The Sikkimese Limboo down the ages: In search of identity and status (Part-I)


INTRODUCTION
The Tsongs (Limboos) are one of the indigenous inhabitants of Sikkim. The phrase ‘Lho-Men-Tsong-Sum’ and other historical records go on to prove this fact. The Limboos often claim that they are neither Nepalis by ethnicity and indigeneity nor Hindus by religion. Historically, linguistically and culturally they share close affinity with the Lepchas and Bhutias of Sikkim. As such, they are a separate ethnic community with distinct identity. But despite of this fact, they were denied and deprived of genuine political rights and economic benefits for many. They are the worst sufferers and victims even after Sikkim’s merger with the Indian Union. Their ‘Tsong Seat’ granted by the Chogyal of Sikkim in 1966 was abolished in 1973 and clubbed with the Nepalis. When Schedule Tribe and Schedule Caste (Sikkim) Order, 1978 was implemented in Sikkim they were left out. While the Bhutia-Lepchas who were also the members of ‘Lho-Men-Tsong-Sum’ had been granted 13 seats reserved for them in the Sikkim Assembly and in 1978, they were included in the list of Schedule Tribe.[1] So this is the reason why the case of Limboo is taken up for discussion in this article. Secondly, till date no study has been made on the Limboos’ struggle for ST status and restoration of the seats in the Sikkim Assembly despite of their strong historical, linguistic, religious and cultural hold deeply rooted into the soil and history of Sikkim.
THE SIKKIMESE LIMBOOS IN SIKKIM PRE-MERGER ERA (1642-1974)
According to the agreement, ‘Lho-Men-Tsong-sum’, the ‘threesome’, Bhutia, Lepcha and Limboo were supposed to be the members of the same family. The Bhutia was considered to be a father, Lepcha a mother and Limboo a son. Through the council, called ‘Lho-Men-Tsong-Sum’ the kingdom of Sikkim was to be ruled.  They all equally had to be represented in the council. They were not supposed to fight among themselves. If one tribe thinks ill of any other tribes, the culprit was to be vexed by the promise (Gurung, 1985, pp. 69-74). The main reason behind this agreement was to establish ‘Communicracy’ and consolidate unity and co-operation among the Lhoree (Bhutias), Menree (Lepchas) and Tsongree (Limboos) who inhabited Sikkim at that time (Kazi, 1983, pp. 1-29 & Basnet, 1974, p. 16).
But the policy of the successive Chogyals of Sikkim towards the Limboos was sometimes ambiguous. Sometimes, the Chogyals of Sikkim treated the Limboos as original inhabitants of Sikkim with reference to ‘Lho-Men-Tsong-Sum’ and sometimes discriminated against because of cultural and linguistic reasons and differences (Gurung, 2011, p. 208). Sometimes they (Limboos) were clubbed with the Bhutia-Lepchas with the use of popular expression ‘Lho-Men-Tsong-Sum’ and sometimes with Nepalis in terms of revenue or tax payment. So, the Limboos did not receive equal treatment from the successive rulers of Sikkim as the Bhutias and Lepchas received from the Chogyals of Sikkim. Even there is no record of Limboos being appointed as Dzongpans (Governors) as well as Kalons (ministers) like that of the Lepchas and Bhutias in the Royal Palace. They were granted mere Decrees ‘Lahalmor’ permitting the Limboo chiefs to look after the affairs of their ‘thums’, administrative centres and to use their customary drums like Negra (royal kettle drum) and Kay (Chyabrung) while observing their religious gathering, rituals and festivals (Gurung, 1985, pp. 69-74). According to the oral history narrated by Yap Sonam Yongda, a famous social worker and founding Chairman of Muyal Liang Trust (MLT), the Limboos during the  time of Tensung Namgyal (1670-1700) were even ‘Charinangmoos’ of the Royal Palace.[2]
In 1917, when Revenue Order No 1 was implemented, the Limboos were not protected as one of the members of the Chogyal’s citizens. They were unequally treated with Bhutia-Lepchas but at par with the Nepalis and had to pay higher revenue (Gurung, 2011, p. 129). Even when the Sikkim State Council was constituted in 1925, none of the Limboos were included in the Sikkim Council. In 1952, the Darbar of Sikkim introduced Parity System according to which, 6 seats were allotted to the Bhutia-Lepchas and 6 seats to the Nepalis in the Sikkim State Council. But no seat was allotted to the Limboos of Sikkim. Henceforth, the Limboos continuously made representations and put constant pressure upon the Chogyal of Sikkim for the grant of ‘Tsong Seat’ in the Sikkim State Council reiterating the historical record of the treaty ‘Lho-Men-Tsong-Sum’ and aboriginality of Limboos of Sikkim.
In 1958, in due respect and recognition of their historical records, the Chogyal of Sikkim nominated Indra Prashad Tsong as a Tsong councillor to represent the Limboos in the Sikkim Council. In 1961, on the basis of the Tripartite Agreement ‘Lho-Men-Tsong-Sum’ the Limboos were provided citizenship[3] through the Sikkim Subject Certificate along with the Sikkimese Bhutias and Lepchas (Sikkim Government Notification No 5/277/61, dated: 3rd July 1961, Rao, 1978, Datta, 1994, Kharel, 2002, p. 33). In 1966 under the Royal Proclamation, the Twelfth Chogyal of Sikkim, Palden Thendup Namgyal, provided the Tsongs (Limboos) one separate seat, ‘Tsong Seat’ in Sikkim Council for the restoration of their political rights and protection of their distinct identity (Sikkim Darbar Gazette, Gangtok, 21st December, 1966). Therefrom, Harka Dhoj Tsong became the councillor to represent the Limboos in the Sikkim Council in 1967. This change, however, was not welcomed by the leaders of Sikkim National Congress and Sikkim State Congress and was constantly objected by them. In counter, the Chogyal Palden Thendup Namgyal reiterated that the Tsongs were not Nepalis and in fact they were separate and distinct identity in themselves since ancient times, as such they were granted a ‘Tsong Seat’ (Kazi, 1983, pp. 1-29). In 1968, after the Chogyal’s approval on 11th March, 1967, teaching of Limboo language in the schools of Sikkim was also started as an optional subject upto class-II (Notification No 36/62/990/Edu 11th March 1968).[4] The Committee consisting of five members under the Chairmanship of Queen, Hope Cook was also constituted to study the deficiency of the Limboo text book in Sikkim (Subba, 2005, pp. 3-12).
The separate seat for the Tsongs (Limboos) in the Sikkim Council continued to remain until it was abolished on 8th May 1973 when a tripartite agreement was signed between the Chogyal of Sikkim, the leaders of the major political parties of Sikkim and the Government of India. Thereafter, the Limboos were merged with Nepalis. While abolishing the ‘Tsong Seat’ none of the Limboo was consulted or no consent of the Limboo was taken. This undemocratic act of abolishing ‘Tsong Seat’ paved the way for the gradual erosion and dilution of Limboos’ distinct identity.
The act of clubbing the Tsongs with the Nepali community became indigestible. They were of the opinion that the Limboos of Sikkim are separate and distinct community with strong historical, linguistic, religious and cultural aspects deeply rooted into the soil and history of Sikkim. Thus submergence of Limboos with Nepalis was against their interest. As a reaction of this, in 23rd May, 1973, Akhil Sikkim Kirat Limbu Chumlung (ASKLC) was established at Tharpu, West Sikkim. In its first meeting held on 19th July 1973 at Soreng Bazar, West Sikkim, under the Chairmanship of Harka Dhoj Tsong, the Chumlung passed a resolution declaring that the ‘Tsongs (Limboos) were not Nepalis but one of the indigenous tribes of Sikkim’ (Gurung, 2011, pp. 129-131 & Chaudhury, 2002, p. 25). Since then Akhil Sikkim Kirat Limbu Chumlung time and again kept on highlighting the concept of historical testimony, ‘Lho-Men-Tsong-Sum’ and vocalising their aspirations and demands.
 On 19th August 1973, under the Presidentship of Badhu Lepcha, a general meeting of ‘Lho-Men-Tsong-Sum’ was held at Gangtok and following declarations were made in favour of the Limboos.
