Adivasi Delisting Debate: ST Status and Religious Conversion in India

Adivasi Delisting Debate Latest News

• Two recent developments in Jharkhand have revived the long-running and deeply divisive debate around religious identity and Scheduled Tribe (ST) reservations. 
• First, when the population census process began in Jharkhand on May 16, appeals circulated among Adivasi communities to write “Sarna” (their traditional tribal faith) — not “Hindu” — in the religion column. 
• A week later, a large Sangh-affiliated Adivasi gathering in New Delhi demanded “delisting” — removal of ST benefits for tribal people who convert to Christianity or Islam.

What is Delisting

• Delisting refers to the demand that tribal people who convert to Christianity or Islam should no longer receive Scheduled Tribe reservation benefits. 
• The demand is primarily raised by Adivasi Hindus and organisations affiliated to the RSS-BJP ecosystem. 
• However, the Sarna community — which does not identify as either Hindu or Christian and follows an indigenous tribal faith — argues that if religion becomes the basis for removing tribal status, the same logic should apply to tribal people who converted to Hinduism as well — pointing to the inherent inconsistency in the selective application of the demand.

‹ ›

The Constitutional Distinction — SC vs ST

• This debate has significant constitutional dimensions. 
• A recent Supreme Court observation reiterated that Dalits converting to Christianity or Islam cannot continue to claim Scheduled Caste status under Article 341 of the Constitution — which explicitly links SC status to religion (specifically Hinduism, Sikhism, and Buddhism). 
• However, Article 342 — which governs Scheduled Tribes — does not mention religion at all. 
• This crucial distinction is now central to the delisting debate — because unlike SCs, STs were never defined on religious grounds under the Constitution, making delisting legally far more complex.

The Two Sides of the Debate

• Pro-Delisting Camp
  • The Janjati Suraksha Manch (JSM) — affiliated with the Sangh’s tribal outfit Akhil Bharatiya Vanavasi Kalyan Ashram — organised the New Delhi gathering recently, attended by Union Home Minister Amit Shah.
  • Several Adivasi groups, including some from the Northeast, backed the delisting demand — arguing that religious conversion breaks the cultural and social continuity that justifies ST status.
  • The Delhi event, however, triggered a separate controversy. Home Minister Shah used the word “vanvasi” (meaning forest dweller) while talking about Adivasis — prompting protests in Jharkhand. 
  • Critics argued that “vanvasi” reduces tribal identity to geography alone, while “Adivasi” — meaning “original inhabitants” — carries a deeper political and historical identity linked to land and indigeneity that the term “vanvasi” deliberately erases.
• Anti-Delisting Camp
  • The Sarna community and the Christian Adivasi Mahasabha organised a large counter-rally in Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. 
  • Adivasi activists from Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh — especially Sarna followers — extended solidarity to Christian Adivasis. 
  • Their core argument is that tribal identity is ethnic, cultural, and historical — not religious — and that conversion does not strip away the social backwardness, land dispossession, and discrimination that form the actual basis of ST status.

Historical Origins of the Delisting Demand

• The roots of the delisting demand are traced to Baba Kartik Oraon — a prominent Adivasi leader and later a Union Minister in Indira Gandhi’s cabinet. 
• In 1962, Kartik Oraon lost his debut Lok Sabha election from Lohardaga (an ST-reserved constituency) and argued before the Patna High Court that since his opponent had converted to Christianity, he no longer qualified as a tribal and should be disqualified.
• The Patna High Court rejected this argument — holding that “Oraon is primarily a tribe and ethnic identity, not merely a religion.” 
• It observed that Christian Oraons retained their clan system, tribal customs, and festivals — concluding that they were “Oraons first and Christians next.” 
• This judgment remains a foundational precedent cited by opponents of delisting.

The 1967-1969 Parliamentary Attempt

• Later, in August 1967, the government introduced the ‘Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Order Amendment Bill’ to revise inclusion and exclusion of castes and tribes. 
• A Joint Parliamentary Committee (1969) proposed amending the Bill to exclude Christian and Muslim tribal converts from the ST category. 
• However, the government expressed reservations and Parliament never adopted the proposal — effectively maintaining the status quo that ST status is religion-neutral.

The Core Constitutional Question

• The delisting debate ultimately rests on a fundamental question — what is the basis of ST identity? Is it religious, ethnic, cultural, or socio-economic? 
• The constitutional framework under Article 342 clearly defines ST status on ethnic, social, and historical grounds — not religious ones. 
• The Patna High Court’s precedent reinforces this — tribal identity survives religious conversion because the social backwardness, community ties, and historical disadvantages that justify ST status do not disappear with a change of faith.

Source: IE