“Of” vs “Or”: Former Manipur CM flags 'deliberate distortion' of Assembly order, seeks Governor's intervention

Former Manipur Chief Minister N Biren Singh has raised serious concerns over an alleged discrepancy between the original Gazette of India notification and the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business of the Manipur Legislative Assembly, calling it a potentially manipulated version with far-reaching implications for governance in the state’s hill areas.

In a letter addressed to Governor Ajay Kumar Bhalla on Wednesday, June 25, Singh highlighted what he described as a "deliberate distortion" in the wording of the Manipur Legislative Assembly (Hill Areas Committee) Order, 1972. Singh claimed that the official version passed by Parliament and published in the Gazette of India uses the phrase "the appointment of succession of Chiefs or Headman", while the version adopted by the Assembly replaces it with "the appointment or succession of Chief or Headman".

“This seemingly minor linguistic alteration constitutes a significant distortion with profound administrative and political implications,” Singh warned.

According to Singh, this alteration replacing “of” with “or” subtly but critically changes the provision’s meaning, broadening its scope to allow for new appointments of chiefs or headmen instead of merely regulating traditional succession. He termed it a “serious and potentially deliberate” manipulation that has allowed for the unchecked proliferation of new villages, some without historical or traditional legitimacy.

 

Singh argued that this misinterpretation of the order has created ambiguity around land ownership, ethnic settlement patterns, and the recognition of new villages, adding fuel to already volatile tensions in the region. He urged the Governor to initiate an independent investigation to determine when and under whose authority this modification was introduced.

“It is equally important to conduct a comprehensive audit to ascertain how many villages have been declared after this adoption and how many new chiefs and headmen have been appointed under this modified provision,” Singh wrote.

The issue ties into a larger, unresolved governance challenge in Manipur: the non-implementation of the Manipur Hill Areas (Acquisition of Chiefs’ Rights) Act, 1967, which was meant to abolish hereditary chieftainship. While the Act was passed by the state and assented to by the President the same year, it has never been operationalised, leaving the traditional chieftain system intact.
 

In the absence of formal implementation, chieftains particularly from the Kuki tribes continue to hold full rights over villages, including the authority to establish new settlements. Singh expressed concern that this system now risks being exploited under the distorted clause.

Political leaders, including BJP MLA Rajkumar Imo Singh, have repeatedly called for the full implementation of the 1967 Act, drawing comparisons to neighbouring Mizoram, which abolished the chieftainship system as early as 1954.

“Manipur is the only state in the northeast where this Act isn’t implemented. Even a state like Mizoram had implemented a similar act... The need of the hour is to implement this Act at the earliest,” Rajkumar Imo Singh had said earlier this year.

The issue also intersects with the broader backdrop of the ethnic conflict between the Meitei and Kuki communities, which has already claimed over 260 lives and displaced nearly 50,000 people, raising alarms about further legal and administrative ambiguities deepening the existing divide.