‘Before the inception of Chogyal Phuntsok Namgyal and its Namgyal dynasty in Sikkim, Lho-Men-Tsong-Sum were the original inhabitants of Sikkim as proved by the history of Sikkim. But due to the manipulation, self centred and one sided policy of Thikadars and political leaders the Tsong (Limboo) community was downtrodden in the political, social, educational and other fields. We expressed our concern to declare that Tsong community is also one of the original communities of Sikkim. The meeting further appeal that the original communities of Sikkim and for the integrity of the three communities let our brotherhood remain strong.
As per the Revenue Act No: 1 of 1917, the land belonging to the Bhutia-Lepcha cannot be purchased by the other communities. Similarly under the above Act, the law should be made in such a way that the land of the Tsong community cannot be sold to the other communities. However, three communities can purchase land among themselves. Thus the resolution is passed.
The resolution was adopted that the political, social, education, culture, language and literature of Bhutia, Lepchas and Limboo should establish its own institution and render possible assistance in order to develop and remain committed and forwarding.
The resolution passed that in the newly constituted Assembly, seats should be obtained by Limboos of the state. The Tsong, Limboo, Subba, Yakthungba are the same community. Yu-Tsong and Khor-Tsong are surname given to cause fraction within Limboo community. Thus the meeting strongly oppose it and resolution is hereby passed that above community are same community’ (Lho-Men-Tsong-Sum ko ghosana Patra, 19th August, 1973).
THE SIKKIMESE LIMBOOS IN POST-MERGER ERA (1975-1994)
In April 1974, the General Election to the Sikkim Assembly was held for the first time on the basis of ‘one man one vote’ according to the 8th May Agreement of 1973 and Representation of Sikkim Subject Act of February 1974 of the Chogyal of Sikkim. In the election, 16 seats each were kept reserved for the Bhutia-Lepcha and Nepali respectively in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly. But no separate seat for the Tsongs (Limboos) was allocated.
In connection with seat reservation and tribal status, the Limboos of Sikkim on 15th June, 1976 submitted a memorandum to the President of India, New Delhi claiming; ‘the Limboos of Sikkim are one of the aboriginal inhabitants of Sikkim having their own distinct culture, tradition, religion and language’. It was further stated, ‘Limboos of Sikkim along with the Bhutia and Lepchas have accepted and installed Phuntsok Namgyal as the first king of Sikkim and very name of Sikkim originated from the two Limboo words- ‘Su’ and ‘Khim’ meaning new house’ (Memorandum submitted to the President of India by Akhil Sikkim Kirat Limboo Chumlung, dated: 15th June 1976).
 In the representation, they requested the Indian Government to consider the Limboos of Sikkim as one of the backward classes and make allotment of necessary fund for their upliftment, reservation of seats and scholarships for higher studies in both within and outside the state, reservation of seats in Government services with relaxation in age and qualification, reservation of seats in the Sikkim  Legislative Assembly for their adequate representation, alienation of agricultural land as done in the tribal areas of other states and extend facilities for a minimum period of 20 years at the initial stage (Memorandum submitted to the President of India by Akhil Sikkim Kirat Limboo Chumlung, Dated: 15th June, 1976).
In response to the representation made by the Limboos of Sikkim to the President of India, Director General (BCW) O K Moorthy, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India wrote a letter to T S Gyaltshen, Chief Secretary of Sikkim stating; ‘there is another primitive tribe namely the Limboos who have social affinity with the Lepchas and some of them are animists. The Limboos have been mentioned as autochthonous inhabitants of Sikkim and are sometime considered as Limbuwan Lepchas as is in the case of muglan Lepchas from Darjeeling District. The status of the Limboos will have to be spelt out clearly and if necessary they may be grouped with Lepcha and their entry could be Lepcha-Limboo’ (Letter from the Director General (BCW), O K Moorthy, Ministry of Home Affairs to the Chief Secretary, Government of Sikkim, dated: 21st July, 1976, No. 12016/24/ 75-SCTV).
 On October 17th 1977, Akhil Bharatya Kirat Limboo Chumlung held a meeting at Singtam. In the meeting, two main issues; reservation of four seats in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly for those belonging to the Limboo community and official status for the Limboo language were raised (An Express Reporter, 3rd December, 1977). Following this, the said Chumlung on 31st October 1977 submitted representation to the Chief Election Commissioner, Government of India when came to Gangtok, Sikkim.  On 5th November 1977, the Governor of Sikkim, Bipin Behari Lall also wrote the Central counterpart T C A Srinivasavaradan, Government of India demanding restoration of seats reserved earlier for the Limboos in Sikkim Legislative Assembly in concurrence to Article 371F (f) of the Indian Constitution. The letter reads:
‘The Tsongs/Limboos/ Subbas of Sikkim are well defined community who have their own language, oral as well as written and have a distinct culture, customs and tradition which are not exactly similar as to the rest of the Nepali community. It was apparently in recognition of their separate identity that a Proclamation was issued on 21st December 1966 relating to the election and composition of the Sikkim Council provided for one seat in the Council being reserved for the Tsongs. This reservation of one seat in the Sikkim Council for the Tsongs was maintained in the Proclamation of 31st December, 1969 also. However, for some unknown reason, in the Government of Sikkim Act of 1974 under which the present Assembly was elected there was no provision for the reservation of any seat in favour of the Tsongs.
The Tsong/Subba/Limboo community has the strength of about 50000 in the state. Educationally, economically and socially however they are a very backward community and in my opinion, they need protection and encouragement in order to bring them to the level of other communities in Sikkim within a reasonable period of time. Article 371 F (f) of the Constitution lays down that ‘Parliament may for the propose of protecting the rights and interests of the different sections of the population on Sikkim make provision for the number of seats in the Legislative Assembly of the State of Sikkim which may be filled by candidates belonging to such section and for delimitation of the assembly constituencies form which candidates belonging to such section alone may stand for election to the Legislative Assembly of the state of Sikkim’.
Reservation of some seats for the Limboos/Tsongs/Subbas can apparently be made under this provision and such reservation in my opinion, will be thoroughly justified, particularly in view of the fact that both in the 1966 and the 1969 Proclamation, relating to election to the Sikkim Council the need for some reservation in favour of the Tsongs/Limboos/Subbas was considered necessary. A copy each of the Proclamation of 1966 and 1969 are also enclosed already for reference’ (Letter written by the former Governor of Sikkim, B B Lall to T C A Srinivasavaradan on 5th November 1977).
On 1st February 1978, the delegation led by the President of Akhil Sikkim Kirat Limboo Chumlung called on the Prime Minister of India, Maroji Desai in New Delhi and submitted a memorandum demanding to accord recognition of Limboos as a Schedule Tribe and reserve at least four seats of the 32 Sikkim Legislative Assembly seats. The delegation also met the President of India, N Sanjiva Reddy and presented the memorandum incorporating similar demands (Indian Express, 2.2.1978 & Hindustan Times, 2.2.1978). On 18th May 1978, two-man delegation representing the Limboo community of Sikkim met the Home Minister, H M Patel and demanded that four seats be reserved for the Limboos in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly. The representation stated:
the Limboos of Sikkim were not part of Nepali community but actually were an ethnic minority tribal community having a separate language, script, culture customs and tradition’ (Hindustan Times, May 18th 1978).
In 1978, Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Sikkim) Order was implemented in Sikkim. But unfortunately, the Limboos were not included despite of their continuous effort and demand for their recognition and inclusion in the said list. They were left out although the central government and the Governor intended to recognise and include them in the list of Schedule Tribe. They, along with the Bhutia and Lepcha, could have been included in the list of Scheduled Tribes under ST and SC (Sikkim) Order of 1978, but were excluded for some unknown reason. However, other communities such as Sherpas, Drukpas, Chumbipas, Yalmos, Tibetans, Kagatay, Tromopas and Dopthapas who were Buddhist by religion were recognised as Schedule Tribes under ST and SC Order (Sikkim), 1978.
