead land for decades. She once critically remarked “What does the word prestige mean to us? Will the society ever give us the right to live? What are the reasons for us to desert the village where we were once made to settle by the Zamindar? People of Musahar community make bricks… They plough the fields and cultivate rice….They construct houses, roads and bridges…Yet they are the victims of untouchability even today. Their houses are demolished, their dwellings set on fire and they are being murdered”.

Development programmes whether it be in form of the development of people below the poverty line or for improving the living conditions of dalits, Musahars are the least beneficiary. For example, they are the lowest number of beneficiaries for the government programme such as Nandini in which buffalos, cows and goats are provided for the poor. They do not figure as recipients for the housing schemes as they more often than not do not have title for the homestead land. They are lowest recipients of loans from the revolving funds that are part of the government schemes. Social support system has been missing and traditionally the direction of private donations for the poor and needy has been for the purposes that did not include assistance to the Musahars in the form of cash or kind. Though, there had been many governmental policies in terms of providing asset and empowering them those had remained paper tiger only devoid of any tangible understanding of the existing reality in Bihar.

Such circumstances have conditioned the poverty of Musahar whom are recognised as a social group who has been victim of chronic poverty for centuries being permanently attached labour to land owners as kamias in the district of Gaya in South Bihar. Looking horizontally Bihar turns out to be the worst state in terms of poverty with 55.15% (fig: 2) population below the poverty level. According to data maintained by Planning Commission Gaya occupies the sixth position among all India districts ranking. Again, with respect to the vertical spread of poverty it is concentrated among the Scheduled Castes (SCs), Extremely Backward Castes (EBCs), and Scheduled Tribes. Musahars who forms almost 2.5% (around 2.5 million) of the total population of Bihar are at the lowest bottom of the vertical layer of poverty (figure: 3)⁵. Even among the Musahars it is the women and children who have been worst sufferer. Musahar women share major responsibilities with their male counterparts. They are the one who carry out the tidiest job like transplantation (ropni), sowing seeds, cutting the weeds as well as taking care of house chores like fetching water, cleaning and cooking.

The above analysis leads one to five main conclusions about the experience of poverty from the perspectives of the Musahars. First, the question of right to Homestead land inevitably related to the wellbeing of the Musahar community. Second, State has been largely ineffective in reaching the poor in providing their rights. Communities like Musahars have hitherto existed in the margins of development practices. Third, the role of non-governmental organisations in the lives of the poor is limited forcing the poor to depend primarily on their own informal networks. Fourth, households are crumbling under stress of poverty.

Musahars are now coming forward to assert their rights and are keen on getting a better deal. In this regard the Kamias in Gaya have been protesting against that the denial of their ownership over their Raiyati Homestead Land. The Kamias of the Maliks had been both men and women whom enjoyed right over their Homesteads. In fact, it is women have been most vocal in raising the voices for ownership of their Raiyati Homestead Land. In this regard the land movement for the right of Homestead land in Bodh Gaya against the Mahants of Bodh Gaya Maths in the eighties is one of the burning example where the Musahars women played a key role in securing their rights. In this Musahar women played an important role in mobilising their community strength. In the Shandgharsh Vahinis that consisted mainly of village activists, Musahar women had a fair representation. Looking at their critical role in running and providing strength to the whole movement at grassroot level many women members of the Shangharsh Vahini were provided the “Parchchcas” of their Raiyati Homestead Lands. Infact, one of the major agenda for the Bodh Gaya land movement had been facilitating in getting “Paarchchas” for Musahar women.

This new aspiration and consciousness has blossomed under the changing ground reality over the decades. This will entail us to look into the specific needs and issues to be addressed which we have mentioned below:

1. Denial of right to entitlement to the Musahars of Homestead land
2. Denial of right of benefit from governmental development programme
3. Denial of the right to live with dignity and difference by the Musahars

With regard to above needs the project will engage in multiple planning both at Block and Panchayat level (within them in selected villages) at district level. We will build up a horizontal base structure with village as its unit. This unit will be closely linked with panchayat, block and our main office at Gaya. The social base of our organisation, existing as well as to be built, would be the community. Through the community we would come to know about the households who have not been given parcha and Parwana. A separate record book will be prepared for each household to note down adject difficulties. Through this process, the community would come to know itself that which family failed to get parcha and Parwana and due to what reasons. The process will prepare ground for community mobilisation which will take initiatives for this agenda. The Self Help Groups already formed by Deshkal and its partners will be the backbone of this mobilisation. Most importantly, approximately 90 per cent members of these SHG’s of 105 villages are Musahar women. As a result, not only a vocal section of Musahar women is already there but they are also able to negotiate with Bank and block officials for their development. In such a situation it won’t be difficult to link the issue of homestead land with SHG’s.

