An Occupational Profile of Tribal Children of Patiala City

 

Dr. Narinder Singh

Department of Sociology, Government Degree College Ramgarh, Jammu

*Corresponding Author Email: singh.narinder286@gmail.com

 

ABSTRACT:

Government of India claims that child labour is banned in the country through its legal pronouncements. The present research work discloses the shocking facts regarding the prevalence of child labour among tribal children between 06 to 15 years in Patiala city of Punjab. In addition to it, it underlines the challenges appeared before them. For this purpose, this chapter tries to seek answers to certain questions regarding underlying patterns of child labour among tribal children. Through this, the factors responsible for child labour have been identified. Along with it, their impacts on tribal children are probed. Pertaining to this, interview schedule is used to procure the answers to certain questions regarding their occupation. It includes: What is your occupation? When did you start earning money? What forced you to earn? Is the income sufficient to fulfil your basic needs? How many months, days and hours you work in a year, week and day respectively? What problems do you face at work place? These questions were put to them to procure information. The tribal children of 06 to 15 years age group in Patiala city of Punjab make the universe of this study. In the process of interviewing the respondents, census method was used in the selection of tribal settlements and households. Purposive sampling was used to select the respondents (children belonging to 06 to 15 years age group). Given the nature of the problem under study it is decided to follow the census method since only those households had to be selected that had children between 06-15 years. Hence all such households across all settlements were taken whose number stands at 211. And the total number of respondents stands at 366. It cuts across gender lines thus we have 191 boys and 175 girls included in this study. Census method is used in the selection of tribes in Patiala city.  There are four tribes namely, Bazigar, Sikligar, Dehe and Ghihare (the latter two are Sansi’s subgroups) living in the city. All such households of these tribal groups have been included in the study that had children in the relevant age group that is 06-15 years irrespective of gender. The research design for the present study is primarily exploratory and descriptive in nature. Some of the popular methods of exploratory research used in the research include literature survey which of course is true for all types of research followed by field observations, depth interviews and group meetings with the respondents and other concerned members of the family and community. This all shall be done to obtain extensive details into various aspects of the child labour among tribal children.

 

KEYWORDS: Occupational Activities, child labour, interview schedule, research design and tribal children.

 

INTRODUCTION:

Born to parents who themselves were uneducated child workers, many child workers are forced to continue a tradition that leaves them chained to a life of poverty (Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation 2012).

 

The word occupation is defined as the doing of work, play or activities of daily living within a temporal, physical and socio-cultural context that characterizes much of human life (Kielhofner 2009). Occupation tends to determine the status of individuals in the society. An individual’s exposure outside his community is affected by his/her occupation. An occupation can be described as a particular action or course of action in which one is engaged especially; habitually to earn one’s living. It is one of the social determinants of one’s economic status and it affects the life style, behaviour, conduct and even morale as well as one’s role in the society. It serves as an indicator of socio-economic status and stature of the family. Varying degrees of honour and prestige are attached with each occupation (Vadhera 2012).

 

In the process of economic or occupation change and social mobility, there is a tendency to acquire increasing degree of autonomy. Any change is not always considered as development. Economic development is a complex process, in which economic and non-economic factors are closely interwoven. Development is, therefore, not only economic growth plus change; social, cultural and institutional as well as economic. So far as economic parameters are concerned capital, accumulation, population, growth, discovery of new resources, and technological progress are relevant. These factors are further interrelated in various ways.

 

Traditional occupations are defined as those occupations that have been followed by successive generations of tribal people and their communities, and are rooted in customs and practices that were established prior to colonization (International Labour Office 2000). A large number of people following their traditional occupations had changed over to new professions and accepted new jobs or employments elsewhere accordingly as they got such opportunities, for further economic prospects and assured livelihood. Coupled with these, growth of population, heavy pressure on the limited ancestral cultivable land and their gradual fragmentation and insufficient output of crops, as well as, segmentation of ancestral trade or shop, have together contributed potentially to rapid changes of occupations of the individuals. Old traditional occupations associated with status and ranks are no longer in a position to sustain orthodox cohesion of the caste-occupational patterns or the social equilibrium. In this respect, a few other factors, peculiar to Indian social structure, have obliged the individuals to develop adaptability of attitudes (Bhowmick 1969).

 

According to Alakh Narayan Sharma, ‘Child labour’ means the employment of children below 14 years in gainful occupations (in industrial as well as non-industrial occupations) which are injurious to their physical, mental, moral and social development. Thus, the term includes wage labour as well as self-employed children working independently as well as in family enterprise’ (Sharma 1979). Srivastava describes child labour as a system of forced, or partly forced, labour under which the child, or usually child's parent enter into an agreement, oral or written, with a creditor (Srivastava 2005). A child laborer is defined by SIMPOC (Statistical Information and Monitoring Program on Child Labor) as an economically active child under 12 that works 1 or more hours per week, an economically active child 14 and under that works at least 14 hours per week or 1 or more hours per week in activities that are "hazardous by nature or circumstance," and a child 17 and under that works in an "unconditional worst form of child labor" (trafficked children, children in bondage or forced labor, armed conflict, prostitution, pornography and illicit activities) (ILO 2002). The ILO (2006a) estimates that there were 218 million child laborers in the world in 2004 under this definition.

 

According to Lieten, there is a distinction between child labour and child work. For him, child work is a generic term that refers to any type of work being done in any mode of employment relationship. The concept of work, thus, means physical (or mental) involvement in a job. It is an activity, which rather than being harmful may be beneficial to the child in its formative socialisation. The concept of labour, he recommends, is any activity which is restricted to the production and services and it interferes with the normative development of children (Lieten 2000).

 

According to the Census of India, 2011, it is estimated that among children of 05-14 years age group total 43,53,247 children are belonging to category of main workers out of which 26,64,047 are males and 16,89,200 are females. Total 19,00,182 children work less than three months in a year in which 9,59,894 are males and 9,40,288 are females. Similarly, total 38,75,234 children work for three to six months in a year in which 20,04,974 are males and 18,70,260 are females in Punjab state of India, there are 90,353 working children in the age group of 05-14 years (Census of India 2011). According to NSSO, 2009-10 (66th round of survey) on child labour, there are 48,836 working children in Punjab state of India, in the age group of 5-14 years (http://labour.nic.in/content/division/nsso-data-on-child-labour.php)

 

According to the ILO Report on India published in 1999, about 1.5 million people were employed in the diamond industry, mostly in the unorganized sector. It estimates that child labourers in 1997 were between 1,000 to 2,000 out of 1.5 million total workers (about 1 in 100). The ILO Report claims the causes for child labour include parents who send their children to work because they see education as expensive   poor in quality offer no real value. As child grows up parents engage them in artisan work in diamond and gem industry for remunerative purposes. In 2011, Sivakasi in Tamil Nadu was home to over 9,500 firecracker factories and produced almost 100 per cent of total fireworks output in India. The fireworks industry employed about 150,000 people at an average of 15 employees per factory (International Labour Organization Report 2012). A Human Rights Watch Report   2003 claims children are employed and work for up to 12 hours a day and six to seven days a week in silk industry. These silk industry children are forced to dip their hands in scalding water to palpate the cocoons and are often paid less than Rs 10 per day. In 2010, a German news investigative report claimed that in states like Karnataka, about 10,000 children working in 1,000 silk factories in 1998 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_labour_in_India).