The Presidential Ordinance seeking to amend the Representation of People Act 1950 and 1951 was issued in 1979 and accordingly allocation of seats in the Sikkim Assembly took place. The 16 each seats which were reserved for the Bhutia-Lepchas and Nepalis were rearranged. The 16 seats reserved for the Bhutia-Lepchas were reduced to 13 including 1 Sangha seat. The Eight communities Sherpa, Drukpas, Chumbipas, Yalmos, Tibetans, Kagatay, Tromopas and Dopthapas were brought within the fold of Bhutias for both economic benefit and political share. The 16 seats which were reserved for the Nepalis was increased to 17 and left unreserved as General seats and 2 seats were allocated for the Schedule castes. But no separate seat for the Limboos was allocated for their political safeguard. Thus, the Limboos were neither provided any separate seats in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly under People’s Representation Act 1950 and 1951 in 1979 nor included in the list of Schedule Tribe in 1978. They were deprived of both political rights and economic benefits. In 1976, the Central Home Ministry had asked for clarification from the Kazi Government as to why the Tsongs (Limboos) could not be included in the list of Schedule Tribe of Sikkim, but still then Kazi was reluctant to recommend the Limboos as one of the Schedule Tribes of Sikkim (Gurung, 2011, p. 130).[5] This ultimately resulted to a great predicament among the Tsongs (Limboos) of Sikkim. The Limboos of Sikkim, restlessly through various forums and organisations kept constantly demanding for their inclusion in the list of Schedule Tribe and restoration of their seats in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly.
The Sikkimese Tsongs were unpleased and disappointed with the attitude and administration of Kazi. For the Tsongs Kazi was a mere hijacker of democracy rather than the architect of it. For the sake of democracy the Tsong seat was abolished on 8th May 1973 and Kazi himself was one of the signatories when the Tripartite Agreement was signed between the Chogyal, the Government of India and the leaders of the three major political parties of Sikkim on that particular event. Furthermore, during five years of his rule in Sikkim, he did never honour the aspirations and urges of Limboos and was reluctant to include the Tsongs in the list of Schedule Tribe in 1978. It was during his regime, that Sikkim became a part of Indian Union in 1975 and 16 seats reserved for Nepalis including the Tsongs in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly was abolished and 16 seats reserved for the Bhutia-Lepcha was reduced to 13 including 1 Sangha seat in 1979.
In April 1979, the election to the Sikkim Assembly was held. Sikkim Janata Parishad led by Bhandari won 16 of the 32 seats and formed the government with the support of one Sangha candidate, Lachen Gomchen Rimpoche. During the election, the Bhutia-Lepcha and Limboo votes had been very crucial for the victory of Bhandari; firstly, Bhandari had fought an election on anti-merger plank which was supported by the majority of Bhutia-Lepchas, especially royal families and secondly Bhandari had contested and won from Soreng constituency which was a Limboo dominated area in west Sikkim.
After the formation of the government, Limboo, Bhutia and Lepcha languages received good deal and witnessed rapid growth and development in Sikkim. In 1980, Textbooks on these three languages were prepared up to the standard of Class VIII and teaching of these languages was started in the same year in the schools of Sikkim. In 1981, Limboo language was recognized as one of the state official languages of Sikkim by the Government of Sikkim (Notification No 6/LD/81). The Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) also accepted and introduced Limboo as one of the core subject for the class IX and X in the government schools of Sikkim in 1981. On 3rd March 1983, All India Radio, Gangtok started broadcasting Limboo songs and news bi-weekly composite programme for 15 minutes. Following same year, December 1983, Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE), New Delhi introduced Limboo language as core subject for class XI from academic session 1984 and class XII in 1985 (Notification No D.D.No academic 11/F1 (2) 83/49983). In 1984, Limboo script was selected for National Award and Sanchaman Limboo then the Minister for Education, Health and Social Welfare of Sikkim was conferred the award for designing the Limboo letter.
Since 1973, the Limboos of Sikkim had been continuously demanding for their inclusion in the list of Schedule Tribe and for restoration of seats in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly. As a reaction of the abolition of Limboos’ seat on 8th May Agreement 1973, Akhil Sikkim Kirat Limboo Chumlung (ASKLC) was established at Tharpu, West Sikkim on May 23rd 1973 and the first meeting of the Chumlung was held on 19th July 1973 at Soreng Bazar, West Sikkim declaring that the Tsongs (Limboos) ‘were not Nepalis but one of the indigenous tribes of Sikkim’ (Gurung, 2011, pp. 129-131 & Chaudhury, 2006, p. 25). Since then, time and again Akhil Sikkim Kirat Limboo Chumlung kept on highlighting the concept of historical testimony, ‘Lho-Men-Tsong-Sum’ and vocalising their aspirations and demands of Limboos’ inclusion in the list of Schedule Tribe and restoration of seats in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly. On 11th March 1980, Sikkim Legislative Assembly was summoned to discuss the 45th Amendment Bill, 1980 seeking to validate the Presidential Ordinance of 1979. During this session, Dorjee Tshering Bhutia of Ranka constituency raised the issue relating to the Limboos of Sikkim and demanded their inclusion in the list of Schedule Tribe. While P L Gurung stressed on the need to include only the genuine Sikkimese in the ST/SC list of Sikkim (Gurung, 2011, p. 278). By virtue of being representative from the Limboo dominated Assembly constituency, Soreng since 1979, Bhandari time to time raised the issue of Limboos’ inclusion in the list of Schedule Tribe from 1981. However, on the other, he remained quite silent regarding the issue of Limboos’ seat reservation in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly. 
 On 14th November 1981, the Limboo representation consisting of sixty signatories including three Limboo MLAs of Sikkim submitted a memorandum to the Prime Minister of India (Memorandum submitted to the Prime Minister of India, dated: 5th November 1981) through the Chief Minister of Sikkim. Nar Bahadur Bhandari took the issue very seriously and forwarded the representation to the Prime Minister of India, Indra Gandhi. It read:
The Limboos do constitute a sizable portion of the population of the state. It is true that there is certainly strong historical date to show that the Tsongs or the Limboos of Sikkim were one of the earlier tribes of this state. The mention of ‘Lho-Men-Tsong-Sum’ to bear out the earlier close ties between Bhutias, Lepchas and Limboos (Tsongs) in the representation is yet a clear undeniable indication. That the Limboos or Tsongs were given separate reservation in the pre’ 74 elections in Sikkim is based on the fact of this community’s distinct and older ethnic background in Sikkim. It is quite true that the Limboos are not well placed educationally in Government services and in other spheres as mentioned in the representation. In the circumstances this representation from the Limboos of Sikkim deserves most sympathetic and favourable consideration from Government of India’ (Letter of the CM of Sikkim to the PM of India relating to the demand for Scheduled Tribe Status by Limboos of Sikkim, dated: 14th November,1981). This initiative of Bhandari indicated his willingness and possible attitude towards Limboos’ inclusion in the list of Schedule Tribe. 
           
On 29th July 1983, the Prime Minister of India, Indra Gandhi had visited Sikkim. In the evening of the same day the Limboos of Sikkim submitted a memorandum to her in the Rajbhawan requesting her to recommend Limboos’ inclusion in the Schedule Tribe (Memorandum submitted to the Prime Minister, Indra Gandhi by the delegates of Limboos, dated: 29th July, 1983). The Government of Sikkim also submitted a memorandum to the Prime Minister of India which contained 5 points such as; Restoration of Seats in the Sikkim Assembly for the Bhutia-Lepchas and Nepalis, Grant of citizenship to the stateless persons, Delimitation of the Constituencies, Economic Programme and Peoples’ faith in Congress (I) leadership. However the issue of Limboos’ inclusion in the list of Schedule Tribe was not mentioned in the memorandum (Memorandum submitted by the Government of Sikkim to the Prime Minister of India, Indra Gandhi dated; 29th July 1983). With regards to the Tsong (Limboo) seat in the Assembly, the Chief Minister submitted a memorandum demanding the restoration of seats both for the Tsongs and Nepalis which was unanimously approved in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly on September 1983.  The copy of the same proposal was also sent to the then Minister of the State for Home Affairs, Nihar Ranjan Laskar. Following this on 14th December 1983, the concerned Minister informed the Lok Sabha stating that ‘there have been proposals for the reservation of seats in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly for the Tsongs and Nepalis communities of Sikkimese origin which had been passed and approved in the State Assembly’ (Gurung, 2010, p. 279).[6]
Sikkim Sangram Parishad (SSP) which emerged as one of the strongest regional political party in Sikkim after 24th March 1984, made a historic comeback in the Lok Sabha election of December 1984 winning the lone Lok Sabha seat with a thumping majority. This victory of Bhandari confirmed that in the state politics of Sikkim local issues and regional parties mattered more importantly than that of the national issues and national political parties.