The identified needs and issues addresses existing larger thematic areas of PACS programme. As the PACS programme has been designed to determine and implement the most effective strategies to empower the poor and build capacities of the local communities. It will facilitate the cause of the identified needs. Poverty is regarded not just about extreme deprivation but is equally about the denial of their rights. Musahars as discussed before in detail in the presence of chronic poverty for centuries and absence of relevant and effective state and national policies compounded the problem. This became the legitimate basis for denying right to equal share of benefit from governmental programmes, entitlement for homestead land and to live with difference. These issues calls for the need to work towards the long-term sustainable Self-Help initiatives which intends to complement the efforts of governments and provide a platform for sustainable livelihood. Besides it also opens up newer avenues for Policy Advocacy at grass-root as well as at national level.

Objectives

With respect to the three identified major issues we have the following broad objectives mode of realising these objectives:

• Capacity Building for demanding entitlements for homestead land especially Musahar women
• Capacity building for already formed 105 SHGs in 100 villages
• Promoting Strategies both at the local and national level for Policy Advocacy on the development issues confronting the Musahar community   

 The above objective will address the three major concern of PACS programme i.e. (a) Women  empowerment, (b) self-help and (c) Policy Advocacy. Through Policy Advocacy at grass-root and national level will help to re-oriented the understanding of the of poverty among the Musahars. The capacity building for the right of entitlement of homestead land especially among the women will make aware of their rights and capacities particularly the importance of their participation in local governance, income generation and decision-making.  By facilitating and strengthening peoples’ initiative in this process will broaden the existing democratic space for peaceful negotiation.  Through initiation of the process of capacity building for demanding entitlement right for homestead land will in turn ensure economic security as well self-esteem. In the process of linking already formed SHG’s with the agenda of homestead land, women would be equipped in such a way that they get maximum number of right on homestead land. Along with this, SHG’s would facilitate the agenda of homestead land. We also aim to develop financial capacity of these SHG’s. The capability of around 50 of these SHG’s which are already formed would be developed in a manner so that they link themselves with Swarnajayanti Gram Swarojgar Yojana (SGSY) within a year. The process of capacity building of Musahars especially women will facilitate the right of equal benefits of the Musahars in the existing programmes at the grass-root level. As discussed before poverty among the Musahars have been looked through monolithic categories devoid of any cultural lens it will fillip the existing gap in the policy advocacy both at grass-root as well as national level. Through this advocacy efforts it will facilitate programme managers, planners and policy makers to for formulation and implementation of policies with the perspective of poverty among the Musahars in Bihar as well as at the national level.

Outputs

With respect to aforementioned issues and objectives we realise the following actual outcome of the proposed project:

1. Approximately 1000 families receive the right of homestead land especially women
2. Around 75 cases of disputes of homestead land solved
3. Data base on homestead land among the Musahars in Gaya district
4. To link at least 50 SHG’s with SGSY in 50 villages
5. Capacity of 5 SHG’s would be developed to provide basis of sources of livelihood to its members. This model will become the source of inspiration not only for Deshkal and its partner organisations but would also appeal to other Civil Society Organisations of Gaya district, donor agencies and Bank.
6. Number of issues where Musahars have actively participated
7. Thematic Booklet (both in English and Hindi, Bulletin, Quarterly Magazine and updating of information on website.
8. Number of persons to whom advocacy material has been disseminated.

Increase in representation of mainstream public space like Magazine, Newspaper and electronic medial

Notes :-

1. According to Gaya District Provisional Census, 2001.
2. K.S. Singh, The Scheduled Castes, 1993.
3. Ibid.
4. Planning Commission Report on Scheduled Castes and Tribes in Bihar, West Bengal and Jharkhand, 2004.
5. Bhusahn, Shashi. “ Reflections on the Material Conditions of the Musahars” in Hemant Joshi and Sanjay Kumar ed. Asserting Voices: Changing Culture, Identity and Livelihood of the Musahars in the Gangetic Plains, Deshkal Publication.

..back