 

Siddartha Kara finds that 20 per cent of carpets manufactured in India involve child labour. Official estimates for child labour working as domestic labour and in restaurants is more than 25,00,000 while certain NGOs estimate the figure to be around 20 million. The Child Labour Prohibition and Regulation Act1 has banned the employment of children as domestic workers and as workers in restaurants, dhabas, hotels, spas and resorts (Kara 2014).

 

United Nations Report (2015) on ‘The Millenium Development Goals states’, “The world’s poor remain overwhelmingly concentrated in some parts of the world. In 2011, nearly 60 per cent of the world’s one billion extremely poor people lived in just five countries.  Nearly 60 per cent of the world’s 1 billion extremely poor people lived in just five countries in 2011: India, Nigeria, China, Bangladesh and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (ranked from high to low) (United Nations Report 2015).  This proves poverty in India is a great menace. In 2012, the Planning Commission Report stated that 21 per cent of people in India fall below the international poverty line of US $ 1.25 per day. The number of poor is now estimated at 269.3 million, of which 216.5 million reside in rural India. According to the United Nations Report (2010) on Development Programme, an estimated 29.8 per cent of Indians live below the country's national poverty line. A United Nations Report 2013 stated that a third of the world’s poorest people live in India (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Poverty_in_ India).

 

According to Census 2011, in India, total 21.9 per cent of persons are falling in category of below poverty line. Out of total 21.9 per cent, 25.7 per cent belong to rural and 13.7 per cent to urban areas. In case of Punjab there is a higher incidence of urban poverty than rural poverty. It is believed that in India there is a higher incidence of poverty in rural areas and urban poverty is spill over of rural poverty. In Punjab rural poverty is declining at faster rate than urban poverty (Gill 2003). It is so because Punjab has been agriculturally dominated economy and agriculture sector gets lion’s share of funds for development (Government of Punjab 2000). At Punjab level, total 8.3 per cent of persons belong to below poverty line. Out of the total 8.3 per cent, 7.7 per cent belong to rural and 9.2 per cent to urban areas (Census of India 2011).

 

Poverty is the denial of opportunities and impoverishment in multiple dimensions like deprivations in a long and healthy life, in knowledge and in a decent standard of living (Mowafi and Khawaja 2005).  At the world level, one out of three malnourished children is found in India. In addition to it, 42 per cent of the children of less than five years age group are underweight. It also depicts that a total of 58 per cent of children less than five years age group are stunted (Siddiqui 2014). In developing countries almost one out of every 15 children die before they reach the age of five (UNICEF 2008).

 

Children who are poorly nourished suffer up to 160 days of illness each year.  Under-nutrition magnifies the effect of every disease, including measles and malaria.  The estimated proportions of deaths in which under-nutrition is an underlying cause are roughly similar for diarrhea (61%), malaria (57%), pneumonia (52%), and measles (45%) (Black et al.2003).  Malnutrition can also be caused by diseases, such as diarrhea, by reducing the body's ability to convert food into usable nutrients.

 

According to the Global Hunger Index (GHI) Report, 2011 India is among the three countries where the GHI between 1996 and 2011 went up from 22.9 to 23.7.  For the sake of convenience the calorie norms are rounded off to 2400 calories per capita per day for rural areas and 2100 calories per capita per day for urban areas. There is no uniform measure of poverty in India. The Planning Commission of India has accepted the Tendulkar Committee Report which concludes that 33 per cent of people in India are living below the poverty line (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_India; Burra 2000; Global Hunger Index Report 2011).

 

World Bank and Government of India claims poverty reduction in India.  But on careful examination these claims proved wrong as they are derived from a methodologically incorrect procedure to calculate poverty. For India the energy norm was set at 2100 calorie per day in urban areas and 2400 calorie per day in rural area, the latter being lowered in actual application to 2200 calories. This definition of poverty line was applied correctly in 1973 by looking at the nutrition data from the NSS consumption survey to give Rs 56 and Rs 49 monthly poverty lines per person, but the definition was never applied again. In 2004-05, the official monthly poverty lines per person were Rs. 539 urban and Rs 356 rural or on daily basis Rs. 18 urban and Rs. 12 rural- very low sums which would have bought only a bottle of water, whereas they are supposed to cover all daily expenses, food plus non-food. The problem lays here that price indices which are useful for short period calculations, under-estimate the cost of living severely over longer periods.

 

Applying the original official nutrition-norm based definition of poverty line by using the NSS nutrition data for 2004-05, it has been disclosed that the actual poverty lines were almost double the official estimates. The analysis by social groups shows there is strikingly higher than average poverty among the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Research found, 79 and 87.5 per cent of Scheduled Castes people in rural and urban areas respectively were in poverty while 82.5 and 81 per cent of Scheduled Tribes in rural and urban areas respectively were inflicted with the problem of poverty (Patnaik 2012).

 

As per the report submitted by C. Rangarajan claims that persons spending below Rs. 47 a day in cities would be considered poor, much above the Rs. 33-per-day mark suggested by the Suresh Tendulkar Committee. The Planning Commission's estimates based on Tendulkar Committee had drawn flak in September 2011, when in an affidavit to the Supreme Court it was stated that households with per capita consumption of more than Rs. 33 in urban areas and Rs. 27 in rural areas would not be treated as poor. The  Rangarajan  Committee  was  set  up to review the Tendulkar  Committee  methodology for estimating poverty and clear the ambiguity over the number of poor in thecountry. As per Rangarajan Panel estimates, a person spending less than Rs. 1,407 a month (Rs. 47/day) would be considered poor in cities, as against the Tendulkar Committee's suggestion of Rs. 1,000 a month (Rs.33/day). In villages, those spending less than Rs. 972 a month (Rs. 32/day) would be considered poor. This is much higher than Rs. 816 a month (Rs. 27/day) recommended by Tendulkar Committee (http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/new-poverty-line-rs-32-per-day-in-villages-rs-47-in-cities-554113).

 

Some television channels assumed that these figures covered food costs alone and it could not meet even a fraction of a person’s minimal nutrition needs at today’s prices. These paltry sums, however, are supposed to cover not only food but all non-food essentials, including clothing and footwear, fuel for cooking and lighting, transport, education, medical costs and rent. Even a school child knows that working health cannot be maintained, nor basic necessities obtained, by spending so little. Amazingly, however, 350 million Indians subsist below these levels. They can hardly be said to ‘live’ in any true sense: their energy and protein intake, and consumption of cloth and other necessities, is far below normal. They are underweight, stunted and sick but without the means to obtain adequate food or medical treatment. The official poverty lines do not measure poverty any more; they measure destitution. The outcry against calling these destitution lines, poverty lines, is justified, for true poverty lines are much higher and show 75 per cent of all Indians to be poor.  Despite a good growth rate of per capita income, this result is because of worsening income distribution, which highlights a minority monopolizing all the gains while the majority has suffered loss of purchasing power (Patnaik 2012).