During the third Assembly election of March 1985, the SSP had raised issues such as restoration of seats in the Sikkim Assembly for the Bhutia-Lepchas and Nepali including the Tsongs, grant of citizenship for the people rendered stateless in Sikkim, preservation of local identity and implementation of son of the soil policy, constitutional recognition of Nepali language, to maintain cordial Centre-State relations (SSP, Election Manifesto, 1984, pp. 1-10), fixation of 1970 as the cut off year for granting of citizenship and amendment of the provision of the constitution which justifies the dismissal of the state government by the governor on one’s pleasure (Gurung, 2011, p. 238). Hence, here it is worth mentioning that Bhandari in the election manifesto (1984) of SSP did neither mention Limboos’ inclusion in the list of Schedule Tribe nor reservation of their seats in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly. It only promised to launch various schemes and programmes for the welfare of the Scheduled Tribes which included both the Bhutia and Lepchas of Sikkim since 1978 (SSP, Election Manifesto, 1984, P. 7). There was a vast difference between old and new Parishad.[7] The SJP and SSP greatly differed in political issues and stands. Though the formation of the new Parishad (SSP) over the old Parishad (SJP) was just like changing a bottle with the same wine, yet dropping of the issues like Limboos’ inclusion in the list of Schedule Tribe and reservation of seats for them in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly and anti-merger of Sikkim in the election manifesto of SSP (1985) manifested the Bhandari’s great political shift in 1985’s general Assembly election from that of the Assembly election of 1979. During this time, Bhandari was more concerned with the idea of ‘Son of the Soil’ policy and ‘Sikkim for Sikkimese’ rather than anti-merger issue of Sikkim. The main issues were reservation of seats in the Sikkim Assembly for the Nepalis, Grant of citizenship to the stateless and inclusion of Nepali language in the Eighth Schedule of the Indian Constitution. The issues raised by Bhandari indicate that he was more concerned with the Sikkimese Nepalis rather than the Bhutia-Lepchas and Limboos of Sikkim. Bhandari also projected himself as the spokesman of the people of Sikkim, whose rights was trampled down by the centre (Kazi, 1993, p. 156). This shift might have occurred due to the political development of May 1984 in which Sanchaman Limboo belonging to the Limboo community and the tribal leaders belonging to Bhutia-Lepcha Sherab Palden, Loden Tshering, Sonam Tshering, Lachen Gomchen Rimpoche and Athup Lepcha were involved in the collapse of Bhandari’s ministry (Gurung, 2011, p. 238).
In his earlier term under SJP (1979-1984), Bhandari sensitively dealt with the language policy of Limboos of Sikkim.[8] Moreover, sometimes Bhandari also took up the issue of Limboos’ inclusion in the list of Scheduled Tribe and reservation of their seats in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly. Therefore, the Limboos once again whole heartedly supported Bhandari in 1985 Sikkim Assembly election with their inner hopes of being included in the list of Scheduled Tribe and restoration of their seat reservation in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly.
In March 1985, Sikkim Legislative Assembly election was held.[9] The SSP  led  by  Bhandari got a landslide  victory  securing  30  out  of  32  Assembly  seats.[10] In the election, two Limboo candidates, Sancha Man Limboo and Birbal Subba won from SSP party tickets. While forming the ministry, both of them were given the rank of Cabinet Ministers. So far as the representation of the Limboo community in the Bhandari’s ministry is concerned, in 1985, out of 11 cabinet rank posts, Limboos had 18.18% of cabinet ministers and 6.25% of 32 representatives in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly.
After the March 1985 Assembly election, Bhandari emerged as a new politician. He turned more powerful, confident, authoritarian and somewhat cocky. He became intolerant of any criticism from outside and within the party. He demanded complete submission to his authority. Political parties and social organisations either had to join or face being silenced forever (Kazi, 1993, p. 163). It was alleged that the rule of Bhandari after 1985 was of worst type. He was accused of being more arrogant and corrupted. There was continual lost of democratic values both within the cabinet and in party functioning, spoil system, victimisation of the opposition (Gurung, 2011, p. 239). The only visible opposition political parties in Sikkim were the Congress (I) and Naya Sikkim Party of Yap Sonam Yongda. Others completely disappeared from the political arena of Sikkim after the Assembly elections. The social organisations which were more influential and actively prevailed during this time were; Sikkim Tribal Welfare Association, Sikkim Lho-men Youth Council, Rangjyong Mutanchi Rong Tarzum and Muyel Pronzom of Bhutia-Lepcha (Kazi, 1993, pp. 155-172) and Akhil Sikkim Kirat Limboo Chumlung of Limboos (Gurung, 2011, pp. 219-314).
Bhandari did not favour the Limboos’ inclusion in the list of Schedule Tribe and restoration of their seats in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly after the 1985 Assembly election. In fact he was opposed to it. Bhandari raised those issues with the centre only which were more concerned to the majority Nepalis of Sikkim. The Limboos’ interest and aspirations was never highlighted to the Central Government on any occasion. As such, Bhandari’s victory of 1985 Assembly election appeared as a slap on the faces of Limboos.
However, there was a continuous representation of the Limboo community to the Central Government even after the election of 1985. On 16th September, 1985, Sanchaman Limboo, the then Minister of Health, Family Welfare, Social Welfare, ST and SC Welfare, Government of Sikkim wrote to Rajendra Kumar Bajpai, Minister of State for Welfare, Government of India, New Delhi enquiring about the position of the file. In reply, on 27th January, 1986, Bajpai stated that the Government of Sikkim had have not recommended despite of their continuous request to the former (DO No.12016/17/81-SC3BCD-I [R/Cell]). On 21st August 1987, MP from Sikkim, L Soloman Sareng submitted Memorandum of Limboos to the Prime Minister, Rajiv Gandhi along with the letter for the earlier inclusion of Limboos in the list of Schedule Tribe. In the letter he stated:
the Limboos form a distinct community of Sikkim with their own social heritage, tradition, customs, religion and language……….the Government of Sikkim had recommended their case in November 1981 and is pending with the Government of India till date…. The Limboos of Sikkim are tribes who are neglected and ignored and the memorandum is self explanatory on this. If Government their genuine demand is not considered by the Government of India then great amount of injustice would be done’ (Letter from L Soloman Sareng, MP, Rajya Sabha to the PM of India, Rajiv Gandhi, Dated 21/8/1987). Despite of continuous demand by the Bhutia-Lepchas and support for Limboos’ inclusion in the list of Schedule Tribe and positive response from the Central Government, Bhandari did neither respond to the matter nor seriously dealt with it. When the central government wanted the Limboo community to be recognised as Schedule Tribes, Bhandari was reluctant to make a recommendation (Limboo, 2003, pp. 69-99).
On 13th August 1987, the meeting of the Group of Union Ministers chaired by Buta Singh was held for 16 hours in Room No 9 of the Parliament House, New Delhi in connection with the comprehensive revision of the lists of SCs and STs. The agenda pertaining to Sikkim State was the inclusion of Limboos in the list of Scheduled Tribe.  In the meeting, the chairman wanted to know whether the Limboos of Sikkim were Tribals?  In the reply, Pasong Namgyal, Secretary to the Government of Sikkim noted: ‘Limboos; they claim their existence right from the time of that of the existence of the Lepchas of Sikkim. They were one of the members of Lho-Men-Tsong-Sum. They have their separate language complete with script which, the state Government has described as one of the State official Languages and is began to be taught upto Class XII in the Schools. They have their different theory of God/Goddess and ritual indicating trait of distinct culture and tradition. Their case for inclusion in the list of ST has already been recommended by the State Government of Sikkim’ (Limboo, 2003, pp. 65-68). Thereafter the file was forwarded to the Chief Minister, Bhandari for the final recommendation. On 22nd August, 1987, in the file Bhandari noted four things under sub-head, ‘Demand-I, Demand-II and Demand-III’. In Demand-I, he recommended the reservation of seats for all the communities of Sikkim in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly as per the distribution of seats suggested by Bhandari government in 1987 as shown in the below given Table-2.
