Kangpokpi: The Committee on Protection of Tribal Areas Manipur-Kuki Hills (COPTAM-KH) has sought urgent intervention of the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) to protect the customary, legal and constitutional rights of the Scheduled Tribe inhabitants of Maohing Village in Kangpokpi District, alleging occupation and assertion of rights by Chawangkhening settlement within the officially demarcated territorial boundary of Maohing Village.
In a press release issued today, Ref. No. 01/COPTAM-KH/PR/2026 dated 16-09-2026 from its Head Office at KIM Administrative Office, Tuibong Sub-Division, CCPUR District-795128, the organization stated that it has submitted a formal complaint under Article 338A of the Constitution of India. The complaint seeks protection of the rights of the Scheduled Tribe community of Maohing Village, stating that uncertainty continues over the village boundary despite existence of historical revenue records, administrative orders and judicial proceedings.
According to COPTAM-KH, the core of the dispute is the official demarcation of Maohing Village that was carried out under Hill Miscellaneous Case No. 40 of 1982. The committee informed that the demarcation was done after due notices were issued to neighbouring village chiefs and objections were invited from all interested parties. After following the prescribed procedure, the territorial boundaries of Maohing Village were formally recorded and recognized by the competent revenue authority.
The officially recorded boundaries of Maohing Village as per the documents enclosed with the complaint submitted to NCST are clearly defined as North: Gunbah, a branch of the Imphal River; South: Kanggui River; East: Imphal River; and West: Koubru Ching. COPTAM-KH has argued that these boundaries have been on official record for more than four decades and form the legal basis for protection of the village’s customary land and village institution.
The organization further pointed out that by an order dated 25 July 1983, the Deputy Commissioner formally recognised Shri Khupkai Haokip as the hereditary Chief of Maohing Village. This recognition, according to the committee, confirms the legitimacy of the village institution and its territorial jurisdiction as per the demarcation done in 1982. The committee maintains that any subsequent settlement or administrative action overlapping this demarcated area must be examined strictly in accordance with law.
Raising concerns over recent developments, COPTAM-KH stated that the Government of Manipur subsequently issued a notification dated 14 November 2002 recognising Chawangkhening Village. The notification was challenged before the Gauhati High Court, Imphal Bench, in W.P. (C) No. 1240 of 2003. The committee said that this legal challenge is central to the present complaint as the recognition of a new village within an already demarcated village territory raises serious questions of legality and customary rights.
Referring to the High Court proceedings, COPTAM-KH stated that by an order dated 3 December 2003, the High Court required that the process concerning the proposed village be undertaken again in accordance with law. The Court directed that proper boundary descriptions must be published, objections must be invited from affected and interested persons, and those objections must be considered before a final decision is taken. The committee alleges that implementation of this order has remained incomplete and uncertain.
In compliance with the opportunity to file objections, the Chief of Maohing submitted objections in December 2003, asserting that the proposed boundaries of Chawangkhening overlapped substantial portions of the officially recognised territories of Maohing Village and Harup Maohing Village. The objections were stated to be supported by demarcation records, survey documents and sketch maps prepared during the 1982 proceedings. COPTAM-KH has enclosed these records as part of its petition to NCST.
The committee has framed the issue as a constitutional concern involving protection of Scheduled Tribe customary land and village institutions. It has submitted that continued occupation or assertion of rights within the officially recognized territorial boundary, if established, violates constitutional safeguards. The complaint invokes Article 338A which defines powers and functions of the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes, Article 371C which provides special constitutional framework concerning Hill Areas of Manipur, Article 300A which provides protection against deprivation of property except by authority of law, and Articles 14 and 21 which guarantee equality before law and protection of life, livelihood and dignity.
To strengthen its legal argument, the complaint also refers to important judicial decisions concerning customary land rights in Manipur and across India. These include AIR 1961 Manipur 21, Vumsuan & Others vs. Nokam & Others, (1995) 3 GLT 617, and the landmark Supreme Court judgment Samatha vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, (1997) 8 SCC 191, which upheld protection of tribal lands. COPTAM-KH argues that these precedents affirm that tribal customary rights cannot be extinguished by unilateral executive action.
As part of its prayer to the Commission, COPTAM-KH has urged the NCST to call for detailed reports from the Chief Secretary, Government of Manipur, the Deputy Commissioner of Kangpokpi District, and the concerned Revenue Authorities regarding implementation of the High Court order dated 3 December 2003 in W.P. (C) No. 1240 of 2003. The organization wants the Commission to verify whether the procedure prescribed by the High Court was duly followed before recognition of Chawangkhening.
Further, the organization has requested a comprehensive joint field inspection and revenue verification based upon the records of Hill Miscellaneous Case No. 40 of 1982 and connected official records, so that the actual status of the officially demarcated Maohing Village boundary can be established on the ground. It states that only a physical verification with reference to old survey records, river boundaries and hill features can resolve the overlapping claims and restore clarity.
COPTAM-KH has also requested that if unauthorized occupation is established following due process of law, the competent authorities initiate appropriate proceedings as per the Manipur Hill Areas laws and revenue codes, and that no mutation, settlement, construction, land transaction or other administrative action inconsistent with the officially recognized boundaries be processed until the dispute is resolved according to law. It warns that allowing such actions would create irreversible ground realities.
Clarifying its position, COPTAM-KH maintains that disputes concerning recognized tribal village territories should be resolved through official records, lawful demarcation, due process and judicially prescribed procedures, rather than through unilateral occupation or administrative recognition unsupported by applicable legal process. It said its objective is not to oppose any community but to ensure rule of law and protection of documented village boundaries.
In conclusion, the organization has appealed to the NCST to examine the matter under its constitutional mandate and ensure that the customary and legally recognized territorial rights of Maohing Village are effectively protected. The press release was issued by the Committee on Protection of Tribal Areas Manipur-Kuki Hills (COPTAM-KH), expressing hope that both the Central and State authorities will act promptly to prevent further complications in Kangpokpi District.