 

In the absence of alternative sources of income, when capital markets are imperfect poor people are left with no other option but to child labour for their survival. In such situations child employment provides families with additional income that may help them cope up with poverty (Dessy and Pallage 2004; Patrinos and Psacharopoulos 1997). Historians of child labour have noted how the industrial revolution in Europe was associated with massive increases in child labour. But eventually as the fruits of development trickled down to the average household and as family wages increased, the employment of children began to decline (Nardinelli 1980).

 

After independence from colonial rule, India has passed a number of legislations on child labour. The Constitution of India guarantees2 Fundamental Rights and the Directive principles of State Policy to prohibit child labour below the age of 14 years in any hazardous employment (Article 24). Under the Child Labour Prohibition and Regulation Act, 1986, a child is a person who has not completed 14 years of age. For the purposes of criminal responsibility, the age limit is 7 (not punishable) and above 7 years to 12 years punishable on the proof that the child understands the consequences of the act, under the Indian Penal Code. For purposes of protection against kidnapping, abduction and related offenses, it’s 16 years for boys and 18 for girls. For special treatment under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2011, the age is 18 for both boys and girls. And the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 defines a child as any person below the age of 18, and includes an adopted step- or foster child. (Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation 2012).

 

Child labour is a matter on which both the central government and country governments can legislate, and have. Additionally, various laws and the Indian Penal Code, such as the Juvenile Justice (care and protection) of Children Act-2000, and the Child Labour (Prohibition and Abolition) Act-1986 provide a basis in law to identify, prosecute and stop child labour in India. The Factories Act of 1948 and the Mines Act of 1952 prohibits the employment of children below the age of 14 and 18 years in any factory respectively. Acts related to child labour further amended in the form of Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act of 1986 which prohibits the employment of children below the age of 14 years in hazardous occupations identified in a list by the law. The list was expanded in 2006, and again in 2008. The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) of Children Act of 2000 made it a crime, punishable with a prison term, for anyone to procure or employ a child in any hazardous employment or in bondage (http://indiacode.nic.in). According to one report, the prosecutors have no direction from the central government that if a child is found to be underpaid, the case should be prosecuted not only under the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and the Child Labour (Prohibition & Regulation) Act, 1986, the case should include charges under the Bonded Labour Act of India (ibid.)

 

This research paper is an attempt to study the child labour among tribal children of age group 06 to 15 years in Patiala city. Moreover, challenges appeared before them are underlined. For this purpose, this chapter tries to seek answers to certain questions regarding underlying patterns of child labour among tribal children. Through this, the factors responsible for child labour have been identified. Along with it, their impacts on tribal children are probed. Pertaining to this, interview schedule is used to procure the answers to certain questions regarding their occupation. It includes: What is your occupation? When did you start earning money? What forced you to earn? Is the income sufficient to fulfil your basic needs? How many months, days and hours you work in a year, week and day respectively? What problems do you face at work place? These questions were put to them to procure information. The responses are presented in tabular form preceding to their respective interpretations.

 

After data collection, it has been found that there is problem of child labour among tribal children. In this regard a question was asked to them, ‘Do you work for money outside the home?’ The responses of the respondents are shown in table 1.1.

 

Table 1.1 Respondents’ working for money outside home

Do you work for money outside the home?

Frequency

Percentage

Yes

240

65.57

No

126

34.43

Total

366

100.00

 

The distribution of the respondents in the table 1.1 clearly marks that more than half of the tribal children that is 65.57 per cent work outside their homes; succeeded by 34.43 per cent of the respondents do not work outside their homes. Now, question arises what type of occupation they are engaged in.  Table 3.1.5 highlights that more than half of the working tribal children that is 58.33 per cent were engaged in the rag-picking occupation; succeeded by 20.00 per cent tribal children fall in the occupational category of domestic worker; 11.25 per cent work as waiter; 05.00 per cent involve in the occupation of shop workers; 04.17 per cent work as wage labourer; and the remaining 01.25 per cent of the respondents fall in the occupational category of drum (dhol) beating. This indicates that maximum of the tribal children are engaged in rag-picking. Further, it is important to inquire about their threshold age of engagement in labour work. Table 1.2 helps to show the corresponding relationship between age and nature of occupation. The responses of the respondents are given as:

 

Table 1.2 Distribution of respondents according to their age and occupation

Occupation

What is age of occupation (in years)

06-09

10-12

13-15

Total

Rag picking

140

00

00

140 (58.33%)

Waiter

07

20

00

27 (11.25%)

Wage Labourer

00

03

07

10 (04.17%)

Drum (dhol) Beating

00

00

03

03 (01.25%)

Domestic Worker

32

07

09

48 (20.00%)

Shop workers

07

03

02

12 (05.00%)

Total

186

(77.50 %)

33

(13.75%)

21

(08.75%)

240 (100.00%)

 

The distribution of the respondents in the table 1.2 exhibits that overwhelming majority of the children that is 77.5 per cent starts working in the age category of 06-09 years; succeeded by 13.75 per cent in the age category of 10-12 years and 08.75 per cent in the age category of 13-15 years. Data reveals that children jump into some sort of occupations at their tender age. It is extremely important to diagnose the reasons responsible for their early engagement in some sort of occupations. To find out the reasons for the same, table 1.3 has been made which is given as:

 

Table 1.3 Distribution of respondents’ reasons to earn money

Reasons to work for money outside the home

Frequency

Percentage

Poverty

162

67.50

To earn pocket money

78

32.50

Total

240

100.00

 

The distribution of the respondents in the table 1.3 witnesses that 67.50 per cent of the respondents work outside owes to their poverty and remaining 32.50 per cent work for earning pocket money. Above data witnesses that there are certain economic bindings on their part which push them into child labour. Now, it is pertinent to note their work time in a year. Pertaining to this, table 1.4 tries to seek the answers to the question. The responses of the respondents are highlighted below:

 

Table 1.4 Distribution of respondents’ according to the work throughout the year

Whether you work usually throughout the year

Frequency

Percentage

Almost 12 months

225

93.75

More than 06 months

15

06.25

Total

240

100.00

 

The distribution of the respondents in the table 1.4 clearly reflects that overwhelming majority of children that is 93.75 per cent work throughout the year and 06.25 per cent works more than 06 months in a year. Further, it is required to calculate the number of days they work in a week. In this regard information is disclosed in table 1.5

 

Table 1.5 Distribution of respondents’ according to the number of days they work in a week

Work days in a week

Frequency

Percentage

04 days

10

04.17

05 days

21

08.75

06 days

21

08.75

07 days

188

78.33

Total

240

100.00

 

The distribution of the respondents in the table 1.5 unveils that majority of children that is 78.33 per cents work 07 day in a week. This category includes rag-pickers, domestic worker and rehra (horse cart) driver. 08.75 per cents of the respondents work 05 and 06 days in a week respectively. It includes waiter, drum beater and shop workers. About 04.17 per cents of the respondents’ work 04 days in a week are engaged in labour. In the same manner, table 1.6 presents responses of the respondents to the question how many hours they work in a day are shown below:

 

Table 1.6 Distribution of respondents’ according to the number of hours they work in a day

Hours in a days

Frequency

Percentage

04-06 hrs

187

77.92

06-08 hrs

12

05.00

08-10 hrs

14

05.83

10-12 hrs

27

11.25

Total

240

100.00

 

The distribution of the respondents in the table 1.6 clearly indicates that overwhelming majority of children that is 77.92 work 04 to 06 hours in a day; succeeded by 11.25 per cents work 10 to 12 hours in a day; 05.83 per cent works 08 to 10 hours in a day and 05.00 per cents work 06 to 08 hours in a day. Tribal children work hard to earn money. They were enquired about the utilization of their income. In this regard the responses of the respondents are given in table 1.7.