Table-2:
Representing the distribution of seats for different communities of Sikkim as suggested by Bhandari led SSP government, 1987.
Communities
No Seats
1
Bhutia, Lepcha and Sherpa of Sikkimese origin including monasteries
13 Seats
2
Nepalis of Sikkimese origin
13 Seats
3
Scheduled Castes of Sikkim
02 Seats
4
Tsong(Limboos) of Sikkimese origin
02 Seats
5
General
04 Seats
6
Total Seats
34 Seats
Source: Gurung, 2011, p. 280.
In Demand-II, Bhandari recommended for the grant of citizenship to 54000 left out people of Sikkim and in Demand-III, he recommended the inclusion of Nepali Language in the 8th Schedule of the Indian Constitution. So far as the recommendation of Limboos’ inclusion in the Scheduled Tribe is concerned, Bhandari wrote; ‘We cannot separate the demands. We do not want Divide and Rule policy. All Sikkimese are one’ (Noting of the Chief Minister on the report submitted by the Secretary, SC/ST Welfare  Department, Government of Sikkim, dated: 22nd August, 1987). Such move of Bhandari indicated his unwillingness towards Limboos’ inclusion in the list of Schedule tribe. The Limboos became more disappointed and displeased. As a reaction, they revitalised their organisational activities and submitted a memorandum to the President requesting him to include the Limboo community in the Schedule Tribe list of Sikkim and restoration of their seats for the Limboos in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly. The Limboo organisation, Akhil Sikkim Kirata Limboo Chumlung also demanded resignation of the Chief Minister, Bhandari (Gurung, 2011, p. 239).
On 4th November 1988, Denjong Tribal Yargay Chogpa a non-political organisation had organised First Level Convention at Gangtok in which eight points issues were adopted under the caption ‘Saving the Red Penda. Saving Bhutia-Lepcha-Tsong’. Of the eight Resolutions adopted in the convention, three resolutions (4,5&7) were concerned with Bhutia, Lepcha and Limboos of Sikkim. In Resolution No-4: the organisation stated that, ‘the early history of Sikkim abounds with instances of ‘Lho-Men-Tsong-Sum’ unity and their glorious struggle in defence of their motherland. In the Sikkim Council also seats were reserved for the Tsong community. The Tsong like Bhutia and Lepcha should be included in the list of Scheduled tribe and accordingly 6 seats should be reserved for them in the State Assembly’. In the Resolution No-5, ‘the unchecked transmigration threatens the cultural, social and political life of the Bhutia, Lepcha and Tsong minorities. Therefore, the Government should introduce the systems of Inner-Line permit to check the influx of people into the state’.  In the Resolution No-7, under;
Clause (c), convention declared that ‘the government should provide facilities of scholarship to the children of Bhutia, Lepcha and Tsong tribals for higher education without maintaining the merit list’.
Clause (d), stated ‘the government should reserve special seats for Sikkimese students of Bhutia, Lepcha and Tsong origin for study outside the state in the institutions of higher and technical learning’.
Clause (e), demanded ‘the government should provide Tribal Hostel to the Bhutia, Lepcha and Tsong tribals in all the places of Sikkim having secondary schools’.
Clause (f) mentioned ‘the government should provide the reservation of 50% of vacancies in all the Central Government offices and undertakings situated in the state for the members of the Bhutia, Lepcha and Tsong tribals’.
Clause (g), demanded ‘the government should provide the reservation of 50% of vacancies in all the offices and undertaking of state government for the members of the Bhutia, Lepcha and Tsong tribals’.
Clause (h), demanded ‘the government should provide vacant lands to rehabilitate the landless Bhutia, Lepcha and Tsong tribals’.
Clause (i), organisation appealed ‘the government should extend the distribution of food grains at subsidised rates throughout the state from all the Bhutia, Lepcha, Tsong and OBCs’ and the last demand which DTYC declared under
Clause (k) was ‘the government sponsored Sahitya Academy should promote languages and literature of the Bhutia, Lepcha and Tsong’ (Denjong Tribal Yargay Chogpa, 4th November, 1988). Thus the Denjong Tribal Yargay Chogpa since its inception took up and gave full support to the Limboos’ cause and demands as genuine issue. 
The Fourth General Election to the Sikkim Legislative Assembly and the Ninth Lok Sabha Election were to be held together in November 1989. On the eve of the election, Bhandari once wrote to the Prime Minister of India recommending the Limboos’ inclusion in the list of Schedule Tribe and restoration of 02 seats for the Limboos in the State Assembly (Memorandum submitted to the President of India by the delegates of Akhil Sikkim Kirat Limboo Chumlung, dated: 9th August, 1990). The Prime Minister of India, Rajiv Gandhi had also assured that their demand of giving the Limboos the status of tribal and the reservation of 06 seats in the Assembly would be given proper consideration (Thapa, The North-East Sun, 10th October, 1989). However, the move of Bhandari was just to win the heart of Limboo community of Sikkim on the eve of Assembly and Lok Sabha Election of 1989. If Bhandari had have taken the issue of Limboos’ inclusion in the list of Schedule Tribe seriously then the Limboos could have been recognised in 1987. But he did not pay much attention to the issue. In the SSP election manifesto, 1989, also no issue relating to the Limboos was mentioned. This attitude of Bhandari shows his double standard politics towards Limboos of Sikkim.
In the election the SSP made a clean sweep of both the Assembly as well as Parliamentary Elections. It captured all the 32 Assembly seats and the lone Lok Sabha seat obliterating opposition parties from the state. With this unprecedented and memorable victory for two consecutive terms both in the Assembly and Parliamentary Elections once again, Bhandari proved that he was the undisputed leader of the people of Sikkim. With this victory SSP once again came to power for the second term with absolute majority under the Chief Ministership of Bhandari and ruled Sikkim till 1994.[11]
                                                                                                                                                    
After his victory in 1989 Bhandari became more powerful as he had 32 out of 32 seats in the Assembly. There was rampant corruption and victimisation of the opposition and above all politics of divide and rule characterized Bhandari’s government in the post 1989 era (Gurung, 2011, pp. 219-302). Bhandari became more authoritarian as compared to his earlier term. He did not tolerate any criticism from both within and outside the party. The press-medias were asked to behave properly or face consequences (Kazi, 1993, pp. 154-172). The right of the press was curtailed. There were assaults, threats, intimidations and constant pressure over the press-media and use of force and commandos over the opposition parties. This is to say that there was an absence of democratic atmosphere in Sikkim. It was alleged that the administration, bureaucracy and police force were used to torture public to no end. Bhandari wanted to control all the people by coercion and physical torture. He tried to establish hegemony of one reign, one leader, one party and one language in Sikkim (Bhutia, 1999). This is how one-party-system, one-man-rule and reign of terror began in Sikkim under Bhandari regime.
On 14th June 1990, Akhil Sikkim Kirat Limboo Chumlung once again submitted a Memorandum to the President and the Prime Minister of India, reiterating the same demand ie Limboos’ inclusion in the list of Schedule Tribe. The two concerned MLAs belonging to the Limboo community, Sanchaman Limboo and Birbal Limboo were also signatories of the memorandum (Memorandum submitted to the President of India by Akhil Sikkim Kirat Limboo Chumlung, dated: 14th June, 1990). Letter to the Sikkimese Limboos, on 18th August 1990, Denjong People’s Chogpa, a registered political party also expressed its willingness to extend support for the recommendation of Limboos’ inclusion in the list of Scheduled Tribe and include the particular issue in its election manifesto. In the letter, the President of DPC, Lachen Gomchen Rimpoche stated; ‘from the historical point of view, the phrase ‘Lho-Men-Tsong-Sum’ stands oneness or solidarity among the Bhutia, Lepcha and Tsong. In view of the above fact, DPC strongly feels that the Tsongs (Limboo) of Sikkimese origin should be awarded with the Tribal Status’ further stated (Letter to the Limboos from the President of DPC, dated: 18th August, 1990).
