Kolhan’s Manki-Munda Governance System: History, Conflict, and Challenges

Manki-Munda System Latest News

• Recently, adivasis of the Ho tribe in Jharkhand’s West Singhbhum protested against the Deputy Commissioner, alleging interference in their traditional Manki-Munda self-governance system after the removal of village heads (Mundas). 
• While the district administration clarified that Mankis and Mundas remain integral to the revenue framework and blamed rumors on social media for the unrest, tribal concerns over losing autonomy persist. 
• The episode threatens the century-old equilibrium between indigenous governance structures and the state administration in Jharkhand’s Kolhan region.

Traditional Manki-Munda Governance

• For centuries, the Ho tribe of Jharkhand’s Kolhan region followed a decentralised governance system rooted in social and political responsibilities. 
• Each village was led by a Munda, the hereditary village head who resolved local disputes. 
• Groups of 8–15 villages, known as a pidh, were overseen by a Manki, who handled cases unresolved at the village level. 
• Importantly, the Manki-Munda system dealt only with internal governance, having no role in revenue or land matters, nor any concept of taxes or external sovereign authority. 
• This changed with the arrival of the East India Company, which introduced taxation.

‹ ›

British Intervention and Co-option of the Manki-Munda System

• Following victories at Plassey (1757) and Buxar (1764), the East India Company gained diwani rights in 1765, enabling tax collection across Bengal, Bihar, Odisha, and Jharkhand. 
• The Permanent Settlement Act of 1793 empowered zamindars with land deeds and fixed revenue demands, often beyond their capacity. 
• To meet targets, zamindars seized Ho lands in Kolhan, sparking adivasi uprisings like the Ho revolt (1821–22) and the Kol revolt (1831). 
• After repeated military failures, the British adopted a strategic compromise — formally recognising and co-opting the Manki-Munda system into their administration.

Wilkinson’s Rules and Their Lasting Impact

• In 1837, the British appointed Captain Thomas Wilkinson as Political Agent in the Kolhan Government Estate (KGE) to manage the Ho-dominated region. 
• Recognising the strength of local governance, Wilkinson drafted 31 “Wilkinson’s Rules” in 1833, formally codifying the Manki-Munda system for the first time. 
• While appearing to preserve tribal autonomy and restrict outsiders (dikkus), the rules effectively co-opted community leaders as agents of British authority, integrating Kolhan into colonial administration.
• This shift triggered major changes: the influx of outsiders surged from 1,579 in 1867 to 15,755 by 1897, aided by the railways, creating demographic shifts. 
• Equally transformative was the introduction of private property — Mundas and Mankis became raiyats (tenants), receiving land deeds (pattas). 
• This altered collective traditions of landholding, fostering individual ownership and reshaping Ho society.

Continuation of Wilkinson’s Rules

• Although the Kolhan Government Estate was dissolved after Independence in 1947, Wilkinson’s Rules remain in force, with Kolhan exempted from India’s general civil procedure laws. 
• Courts upheld their validity for decades, until the Patna High Court in Mora Ho vs State of Bihar (2000) ruled they were old customs, not formal law — yet allowed them to continue in the absence of alternatives. 
• Despite calls to update the system, neither Bihar nor Jharkhand took action. 
• A 2021 Jharkhand initiative, Nyay Manch, was proposed but never enacted, leaving Wilkinson’s Rules still operational today.

The Current Conflict in Kolhan

• The recent unrest in West Singhbhum stems from complaints by Scheduled Castes and OBCs in Ho-dominated villages. 
• Issues included Mundas restricting the Gope community from pursuing non-traditional livelihoods and prolonged absences of village heads, which hindered access to official documents. 
• In response, the district administration issued a nine-point directive reminding Mundas of their duties under Wilkinson’s 1837 Hukuknama, aimed at ensuring transparency in the Manki-Munda system. 
• However, villagers misinterpreted this as interference, sparking rumours of action against Mankis and Mundas. 
• The administration has clarified that it does not intend to override customary laws.

Larger Issues with the Manki-Munda System

• In West Singhbhum, 1,850 Manki-Munda posts exist, with 200 vacant, of which 50 were recently filled via Gram Sabhas. 
• However, concerns remain. Some roles have reportedly been given to non-tribal raiyats, bypassing the village system, sparking discontent. 
• Within the Ho community, especially among youth, there are growing demands for reforms — including ending the hereditary nature of Munda roles and allowing non-tribal raiyats participation.
• Hereditary succession often leaves leadership in the hands of individuals lacking formal education, creating challenges in managing today’s document-driven administration. 
• As a result, villagers frequently escalate unresolved issues to the district administration. 
• Many leaders note that while the Deputy Commissioner’s role is limited, it is crucial in clarifying provisions of Wilkinson’s Hukuknama and intervening in disputes or succession issues. 
• Many argue the system should be preserved but modernised to align with democratic needs.

Source: IE | IE | HT