 

Table 1.7 Distribution of respondents regarding for what purpose their contribution is usually used

For what purpose your contribution usually used

Frequency

Percentage

Household expenditure and repayment of loans

229

95.41

Payment of their school fee, uniforms, books etc. 

11

04.59

Total

240

100.00

 

The distribution of the respondents in the table 1.7 shows that overwhelming majority of children that is 95.41 per cent income is usually used in household expenditure and repayment of loans and 04.59 per cents income is used for payment of school fee, school uniforms, books etc. Income is considered to be the most important variable in determining socio-economic status of an individual. The income of an individual also influences the quality of life. To get information about their income level the responses of the respondents are presented in the table 1.8.

 

Table 1.8 Distribution of respondents according to their monthly income

Monthly income of respondents (in Rs.)

Frequency

Percentage

Upto 1000

92

38.33

1001-1500

135

56.25

1501-2000

13

05.42

Total

240

100.00

 

Out of 366 respondents, 240 respondents work outside their homes which are classified in the above mentioned table according to their income category. Table 5.8 reveals that 56.25 per cent of the respondents belong to the income category of up to Rs. 1001-1500; succeeded by 38.33 per cent in the income category of Rs. 1000; and the remaining 05.42 per cent in the income category of Rs. 1501- 2000. Further, they were asked about the per capita monthly income of their families to determine the socio-economic status of their families. The responses, in this regard are distributed in the table 1.9.

 

Table 1.9 Distribution of per capita monthly income of family

Per capita monthly income of family (in Rs.)

Frequency

Percentage

Upto 600

26

12.32

601-1200

159

75.36

1201-1800

23

10.90

1801-3000

03

01.42

Total

211

100.00

 

Table 1.9 represent that the majority of the families that is 75.36 per cent belong to the per capita monthly income category of Rs. 601-1200, followed by 12.32 per cent of the families belong to the per capita monthly income category of upto Rs. 600, 10.90 per cent belong to the per capita monthly income category of Rs. 1201 to 1800 and small proportion of the families that is 01.4 per cent belong to the per capita income category of Rs. 1801-3000. This makes obvious that majority of the tribal families fall in the per capita monthly income group of up to Rs. 601-1200 which is very low.

 

A glance on their own income and per capita monthly income of their family raises question, ‘Is their income sufficient to fulfil individual respondents or family’s basic needs?’ To seek the answer to this question the responses of the respondents are highlighted in the table 1.10.

 

Table 1.10 Distribution of respondents whether their income is sufficient to fulfil their basic needs.

Is the income sufficient to fulfil your basic needs?

Frequency

Percentage

Yes partially

23

09.58

No

217

90.41

Total

240

100.00

 

Table 1.10 indicates that overwhelming majority of children that is 90.41 per cent responded that their income is not sufficient to fulfil their basic needs and 09.58 per cent income is partially sufficient to fulfil their basic needs. Health for poor people is a vital economic asset. Their livelihood depends on it. When a poor person become ill or injured, entire household traps in downward spiral of lost income and high health care costs. There is simply no doubt about it: health and poverty are inextricably linked; and both have an effect on each other. Tribal children, on account of their poverty do not get proper treatment. Minor ailments are mostly ignored due to financial constraints. Thus, the respondents were inquired whether they suffer from any health problems. The responses in this regard are shown in the table 1.11.

 

Table 1.11 Distribution of respondents whether they suffer any health problem

Whether you suffer any health problem

Frequency

Percentage

Yes

11

03.00

No

355

97.00

Total

366

100.00

 

Table 1.11 unveils that an overwhelming majority of the respondents that is 97.00 per cent of the respondents do not suffer from any health problems and only 03.00 per cent of the respondents they suffer from health problems. It includes fever and cold. Leaving aside few tribal children all remain bare-footed in extreme sunny days. They do not have proper healthy diet. They are not concerned about hygienic conditions of living like washing of hands using soap before and after taking food. Drains are blocked. Tribal bastis (colonies) are surrounded by heaps of trash. In spite of living in such filthy conditions of living tribal children are not sufferings from any hazarduous communicable diseases like TB, Cholera etc.

 

Child labour among tribal children has its certain characteristics. An analysis of its characteristics helps one to understand what kind of child labour it is. To know about the nature of abuses, the respondents were inquired whether they face any kind of abuse at workplace. The responses in this regard are shown in the table 1.12

 

Table 1.12 Distribution of respondents whether they face any kind of abuse at workplace

Do you face any kind of abuse at work place

Nature of abuse

Frequency

Percentage

Verbal

214

89.16

Both physical and verbal

49

20.41

 

Table 1.12 indicates that 89.16 per cent of the respondents face problem of verbal abuse at their work places while 20.41 per cent face the problem of both verbal and physical abuse.  The problems faced by children at work places include harassment at work places, problem of extortion and blame of thieving.

 

From the above, it is ascertained that there is presence of problem of child labour among tribal children. Their poor socio-economic status is compelling factor behind it. Despite their hardships income earned is not enough to complement their basic needs. It may seem strange that there are certain common factors traced in the research work responsible for early indulgence of tribal children into some sort of occupations. Research reveals that more than half per cent (65.57%) of tribal children are engaged in child labour.  Tribal children work very hard to earn money. Girls (Bazigar, Sikligar, Dehe and Ghihare) above 09 years age group work as domestic worker while girls below 09 years go for rag-picking (Dehe and Ghihare only).

 

In case of boys (Dehe and Ghihare of 06 to 15 years age group) are Rag-pickers and boys (Bazigar, Sikligar and Ghihare) above 09 years work as Waiter, Shop workers, Wage labourer, Drum (dhol) beating and Horse cart (rehra) driver. Tribal children work very hard to earn money. Overwhelming majority (93.75%) of them work throughout the year. In majority (78.33%), they work 07 days in a week. It is found that majority (58.33 %) of the children are engaged in rag-picking followed by 20.00 per cent domestic worker; 11.25 per cent waiter; 05.00 per cent shop worker; 04.17 per cent wage labourer and 1.25 per cents are drum beater respectively.

 

About 77.50 per cent children start working at the age of 07 years. They work along with their study. It is because they have to carry out the family responsibilities on their delicate shoulders. On account of their poverty, tribal children work outside to earn money. Almost (95.41%) income of tribal children is usually used in their household expenditure. More than half per cent (56.25%) of the respondents belong to the income category of up to Rs. 1001-1500. Tribal children face problem at workplaces which is quite evident from the data that 89.16 per cent are verbally and 20.41 per cent are both physically and verbally abused.