As a reaction to the memorandum submitted to the President and Prime Minister of India, the Chief Minister of Sikkim, Bhandari, on 30th June, 1990, wrote an explanation letter to the two concerned MLAs belonging to the Limboo community regarding the said memorandum. The letter read; ‘In your memorandum submitted to the Prime Minister of India you have said that ‘Limboos are a mass of illiterate, poverty striken and vulnerable group with no means to protest’. How would you reconcile these two situations?
(i) How would you say that the Limboos are ‘unequally yoked with the Nepali majority?.’ The word ‘Yoke’ gives a very dangerous connotation and indicates master and servant relationship. Do you think that such relationship exists between the Limboos and the other castes in the Nepali community?
(ii) You have spoken about forgetting the history and culture of the Limboos. Who are responsible for this?
(iii) In the memorandum you have said, ‘Inspite of jeopardy they continue to retain atleast two members in the Legislative Assembly in every Assembly Elections’. This only means that the two members got elected only from Limboo votes. Do you agree on this?
(iv) In the memorandum you have also said ‘we had the future of retaining one MP from the state in 1979 General Elections’. This indicates that the MP was elected only from Limboo voted and the votes of the other communities had no relevance. Was he not a candidate of any political party and that he had no support from the people of Sikkim in general?
(v) Education in Sikkim is free right up to college level. This being so how would you explain that ‘most of the Tsongs or Limboos are unable to send their wards to schools not to speak of higher studies’. Do the Limboos still follow the primitive way of life as mentioned in the memorandum? Please explain ‘the threat to the purity of Limboo language and culture as alleged in the memorandum’.
(vi) Who has pushed the Limboos to ‘utter their submission and dependence’ and that ‘they are threatened of their very identity’.
(vii) You have spoken of the ‘utter degradation of their self respect’. Please exemplify. Don’t you think that these are serious allegations having wide ramifications?
(viii) What status and prestige the Limboos have lost that they are now asking for their restoration?
Both of you being the signatories to the memorandum don’t you think you have violated the discipline of your party, Sikkim Sangram Parishad and its policies? Answers to these queries may please be sent to the party President within two days of the receipt of this communication’ (Letter to Sanchaman Limboo from Bhandari, Ref No 291/SSP/909-91).
On 9th July, 1990, once again Akhil Sikkim Kirat Limboo Chumlung submitted a memorandum to the President of India, R Venkataraman countersigned by the General Secretary of DPC, Major Tashi Wangdi Fungpo and General Secretary of DTYC, Uttam Lepcha regarding the earlier inclusion of Limboos in the list of ST. This time the demand and interest became much forceful and stronger than earlier as Chumlung had the support of most of the Limboo leaders belonging to different political parties including the ruling SSP. The two Limboo MLAs belonging to the ruling government were also the signatories of the memorandum. The tribal-dominated political party, Denjong People’s Chogpa and another vocal social organisation of Tribals, Denjong Tribal Yargay Chogpa, had lent tacit support to the Limboos’ cause and demand. The Sikkimese Bhutia-Lepchas[12] also strongly supported the ‘Lho-Men-Tsong-Sum’ movement for unity among the Bhutia, Lepcha and Limboos[13] and demanded the earlier inclusion of Limboos in the list of Schedule Tribe and restoration of seats in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly. In the memorandum it was stated; ‘In keeping with the tribal traditions, the Limboo community up-held and honour the ‘Lho-Men-Tsong-Sum’ agreement fully and stayed with amity with Bhutias and Lepchas of Sikkim. It was the forces of those three communities which fought valiantly in 1788 war against the Gorkha invasion of Sikkim’. However, the reaction of the Chief Minister of Sikkim, Bhandari who championed the interests of the larger Nepali was very dramatic. He threatened to quit his post as the party chief, if his two MLAs belonging to Limboo community, Sanchaman Limboo and Birbal Limboo fail to apologise for becoming a party to the Chumlung in submitting memorandum. ‘Either I will resign from the post of the President or the two signatories will have to resign for violating party conduct’ Bhandari warned at the public gathering (Sunday, 7-13th October, 1990).
The threat of Bhandari, however, did not have much effect on the Limboos. This was evident from a subsequent memorandum submitted to him by the ‘Lho-Men-Tsong-Sum’ further demanding for the constitutional recognition of the Bhutia, Lepcha and Limboo languages along with the Nepali language. When Bhandari was campaigning for the inclusion of Nepali language in the 8th Scheduled of the Indian Constitution, requesting to all the section of the society, 51 persons representing Bhutia, Lepcha and Limboos also urged the Chief Minister to raise the demand for the inclusion of their languages in the 8th Schedule of the Indian Constitution. This linguistic issue created ideological difference and antagonism between Bhandari and a section of Bhutia-Lepchas and Limboos of Sikkim (Limboo, 2003, pp. 60-99).
Another issue on which the Limboos have become vocal was regarding the Mandal Commission recommendation. In 1990, the Limboos were included in the list of Other Backward Classes (OBC) of Sikkim by the Central Government but State Government headed by the Chief Minister of Sikkim, Bhandari refused to implement the Mandal Commission recommendation in Sikkim. The act of Bhandari’s refusal to implement the recommendation of the Commission in the state has made the matter worse. In the autumn session of the Assembly, Bhandari moved a resolution against the implementation of the Mandal Commission report in Sikkim which was unanimously passed by the Sikkim Legislative Assembly.
Bhandari felt that the report which includes sections of the Sikkimese people in the list while excluding some others is ‘discriminatory’. Implementation of such recommendation among the ethnic communities in Sikkim according to him was to divide them. Here it is also worth mentioning that in 1980 Bhandari himself had prepared the list of Other Backward Classes which included Limboo, Rai, Manger, Tamang, Gurung and Bhujel. However, the Bahun, Chettri and Newars were excluded from the fold of OBCs. Racially, the communities included in the list of OBC belonged to the Mongoliod racial stock while Non-Backward Communities belonged to the Aryan racial stock. This was the reason why Bhandari did rejected the recommendation of Mandal Commission in Sikkim (Sikkim Observer, 8th September, 1990).
  
Meanwhile, the press statement issued by the General Secretary of ASKLC, K B Limboo of Martam-Bermoik accused the stand of Bhandari led government on the Mandal Commission recommendation as ‘an act of highhandedness’ aimed at appeasing  ‘a very small’ section of the Sikkimese people in the state. Representing the Limboos of Sikkim, Chumlung demanded for a ‘review’ of the state government’s decision on the Mandal Commission issue. On the other, reflecting the sentiments of the Sikkimese Limboos, Prithivir Raj Limboo, founder President of the Chumlung and Vice-President of Denjong People’s Chogpa claimed that the inclusion of Limboos in the list of OBCs was an act of ‘injustice’ as because, the Limboos deserved the status of Schedule Tribe like the Bhutias and Lepchas of Sikkim (Sunday, 7-13th October 1990). After Bhandari failed to implement Mandal Commission in Sikkim, bitterness between the leaders of OBCs specially belonging to Limboo, Rai, Gurung, Tamang, Manger and Bhujel and Bhandari started growing.[14]
With regard to the Limboos’ inclusion in the list of Schedule Tribe’s, in 1990s, the Chief Minister, Bhandari once again had shown his unwillingness and antagonistic view. This was clearly reflected in the letter written by Mata Prasad, Additional Secretary, Govt. of India to P K Pradhan, Chief Secretary, Govt. of Sikkim. In the letter it was stated, ‘the Chief Minister of Sikkim vide his letter dated 14th November, 1981 addressed to the Prime Minister recommended the inclusion of Limboo community in the list of Schedule Tribes. The State Government again in the letter No 155/SCSTWD, dated: 2nd June, 1987 recommended the inclusion of Limboo as well as Tamang communities in the list of Scheduled Tribes’. It was further stated that ‘in his (Bhandari) letter addressed to the Defence Minister had suggested that Limboo and Tamang should not be included in the list of Schedule Tribes as this would divide the Nepali community’. ‘Since the earlier view of the Chief Minister and present one are contradictory, may I request you to obtain the specific recommendation of the State Government in this matter so that a decision could be taken’ letter further read (D.O. No. 12016/17/810S CD [R.CELL], dated: 18th December 1991).