 

The problem of child labour is also quite acute amongst them. It is found that 27.32 per cent children from the sample of 366 are working full time and 38.25 per cent part time outside the home. This is not out of any pleasure or for the pocket money but out of compulsion to make both ends meet to run the household. Poverty is the driving force behind it as majority of the children belong to families (75.36 per cent) that fall in the per capita monthly income category of Rs. 601-1200, followed by 12.32, 10.90 and 01.40 per cent of the families belonging to the per capita monthly income category of Rs. 600, Rs. 1201 to 1800 and Rs. 1801-3000 respectively.

 

Moreover, when children were enquired about the reason to work outside 67.50 per cent of the respondents cited poverty as a compelling factor in the manner, ‘Ghar da kharcha chalaun leyi kamm karde haan’ (Do labour to contribute in sharing household expenditure). The contribution of children in household affairs affirms from the fact that the income of 95.41 per cent respondents is usually used in household expenditure and repayment of loans. However income earned by them not big in amount as research reveals that 56.25 per cent of the respondents belong to the income category of up to Rs. 1001-1500; succeeded by 38.33 and 05.42 per cent in the income category of Rs. 1000 and Rs. 1501- 2000 respectively.

 

From the money they earn, they get pocket money. About 99.45 per cent of the respondents get pocket money and only 0.55 per cent of the respondents do not get pocket money. More than half of the tribal children that are 51.09 per cent of the respondents get Rs. 03-3.99 in pocket money; followed by 40.66 per cent get Rs. 02-2.99 and only 08.25 per cent of the respondents get Rs. 04-4.99 in pocket money. However, from the research it comes to light that majority of the children get Rs. 03-3.99 per day in pocket money. For tribal parents offering Rs. 10 after a gap of two or three days spoils children. They have perception that it leaves negative impact on them. In few instances parents relate pocket money with the education of their children. They have perception that it can leave negative impact on them.

 

In few instances parents relate pocket money with the education of their children. They have notion that ‘Jyada paise den naal bachae bigad jande ne, oh phir padh de nahin’ (Excessive pocket money spoils children and it diverts their attention from study). They may think so out of poverty. Knowingly it gives them one solid excuse to not offer big amount (Rs. 10) in pocket money (after a gap of two or three days) to their children.

 

It is found in this study that rag-picking is the most common occupation that the children indulge in since it does not require any special skill. About 58.33 per cent children are engaged in this occupation. Others in line are engaged in domestic work; work at shops, waiter, wage labour and drum beating. It is also true of the elder generation. Elder generation is also resorting to daily- wage unskilled labour, shop workers, scrap collection or selling petty goods as pheriwalas (vendor) like chairs, utensils, bed sheets etc. According to Singh (2010), “They have adopted new occupations like rag-picking, boot-polishing or selling vegetables or other items on their bicycles”

 

Besides the problem of their being thrown out of their traditional occupation and their lacking skill and training to undertake modern occupations, the very lopsided development of liberal economy has foreclosed their integration in the mainstream economy and economic development. Birinder Pal Singh writes in this respect that the state is paying more attention towards national and multi-national companies for the development of special economic zones (SEZs) instead of improving the living conditions of poor.

 

Monster of nepotism and corruption is generating the feeling of insecurity and alienation among masses. The state is showing no accountability and set no noose to check rampant growth of economic corruption. No serious action is being taken to support those sections of society that have hitherto remained marginalised. For instance, the tribes of Punjab, not even owns a small piece of land to construct their jhuggi. They settle on government land from where they can be uprooted at any point of time. Their poverty is in consonance with the tribal poverty at all India level.

 

REFERENCES:

1.      A. 2007. Social Problems in India. Jaipur: Rawat Publications.

2.      Aiyappan. A.1948.Report on the Socio-economic Condition of the  Aboriginal Tribes of the Provinces of Madras. New Delhi: Government Press.

3.      Akarro, R. R. J. and Mtweve, N. A. 2011. ‘Poverty and its Association with Child Labour in Njombe District in Tanzania: The Case of Igima Ward,’ Current Research Journal of Social Sciences 3(3):199-206.

4.      Alexandrescu, Gabriela.2002. Romania: Working street children in Bucharest: A Rapid assessment, Issue 19 of Investigating the Worst Forms of Child Labour. Geneva:  International Labour Organization.

5.      Anti-Slavery and IWGIA.1997.Enslaved Peoples in the 1990s: A Report by Anti-Slavery in collaboration with International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs. London: Anti-Slavery International.

6.      Anti- Slavery.2000. ‘Debt Bondage in India, Nepal and Pakistan,’ in United Nations Commissions on Human Rights, Sub- Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, Working Group on Contemporary Forms of Slavery, 25th session.

7.      Bawa, Tajeswari.2010. Social Structure and Family: A   Social- Anthropological Study of   Baurias. M.Phil. Thesis. Patiala: Department of Sociology and Social Anthropology, Punjabi University.

8.      Becker, Howard S. 1963. The Outsiders. New York: Free Press

9.      Berger, P. L. and T. Luckmann .1966. The Social Construction of  Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. New York: Anchor Books.

10.   Biswas  et. al. 1990. ‘A Study of the impact of Health, Education imparted to school children on  their knowledge, Attitude and Practice in regard to Personal Hygiene,’ Indian Journal of Public Health, 34(2):87-92.

11.   B. Bluestone.1971. ‘Economic Theory, Economic Reality, and the Fate of  the Poor,’ Mimeo, p-10.

12.   Black et. al. 2003. ‘Where and why are 10 million children dying every   year?’ Lancet, Jun 28; 361(9376):2226-34.

13.   Bloom, B.S.1965. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Longman Green & Co.

14.   Bokil, Milind.2002. ‘De-notified and Nomadic Tribes: A Perspective,’ Economic and Political Weekly, 37(2): pp. 1-8.

15.   Boudon, R. 1974. Education, Opportunity and Social Inequality. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

16.   Bottomore, et.al. 1985. A Dictionary of Marxist Thought. London:  Blackwell.

17.   Burra, Neera. 1999. Child Labour in Rural Areas with Special focus on Migration, Agriculture, Mining and Brick Kilns. National  Commission for Protection of Child Rights.

18.   Butcher, J.1983. ‘Socialization of Adolescent girls into physical Activity,’ Adolescence, 18:753–66.

19.   Cannan, E. 1983. A History of the Theories of Production and Distribution in English Political Economy. New York: Augustus M. Kelley.

20.   Carrasco, David.1999. ‘New efforts to end child labour,’ InterPress Third World News Agency, 8 December.

21.   Carteau, Michel D.2011. The Practice of everyday life. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.

22.   Cartwright and Patrinos.1999. ‘Child labour in Urban Bolivia,’ in Christian Grootaert and Harry Patrinos (eds.): The Policy Analysis of Child Labour: A Comparative Perspective (St. Martins Press)

23.   Casteneda, A.1974. ‘The Educational needs of Maxican Americans,’ in Castenada A., James R.L. & Robbins W. (eds.): The Educational needs of Minority Group of Children, Lincoln, Nebraska: Professional Educators Publications, Inc.

24.   Census of India (Punjab) 2001 and 2011. Chandigarh: Government of Punjab.

25.   Chand and Puri.1983. Regional Planning in India. New Delhi: Allied Publishers

26.   Chandra Korgaokar and Geir Myrstad.1997. ‘Child Labour in the Diamond Industry,’ International Labour Organization, pp. 51– 3.

27.   Chandwani, V.S. and M.Bhome, Shraddha.2013. ‘A Study of Impact of Commercialisation of Education in India’, Episteme: an online interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary & multi-cultural  journal, Volume 1, Issue 5.

28.   Chattopadhyay, K.P. 1953. ‘Tribal Education,’ Man in India, vol-33. 23,(1),pp.1-18.

29.   Chaudhary, D.P. 1997. ‘A Policy Perspective on Child Labour in India with Pervasive Gender and Urban Bias in School Education’, The Indian Journal of Labour Economics, vol. 40, no. 4, p. 790.

30.   Das and Naidu.2003. Development of Primitive Tribal Groups in India. New Delhi: Kanishka Publication.

31.   Deep, Pankaj. 2007. Implementation of Tribal Development Policies: A Study of the Tribal Sub-plan in G. Udaipur and Kashipur Blocks in Orissa. Ph.D. Thesis (unpublished). New Delhi: Centre for Political Studies School of Social Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University.

32.   Dubey, Birendra Narain.1994. Social Context, Education Policy and Schooling of Tribal Children in Bihar: A Study of Chhotanagpur Region. M.Phil. Dissertation  (unpublished). New Delhi: Zakir Hussain Centre for Educational Studies School of Social Sciences, Jawahar Lal Nehru University.

33.   Durant, R. H., et al. 1994. ‘The Relationship among Television Watching, Physical Activity, and Body composition of Young children,’Pediatrics, 94:449 –455.

34.   Durkheim, E.  1961. Moral Education. Glencoe: The Free Press.

35.   Education and National Development. 1970. Report of the Education Commission, 1964-66 (Vol i: general problems). New Delhi: National Council of Educational Research and Training.

36.   Eames, E. and Goode, J. 1970. ‘On Lewis’ culture of poverty concept’, Current Anthropology, 11 (4-5): 479-482.

37.   Frank, A.G.1969 a. Capitalism and Underdevelopment in Latin America: Historical  Studies of Chile and Brazil. New York: Monthly Review Press.

38.   F 1978. Dependent Accumulation. New York: McGrawhill Publishers.

39.   Ghuman et al.2006. Rural Students in Universities of Punjab. Patiala: Punjabi University.

40.   Ghuman et al.2007b. Unit Cost of Higher Education in Punjab: A Study  of Universities and their Affiliated Colleges. New Delhi: Project Report, sponsored by AIU.

41.   Ghurye, G.S. 1943. The Aborigines-so called- and their future.Poona: Gokhale Institute of Politics and Economics

42.   Global Hunger Index Report. 2011. Bonn: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).

43.   Godin and Shephard. 1984. ‘Normative beliefs of school children concerning regular exercise,’ Journal of School Health, 54:443–445

44.   Good, C.V. 1959.Dictionary of Education. New York: Mc Graw Hill Book Company.

45.   Goode, William Josiah and Hatt, Paul K.1952.Methods in Social  Research.USA: McGraw- Hill, University of California.

46.   Government of India.1968. National Policy on Education. Ministry of Human Resource Development, New Delhi: Department of  Education.

47.   G.n.d.Initiative towards Elimination of Child Labour—Action Plan and Present Strategy. New Delhi: Ministry of Labour.(http//labour.nic.in/cwl/Child labour.htm) (accessed on 29 October 2011)

48.   G..2005. Educational Development of Schedules Castes and Scheduled Tribes: Status  and Programmes. New Delhi: Ministry of Hunan Resource Development.

49.   G .2007. Poverty Estimates for 2004-05, New Delhi:Press Information  Bureau, Planning Commission.

50.   G.2012. Children in India 2012: A Statistical Appraisal.  New Delhi: Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation.

51.   G..2014. Report of the High Level Committee on Socio-Economic, Health and  Educational Status of Tribal Communities of India. New Delhi: Ministry of Tribal Affairs.

52.   Government of Punjab .2007. Statistical Abstract of Punjab, 2006.

53.   G.2000. Statistical Abstract of Punjab, 1999.

54.   Government of Tamil Nadu.1999. Rural Development in India. Chennai: State Planning Commission

55.   Granthan-McGregor et.al.2007. ‘Child Development in Developing Countries in the First Five Years for Children in Developing Countries,’ The Lancet, 369: 60-70.

56.   Haan, Hans Christan.2002. Non- formal Education and Rural Skills Training: Tools to Combat the Worst Forms of Child Labour including Trafficking. ILO Mekong Sub- regional Project to Combat Trafficking in Children and Women, IPEC.

57.   Hammersley M, Atkinson P.1995. Ethnography Principles in Practice. London: Routledge.

58.   Haralombos and Holborn. 2000. Sociology: Themes and Perspectives. New York: Oxford University Press.

59.   Harriss-White, Barbara .2005. ‘Poverty and Capitalism’, A Working Paper Number 134, in Department of International Development.UK:Oxford University.

60.   Hitchcock, G. and Hughes, D.1989. Research and the Teacher. London & New York: Routledge.

61.   Hoey, Brian A.2014.Opting for Elsewhere: Lifestyle Migration in the American Middle Class. Amozon: Vanderbilt University Press.

62.   HRC.1997. Concluding observations on Bolvia. Human Rights Committee, U.N. Doc. (CPR\ c\79\ Add.73.)

63.   Ibbetson, D. and H.A. Rose .1970(1883). A Glossary of the Tribes and Castes of the Punjab and North – West Frontier Province (vol. II).Patiala: Languages Department Punjab.

64.   ILO (International Labour Organization).2002. Every Child Counts: New Global Estimates on Child. Geneva: International Labour  Office.

65.   I…2006a. The End of Child Labor: Within Reach. Geneva: International Labour Office.

66.   I…2010. ‘Accelerating action against Child Labour’, in Global Report under   the follow-up to the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work. Geneva: International Labour Conference, 99th Session, p.98.

67.   I…2011.’Children in hazardous work: What we know? What we need to do?’,in  International Programme on the Elimination of Child Labour (IPEC). Geneva International Labour Office.

68.   Initiative towards Elimination of Child Labour—Action Plan and Present Strategy. 2011. Ministry of Labour, Government of India.

69.   J. A. Bargh et. al.1996. ‘Automaticity of Social Behavior: Direct Effects of Trait Construct and Stereotype Activation on Action,’ Journal of Personality and Social  Psychology, 71: 230- 244.

70.   Jha, Rajiv Kumar.2000. The Role of Language in Schooling of Tribal Children. M.Phil. Dissertation (unpublished). New Delhi: Zakir Hussain Centre for Educational Studies, School of Social Sciences, Jawahar Lal Nehru University.

71.   Jo Boyden and Michael Bourdillen.2012.Childhood Poverty: Multi-disciplinary Approaches. Hampshire: Macmillan

72.   Joy, Jobin and Srihari, M.2014. ‘A Case study on the School dropout Scheduled Tribal students of Wayanad District, Kerala,’ Research Journal of Educational Sciences, Vol. 2(3), pp.1-6. 