In September 25th 1992, ASKLC submitted a representation to the Prime Minister of India requesting to consider the case of Limboos’ recognition as Schedule Tribe. It was accompanied with the remarks of the Chief Minister of Sikkim, SC/ST Department and former Governor of Sikkim along with the historical testimonies like copy of ‘Lho-Men-Tsong-Sum’ treaty and various decrees issued by the successive Chogyals of Sikkim to the Limboos (Ref. No. ASKLC/ 100/92, dated: 25th September, 1992). In 1993, on 13th and 14th September, Resolution for the recognition of Lepcha, Bhutia and Limboo languages upto degree and post degree level  and Resolution for re-scheduling of Scheduled Tribe of Limboos and Tamangs in Sikkim was placed in the August House (Sikkim Legislative Assembly) by the former Chief Minister of Sikkim, Sanchaman Limboo respectively on the subsequent days for the recommendation to the Government of India for rescheduling the Schedule Tribe list as well as the reservation of seats in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly as per the Constitution of India under Article 342 and Schedule Tribe Order 1978 (Resolution of 13th and 14th September 1993, Sikkim Legislative Assembly). But the proposed resolutions could not receive response from Bhandari.
On 20th August 1992, Nepali Language was included in the Eight Scheduled of the Indian Constitution. But this achievement of Bhandari further displeased some section of Bhutia, Lepcha and Limboo communities who wanted the Bhutia, Lepcha and Limboo languages of Sikkim to be included in the 8th Scheduled of the Indian Constitution along with the Nepali language. In March 1994, when there was such political and leadership crisis in the state politics of Sikkim and complete lost of trust upon Bhandari, due to his taxation policy and divided Sikkimese people into Tribal and Non-tribal in terms of Central Tax payment, Bhandari, visited Delhi and met Union Home Minister for State Internal Security, Rajesh Pilot and urged him to take up the issue of including Limboo and Tamang in the list of Schedule Tribe, Delimitation of Assembly Constituencies and restoration of reserved seats of ethnic Nepali communities in the Sikkim Legislative Assembly at an early date (Sikkim Herald, Thursday 31st March, 1994). Here, it is apparently noted that when Bhandari was in power, he never took up those aforesaid issues seriously and intentionally kept unheard for more than one and half decade. But when anti-Bhandari movement took its deep root in Sikkim, he reiterated the age-old issues to normalise the situation. This is how Bhandari in the state political affairs of Sikkim acted and fooled the innocent Limboos of Sikkim during his undisputed regime. Neither the aspirations and demands of Limboos were fulfilled nor were their rights and interests protected. Those issues relating to the Limboos were only begging bowl of votes for Bhandari. He was a leader of double standard that Sikkim had ever produced. He promised one thing and did other thing in his own way.
                                       (To be continued in the next issue).
References:
Primary Sources:
Government Documents
Sikkim Darbar, Notification No 5/277/61, dated: 3rd July 1961
Sikkim Darbar, Government Gazette, December, 21/1966, No-6.
Sikkim Darbar, Notification No 36/62/990/Edu 11th March 1968
Sikkim Darbar (1963), Sikkim: The People and its land, Publicity Department, Govt of Sikkim, Sikkim Govt. Press, Gangtok.
Sikkim Darbar, (1963), Sikkim: A Concise Chronicles, The Royal Weeding Committee, Sikkim Darbar Press, Gangtok.
Sikkim Darbar, (1963), Sikkim: Sikkim Facts and Figures, Sikkim Darbar Press, Gangtok.
Sikkim Darbar, (1965), The Coronation of Sikkim, Sikkim Darbar, Gangtok, Sikkim.
Government of Sikkim (2008), Report on the Commission For Review Of Environmental and Social Sector Policies, Plans and Programmes, IPR, Kwality Stores (Printing Division), Gangtok.
Party Documents
Sikkim Sangram Prashad, (1984) Constitution of Sikkim Sangram Prashad, Gangtok, Sikkim.
Sikkim Sangram Parishad, (1984) Election Manifesto of Sikkim Sangram Parishad, Siliguri.
Eight points issues adopted in First State level Convention of Denjong Tribal Yargey Chogpa at Gangtok on 4th November, 1988.
Sikkim Sangram Prashad, 26th November, 1989, Sikkim Vidhan Sabha Chunao Ghosnapatra, Gangtok, Sikkim.
Letters, Memorandums and Resolutions
Lho-Men-Tsong-Sum ko Ghosana Patra, 19th August, 1973.
Memorandum submitted to the President of India by the Limboos of Sikkim, dated: 15th June, 1976.
Telegram sent to the President of India, dated: 15th June, 1976.
Memorandum submitted to the Chief Election Commissioner of India, Gangtok, dated: 31st October, 1977.
Memorandum submitted to the Prime Minister of India, through the Chief Minister of Sikkim, dated: 5th November, 1981.
Memorandum submitted by the Government of Sikkim to the Prime Minister of India, Indra Gandhi, dated: 29th July, 1983.
Memorandum submitted to the Prime Minister of India, Indira Gandhi, dated: 29th July, 1983. 
Memorandum submitted to HE Governor of Sikkim, Homi JH Taleyarkhan, Gangtok, Sikkim, dated: 28th May 1984.
Memorandum submitted to HE Governor of Sikkim, Homi JH Taleyarkhan, Gangtok, Sikkim, dated: 14th August, 1984.
Memorandum submitted to the HE President of India, Raj Bhawan, Gangtok, dated: 29th November, 1985.
Memorandum submitted to the Prime Minister of India, Rajiv Gandhi, dated: 21st August, 1987.
Memorandum submitted to HE the Governor of Sikkim, Rajbhawan, Gangtok, dated: 20th March, 1990.
Memorandum submitted to the HE the President of India, New Delhi, dated: 14th June, 1990.
Memorandum submitted to the President of India, Shri R. Venkataraman by the Chief Minister of Sikkim, dated: 21st October, 1991.
Memorandum submitted to the Chief Minister of Sikkim, NB Bhandari, dated: 6th June, 1993.
Memorandum submitted to the Prime Minister of India, New Delhi, through the Chief Minister of Sikkim, dated: 31at August, 1993.
Memorandum submitted to the Chief Minister of Sikkim, Pawan Kr Chamling, dated: 17th June, 1995.
Memorandum of JAC submitted to the HE Governor of Sikkim: dated; 9th October 1985.
Memorandum submitted to the Governor of Sikkim by the STWA dated: 9th October, 1985.
Memorandum submitted to the President of India by the delegates of Akhil Sikkim Kirat Limboo Chumlung, dated: 9th August 1990.
Letter from the Director General (BCW), O K Moorthy, Ministry of Home Affairs to the Chief Secretary, Government of Sikkim, dated: 21st July 1976, No.12016/24/ 75-SCTV.
Letter of the Governor, Sikkim, BB Lall to TCA Srinivasavaradan, Government of India, dated: 5th November, 1977.
Letter of the CM, Sikkim to the PM of India relating to the demand for Scheduled Tribe Status of Limboos of Sikkim, dated 14th November, 1981.
Letter to the Secretary, Ministry of Welfare, Government of India, S S Verma by the Government of Sikkim, Welfare Department of SC & ST, Gangtok, dated: 2nd June, 1987.
Letter from L. Soloman Sareng, MP, Rajya Sabha to the PM of India, Rajiv Gandhi, dated: 21st August, 1987.
Noting of Chief Minister regarding the seat reservation formula, Constitutional recognition of Nepali language, citizenship and inclusion of Limboo in the list of Schedule Tribe, dated: 22nd August, 1987.
Explanation letter sent to Sanchaman Limboo by Bhandari, Ref No 291/SSP/909-91.
Letter to the Limboos from the President of Denjong Peoples’ Chogpa, dated: 18th August, 1990.
Letter of Subhot Kant, Minister of State Home, Government of India, North Block, New Delhi to the Chief Minister of Sikkim, Bhandari, dated: 8th March 1991.
Letter of Mata Prasad, Additional Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Welfare to PK Pradhan, Chief Secretary, Government of Sikkim, dated: 18th March 1991, DO. No. 12016/17/810SCD (R.CELL).
Resolution, Sikkim Legislative Assembly, dated: 13th and 14th September 1993, Sikkim Legislative Assembly, Sikkim.