73.   Joshi, Vidyut.1998. Tribal Situation in India: Issues in Development. Delhi: Rawat Publication.

74.   Jullian, Joseph. 1977. Social Problems. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs.

75.   Kara, Siddharatha.2014. Tainted Carpets: Slavery and Child labour in India’s Hand-made Carpet Sector. Harvard University: FXB Center for Health and Human Rights.

76.   Kar, S. &Sakthive, S.2004. ‘Uneven Economic Development in India,’Working Paper Series No.E/242/2004. New Delhi: Institute of Economic Growth.

77.   Kaur, Balwinder.2015. ‘The Study on Slum Population and Improvement Programs of Slums in Punjab,’ International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, Vol. 5, Issue 5, May, ISSN 2250-3153

78.   Kaur, Harinder. 2012. Socio-Cultural Factors Related to Environmental Degradation: A Study of Patiala District of Punjab. Ph.D. Thesis (unpublished). Patiala: Department of Sociology and Social Anthropology, Punjabi University.

79.   Kerlinger, F.N.1978.Foundations of Behavioural Research. New Delhi: Surjeet Publications.

80.   Khan, M. Israr.2015. ‘A Critique of Socio-economic Value of Education: Case for Development of Subaltern Paradigm of Schooling’, International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development, 56-61.

81.   Kielhofner, Gary. 2009. Conceptual Foundations of Occupational Therapy Practice. United States of America: F.A. Davis Company.

82.   Kothai, K. 2007. ‘Seasonal Migration hinders Education in India’, One World South Asia,  October.

83.   Kratli, Saverio.2001.Provision to Nomadic Pastoralists: A Literature Review. Institute of Development Studies (IDS): Environment Team. http// www. Eldis.org/ pastoralism.

84.   Larsen, Peter Bille.2003. ‘Indigenous and Tribal Children: Assessing Child Labour and Education challenges,’ in Child Labour & Education Working Paper. Geneva: A Joint IPEC & INDISCO- Cooperation  Publication Lebowitz, M .2004. ‘Paul Sweezy’, Monthly Review, Vol 56, No 5.

85.   Leacock, Eleanor Burke. 1971. The Culture of Poverty: a Critique. New York: Simon and Schuster.

86.   Levi-Strauss,Claude.1963. Structural Anthropology (volume). Norwich: Penguin  Books.

87.   Lewis, Jerome.2001. The Batwa Pygmies of the Great Lakes Region. Minority Rights Group International

88.   Lewis, M. A. and M. E. Lockheed. 2007. ‘Getting All Girls into School’, Finance and Development. International Monetary Fund, Volume 44, Number 2, June.

89.   Lewis, Oscar.1969. ‘Culture of Poverty’, in Moynihan, Daniel P. On Understanding  Poverty: Perspectives from the Social Sciences. New York: Basic Books. pp. 187–220.

90.   Lieten, G.K.2000. ‘Children, Work and Education: General Parameters’. Economic and Political Weekly, June, p. 2037.

91.   Lundberg .1958.Lundberg on Sociology. New Delhi: Harper and Bros.

92.   Mack, Burton L. 2014. Myth and the Christian Nation: A Social Theory of Religion. New York: Routledge.

93.   Maclver and Page.1959. Society: An Introductory Analysis.University of  Michigan: Reinhart.

94.   Martinez, Miguel Alfonso.2000. Review of Developments: Indigenous Children and Youth,  item 4. Working Group on Indigenous Populations, Report: E/ CN4/ sub.2/2000/24.

95.   Marx, Karl. 1988. The Communist Manifesto, ed. Frederic L. Bender. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.

96.   Mazumdar.1966. Grammar of Sociology. New Delhi: Asia Publishing House.

97.   Menon, Geeta 1997. ‘Bondage: Its forms and persistence in tribal India,’ in Anti-slavery and IWGIA: Enslaved peoples in the 1990s, Copenhagen: Document No. 83.

98.   National Child Labour project.2011. Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India. Retrieved 12 September 2011.

99.   National Legislation and Policies against Child Labour in India.2011.Geneva: International Labour Organization.

100.Nayak, P.K.2001. Baseline Survey and needs assessment of the Bondo Highlands. Draft version. New Delhi: SCSTRTI (INDISCO).

101.Ogburn and Nimkoff. 1964. A Handbook of Sociology:International Library of Sociology  and Social Reconstruction. The University of Michigan: Routledge and Kegan Poul.      

102.Palma- Sealza and Sealza.2000. Child Labour involving Indigenous Peoples: The Case of a Manobo Community in Bukidnan  Province. Manila: Draft document for ILO- INDISCO & IPEC.

103.Partridge et al. 1996. Including the Excluded : Ethnodevelopment in Latin America. Latin America and the Carribean Technical Department, Environment Unit, the World Bank.

104.Patel, S. 1991. Tribal Education in India. New Delhi: Mittal Publications.

105.Patnaik, Utsa.2012. ‘Capitalism and Production of Poverty’, in T.G. Narayanan Memorial Lecture. Asian College of Journalism.

106.Redfield, Robert. 1955. The Little Community: Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

107.Robertson, Adam.1997. ‘The Struggle against the Kamaiya system of Bonded system,’ in Anti- slavery and IWIGIA: Enslaved Peoples in the 1990s. Copenhagen: Document No. 83.

108.Robinson, T. N.  et al. 1993. ‘Does Television viewing increase obesity and reduce Physical Activity? Cross-sectional and Longitudinal Analysis among Adolescent Girls,’ Pediatrics, 91:273–280.

109.Rodriquez, Carlos Antonio.1998. ‘School and work for Guatemalan Children,’ in Salazar and Glasinovich: Child Work and Education: Five Case Studies from Latin America (UNICEF).

110.Simon, Wilson O.2011. ‘Centre-Periphery Relationship in the Understanding of Development of Internal Colonies,’ International Journal of Economic Development Research and Investment, April, Vol. 2 No. 1.

111.Singer, Peter.1980.Marx. New York: Oxford University Press

112.Singh, Birinder Pal.2010.'Criminal' Tribes of Punjab: A Social- Anthropological Inquiry. New Delhi: Routledge.

113.Singh, Gopal. 1984. ‘ Socio-economic Bases of Punjab Crisis,’ Economic and Political Weekly, Vol 19, No.1, January, pp.42-47.

114.Singh, Dharmendra Kumar.1996.Primary Education of Tribal Children in Bihar: A Sociological Analysis. M.Phil.Dissertation. New Delhi: Zakir Hussain centre for Educational Studies, School of Social Sciences, Jawahar Lal Nehru University.

115.Singh, K.S. 1998. People of India- India’s Communities (A-G), National Series (vol. IV). Anthropological Survey of India. Delhi, Calcutta, Chennai, Mumbai: Oxford University Press.

116.Sujatha, K. 1998. Evaluation of Quality Improvement Programmes in Education: A Study in Tribal Areas of Vishakhapatnam, Andhra  Pradesh. New Delhi: NIEPA.

117.S_1999.Education of India Scheduled Tribes: A Study of Community Schools in  the District of Vishakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh. UNESCO, Paris: Institute for Educational Planning.

118.Terre, L. et. al. 1992. ‘Demo-graphics, Affect, and Adolescents’, Health Behaviours: Adolescence, vol. 27, pp. 12–24.

119.Tiwari, Jyotsna.2004.Child Abuse and Human Rights.New Delhi: Gyan Publishing House.

120.Tripathy, S.N.1991. Exploitation of Child Labour in Tribal India. New Delhi: Delhi Publishing House.

121.United Nations. 2015. The Millenium Development Goals. New York: United Nations.

122.U…1995. The World's Women. New York: United Nations.

123.UNDP.1990.Human Development Report. New York: UNDP.

124.USAID.1997. ‘Educating Indigenous girls in Latin America: Closing the Gap,’ in Information Bulletin, USAID: Office of Women in Development.

125.UNESCO .2005a. ‘Education for All: The Quality Imperative’, in Global Monitoring Report. Paris: UNESCO.

126.UNICEF. 2008. The State of the World’s Children: Women and Children- Child Survival. New York: Oxford.

127.U..2003. The State of the World's Children. New York: Oxford.

128.U.1998. The State of the World's Children. New York: Oxford .

129.Uowda and Patrinos.1999. ‘Producing Educational Materials in Local Languages: Costs from Guatemala and Senegal,’ in International Review of Education.

130.Upadhyay, R. 2002. Impact of Christianity on the Tribes of Jharkhand. South Asia Analysis Group Paper 511 (<http://www. South asia analysis.org/papers6/paper511.html>, accessed December 30, 2010).      

131.Vadhera, Namarta.2012. Rise and Fall of Hockey in Punjab: A Sociological Analysis.  Ph.D. Thesis (unpublished). Patiala: Department of Sociology and Social Anthropology, Punjabi University.

132.Vajpayee,  Bhavtosh .2008. ‘Take Off: Private Intiative in Education’, Indian Education, 14 March (http://www.everonn.com/images/CLSA140308.pdf).

133.Van, Manen.1990. Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for Action- Sensitive Pedagogy. Albany: State University of New York Press.         

134.Varghese, N.V.1994. School Quality and Students Learning: A study of Primary Schooling in Kerala. DPEP Baseline study. New Delhi: NIEPA.

135.Vidyarthi, L.P.1981. Tribal Development and its Administration.New Delhi: Concept Publishing Company.

136.Ventiades, Nancy.1997. ‘Slavery among the Bolivian Guarani. Indigenous Peoples Subject to the Tabond System,’ in Anti- Slavery and IWIGIA: Enslaved peoples in the 1990s, Copenhagen: Document No 83.

137.Wazir, Rekha.2001. Report on Sankalp, Shankargarh, U.P. Children and Poverty. India: UNDP.

138.Weiner, Myron.1991. The Child and the State in India: Child Labour and  Education Policy in Comparative Perspective. Delhi: Oxford  University Press.

139.William A, Morrison.1959. ‘Family Types in Badlapur, etc., Sociological Bulletin, VIII, pp. 45-67.

140.WIPCE.1999. The Coolangatta Statement: On Indigenous Peoples Rights in Education,  Ratified during the 1999, Hawaii WIPCE. (http://www.fnahec.org/wipce2002).

141.World Bank .2000.Higher Education in Developing Countries: Peril and  Promise. Washington DC: World Bank.

142.World Bank.2001. Honduras: Community- based Education Project, Social Assessment and indigenous People’s Development Plan. Washington, D.C: World Bank. Proheco, Adel and the Intercultural Bilingual Program. (www.worldbank.org)

143.World Bank.2005. Development in Practice: Priorities and Strategies for Education. Washington, D.C: World Bank.

144.Xaxa, Virginia.2005. ‘Politica of Language, Religion and Identity’, Economics and Political weekly, Vol.-XL.13.

145.Yadappanavar, A.V.  2003. Tribal education in India. New Delhi: Discovery Publishing House.

146.Young, P.V. 1969. Scientific Social Surveys and Research.New Delhi: Prentice Hall of India.

147.Zaidi &Salam .2008. ‘Human Development in India; A regional Comparison,’ Indian Journal of Economics, LXXVIII (311), 447-460.        

148.Zakarian et. al. 1994. ‘Correlates of Vigorous Exercise in a Predominantly Low SES and Minority High School Population,’ Preventive Medicine, 23:314 –321.

 

 

WEBSITES

·       file:///C:/Users/Narinder/Desktop/RahulSirohi_JMP.pdf

·       http://ambarsariyaradio.com/game.php#Bandar killa

·       http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/definition/inflation

·       http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Delhi_gang_rape

·       http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_labour_in_India

·       http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everyday_life#cite_ref-1

·       http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kho_kho

·       http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patiala      

·       http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_India

·       http://hdrc.undp.org.in/childrenandpoverty

·       http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/10362/10/10_chapter%203.pdf

·       http://www.hindu.com/2011/04/10/stories/2011041062650300.htm>

·       http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/features/indias-shame

·       http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-  descriptive-and-vs- exploratory    research/#ixzz39FANdgzL

·       http://www.economics.illinois.edu/people/candidates/documents/                                         Rahul Sirohi-Jmp-ph

·       http://harprathmik.gov.in/pdf/rte/Guidelines_for_Eliminating_Corporal_Punishment_in_schools.pdf

·       http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-index-hdi

·       http://indiacode.nic.in

·       http://indiatogether.org/bhasha/budhan/birth1871

·       http://intranet.oit.org.pe/WDMS/bib/virtual/coleccion_tem/trab_infantil/Child_labor_factor_acts.pdf

·       http://labour.nic.in/cwl/ListHazardous.htm

·       http://labour.nic.in/content/division/nsso-data-on-child-labour.php

·       http://mhrd.gov.in/rtehttp://nac.nic.in/pdf/final_dnt_recommendations.pdf

·       http://www.thehindu.com/features/education/school/over-a- quater -ofenrolments-inrural-india-are-in-privateschools/article5580441

·       http://www.ncpcr.gov.in/Reports/Child_Labour_in_Rural_areas_with_special_focus_on_Migration_Agriculture_%20Mining_by_Neera_Burra.pdf. Retrieved 2009-10- 19.

·       http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/new-poverty-line-rs-32-per-day-  in-villages-rs-47-in-cities-554113

·       http://planningcommission.nic.in/reports/genrep/surya.pdf

·       http://theviewspaper.net/poor-quality-of-education-in-government-schools

·       http://www.right-to-education.org/sites/right-to-education.org  2014.pdf

·       http://www.sagepub.in/upm-data/36869_muijs.pdf

·       http://www.traditionalgames.in/home/outdoor-games/hide-seek-kannamucci

·       http://tribal.nic.in/Content/IntroductionScheduledTribes.aspx

·       http://tribal.nic.in/WriteReadData/userfiles/file/ScheduledTribesData/Secation7.pdf

·       http: //web.stanford.edu/eckert/PDF/Chap1.pdf

·       http://www.worldbank.org/depweb/english/beyond/beyondco/beg_01.pdf>

·       http://www.unicef.org/india/education.html

·       http://www.unicef.org/india/about_unicef_3696.htm

 

Received on 24.01.2020         Modified on 19.02.2020

Accepted on 11.03.2020      ©AandV Publications All right reserved

Res.  J. Humanities and Social Sciences. 2020; 11(2):122-132.

DOI: 10.5958/2321-5828.2020.00021.2