Report of the Committee Constituted by Government of Sikkim to consider the demands; Inclusion of Limboo and Tamangs in thew list of Schedule Tribes of the State, Restoration of seats of Sikkimese origin and Delimitation of Constituencies, 1987.
Secondary Sources: (Articles):
Datta, Amal (1994) ‘Ethnicity and Resource Management in Sikkim’, in Mahindra P Lama, Sikkim: Society, Polity, Economy and Environment, Gidwani Indus Publishing Company, Elegant Printers, New Delhi, 110064.
Chakravartti, K R (1991), ‘Seat Reservation Issue in Sikkim Legislative Assembly: A Perspective’ in Sikkim Govt. College, Bulletin of Research Cell,Vo-1,No-1, Research Cell, Sikkim Govt College, Tadong, Gangtok.
Gyamtso, P.T. ‘Culture; Animism in Limbu-istic Cult’ Himalayan Today, June-August 1992.
Jigme, N. Kazi (1998) ‘District Identity Within the Union’, News Letter, Sikkim Observer, Sunday, January 2-8th, Gangtok.
Khamdhak, B L (2001) ‘The plight of Limboos in Sikkim’, Sikkim Observer, April 20 to May 4th  Vol. XVI Nos.
--------- (2003) ‘The Sikkimese Limboos; Their changing history and status in the pre and post merger of Sikkim’, in Harka Khamdhak, Emeythnasung, Modern Deepak Press, Nadesar, Varanasi, UP.
Rapden, Tashi ‘United tribes of Sikkim; The Limboos, Bhutias and Lepchas join hands to press for their demands’, Sunday, 7-13th October 1990.
Sangkrityayana, Jeta (1994) ‘Development without Stocks: A Himalayan Experience’ in Mahindra P Lama, Sikkim: Society, Polity, Economy and Environment, Gidwani Indus Publishing Company, Elegant Printers, New Delhi, 110064.
Subba, P S (2005) ‘Limboo Lekhya Bhasako Bikashbarey Aphailai Herda,’ in Tumyang, Setling and Tigenla Padam Sing Subba ‘Apatan’: Byatitwa ra Krititwa Yakthung Kirat Chumlung, Limboo Bhasa Sahitya Pratisthan, Kathmandu.
Tenzee, C’Wang (1992) ‘Limbus in Limbo’ in Vishwa Bandhu Gupta, North-East Sun, The Voice of North-East, May 23-29th 1992 Vol-XV, No-43.
Thapa, Arati ‘Tribes Shooting Trouble for Bhandari’, The North-East Sun 10th October, 1989.
Tulku Rinku, (1991) ‘Buddhist Culture of Sikkim: Problems and Possibilities’ in Sikkim Govt. College, Bulletin of Research Cell, Vo-1, No-1, Research Cell, Sikkim Govt College, Tadong, Gangtok.
Secondary Source:
Basnet, L B (1974) A Short Political History of Sikkim, S. Chand & Co. Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi.
Chaudhury, Maitryee (2006) Sikkim: Geographical Perspectives, Mittal Publications, New Delhi-110006.
Datta Amal (1991) Sikkim Since Independence (A Study of Important of Education and emerging Class Structure), Mittal Publication, New Delhi-110059.
Gurung, Gopal (1985) Hidden Facts in Nepali Politics, Putali Sarak, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Gurung, S K (2011) Sikkim: Ethnicity and Political Dynamics, A Triadic Perspective, Kunal Books, New Delhi-110002.
Kazi, Jigme N (1983) Spotlight  on  Sikkim,  Eastern  Express  Print  Shop,  Enchay  Colony, Tibet  Road, Gangtok.
--------- (1993), Inside Sikkim Against Tide, Hill Media Publication, Gangtok.
Kharel, M P,(2002) Socio-Economic Condition of Sikkim under Colonial Domination (1889-1947): An Authenticity Discourse, Thesis submitted to the University of North Bengal, Rajarammohnpur, Darjeeling, West Bengal. 
Limboo, K B (2003)  Limboos of Sikkim, Background Paper of ST Status, Tarun Advertising Agency, Delhi.
Lama, R P & Gurung, M M (2004) Culture, Vol-III, Sikkim Study Series, Information and Public Relation, Government of Sikkim, Part-A, Kawality Stores, Gangtok, Sikkim.
Rao, Raghunadha P (1978) Sikkim: The story of its Integration with India, Cosmo Publications, 24 B Ansari Road Daryaganj, New Delhi-110002.



[1]In other words, they were politically protected and economically benefited. 
[2] The word ‘Charinangmoo’ in the statement of Yap Yongda means ‘pro-national as well as loyal of the Palace’.
[3] The status of aboriginality, i.e, aadibashi haak in Nepali language.
[4] Within six years of duration (1968-1974), altogether 9 Limboo language teachers were appointed by the Sikkim Dabar.
[5] During Kazi led government rule (1974-1979), only teaching of Limboo language which was started upto class II during the reign of Chogyal was further upgraded to VII.
[6] Since the merger of Sikkim to the Indian Union, the issues like merger of Sikkim, Bill No 79, Rights of the Sikkimese vis-a-vis Non-Sikkimese, Son of the Soil Policy, issue of citizenship and reservation of seats continued to dominate the political arena of Sikkim. After the SJP government assumed power in 1979, the whole administrative structure of Sikkim was reorganised. The Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) which was set up in 1973 was replaced with the Sikkim Armed Police (SAP). Considerable reduction was made for the central government officials on deputation to Sikkim. Even the name of the Sikkim Janata Parishad was changed to Sikkim Parishad to keep the distinct identity of Sikkim and party. Bhandari was also extremely critical of plainsmen being a Governor of Sikkim. This resulted in the growth of bitterness between B. B. Lal, the Governor of Sikkim and Bhandari, the Chief Minister of Sikkim.
[7] This is because the old SJP was formed on anti-merger platform by Bhandari. In its initial stage, leader and supporters had to suffer from humiliation and torture in the hands of Central Reserve Police. Bhandari was imprisoned in the Central Jail, Behrampur for his anti-merger position. His party was not allowed to hold any public meetings. Hence it took years to get its concrete shape and triumphant success in the 1979 Assembly election while SSP was the foster child of SJP.
[8] In 1981, Limboo language was recognised as one of the official language of Sikkim by the Bhandari led government. In the same year (1981) Limboo language was also introduced upto class X as one of the optional subject in the government schools of Sikkim and by 1983, the same was accepted by Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) and was introduced up to Class XI in 1984 and XII in 1985.
[9] There  were  altogether  195 candidates  of  which  94  including  11  women  were  Independent  candidates  to  fight  an  election. Four National political parties and two state political parties were in the election fray.
[10] One  seat  went  to  Indian  National  Congress  (INC) candidate,  Kalzang  Gyatso  Bhutia  of  Kabi-Tingda  constituency   and  next  one  seat  to  Palchen  Sardar, Independent  candidate  from  Gangtok constituency. The Sikkim Sangram Parishad secured 60,371 (62.20%) votes out of 99,059 votes polled in 290 polling stations. 
[11] While forming the ministry after 1989 Assembly election, out of 13 ministers of Cabinet ranked, 6 i.e (44.4%) was provided to Bhutia-Lepcha and only 1 ie (7%) to the Limboos. This distribution of portfolios for the Cabinet minister shows that Bhandari was more in favour of Bhutia-Lepchas than Limboos after 1989 Assembly election. Heavy weighted and veteran Limboo representative and community vocal, Sanchaman Limboo was dropped from Cabinet rank post and remained as MLA.
[12] Who were declared as Scheduled Tribes in 1978, three years after the merger of Sikkim with the Indian Union.
[13] Whom the historians regard as the three main communities inhabiting the state prior to the large scale Nepalese immigration into Sikkim in the latter part of the 19th century.
[14] The Mandal Co-ordination Committee was also constituted under the leadership of Chandra Das Rai. It became broad-based forum of OBCs of Sikkim and had the support of most of the OBC political leaders.

1 comment:

  1. Thank you sir for your great afford on upliftment of mother language,community,selflessly.I feel proud n that was my fortunate That i was been a student of your.hats up.

    ReplyDelete