Issue on Gorkha Identity: Are Darjeeling Hill Nepalese foreigners?

This is the write up for the answer to the question raised by Mr. Sumanta Sen in The Telegraph, Kolkata edition, Dated April 3, 2008 on the Gorkha Identity in Fifth Column: Fight for a New Home.
Mr. Sen writes in the midst of the tussle, a pertinent question seems to have got lost. The question is how valid is the Nepalese claim to Darjeeling, which includes Kalimpong and Kurseong? Are they the original inhabitants? The answer, unfortunately, is a ‘No’…….. Strictly speaking, the Nepalese in Darjeeling can be dubbed ‘foreigners’ because they have come from another country. For whole story read
Mr. Sen sounds that he is advocating for the state and is desperate to force the sixth schedule in the hills. He sounds contradictory himself, in one hand he says Nepalese can be dubbed as foreigners and on the other hand recognizes citizenship of ours too. It shows that he knows what the status of Nepalese is. The state or the supporters of the so called sixth schedule are desperate seeing the positive momentum of the movement in the hills. They know that Gorkhaland is achievable. And it is the trend in the past too to sideline the real demand of the Hill people.
Mr. Sen has misconception regarding the term Gorkha itself. He had taken the explanation of the term Gorkha from a reliable source but muddled with it. The source says “It is a misconception that the Gurkhas took their name from the Gorkha region of Nepal. The region was given its name after the Gurkhas had established their control of these areas. In the early 1500s some of Bappa Rawal's descendants went further east, and conquered a small state in present-day Nepal, which they named Gorkha in honour of their patron saint.” So every Nepali in the Hills is a Gorkha. Our root lied in the Bappa Rawal’s ancestry which hails from India. It has nothing to do with the citizenry of a country.
By the way how does one differentiate between Bangladeshi Bengali and Indian Bengali? Why don’t you call Amartya Sen a foreigner, he is born in Bangladeshi region? You will argue that it was before Independence, bla..bla..bla right? The same logic applies to us. If you dub Darjeeling people as foreigner then the land itself by default is a foreign land which was ruled by Nepal and Sikkim(Sen has accepted this fact ). Why doesn’t Sen argue in favor of giving back the land to Sikkim or Nepal or Bhutan? He will not do so? Because he knows not what is what in the hills? Why cannot he argue and say that the Dooars, Siliguri was and is a part of the Darjeeling Hills by default, he will not do so because he knows not the history. The arguments put forward by Sen are hypothetical. He does not have sufficient data to authenticate his arguments. Please do remember, Sikkim, prior to 1973 was a sovereign country. Sikkim as a sovereign state of India at no cost will claim its ownership on Darjeeling, to claim its ownership on Darjeeling, as a sovereign state of India is nonsense. Sen talks about fencing of the border because of the influx. But what data he has to support his argument that immigrants from Nepal are residing in Darjeeling Hills? Is he talking about fencing the border with Darjeeling only or the entire Nepal India border? India will be on loss if it is done. Sen sounds conservative and looks at the issue from a very narrow point of view.
History tells that by the start of the twentieth century, Gorkhas made a modest socio-economic advance through government service, and a small anglicized elite developed among them. Following this in 1907, the first ever demand for “a separate administrative setup” for the District of Darjeeling was placed before the British government by the “leaders of the hill people”. The “Hill people” here referred to the Lepchas, Bhutias and the Gorkhas. Their main reason for doing so was the superior attitude of the Brown Sahibs (from Dhaka and Calcutta) shown towards the people of the hills and their growing sense of insecurity against the educated hordes of the plain. The demand was ignored. The demand for separate statehood was revoked in 1917, 1930, 1934. On 19 December 1946, the party's heart and soul, D.S. Gurung even made a plea in the Constitution Hall before the Constituent Assembly for recognition of Gorkhas as a minority community "Sir, the demand of the Gurkhas is that they must be recognized as a minority community and that they must have adequate representation in the Advisory Committee that is going to be formed. When the Anglo-Indians with only 1 lakh 42 thousand population have been recognized as a minority community, and Scheduled Castes among the Hindus have been recognized as a separate community, I do not see any reason why Gurkhas with 30 lakhs population should not be recognized as such." (Source Wikipedia). Is this not the same attitude of the so called Bhadra lok from Kolkata or West Bengal towards Darjeeling?
Darjeeling Nepalese or the Indian Nepalese has never denied their roots. We have never denied our history. But what we want to do is reinvent our history. The constitution of India provides us ample space to reinvent it. Mr. Sen must know why this upsurge or the demands for the formation of new state is coming up now and then. The way Sen has put forward his argument, it itself is one of the causes for demanding separate state. First there is a big question on our Identity. Second, the issue of development is another question. Darjeeling in terms of revenue from tea and tourism fills state revenue box but in return what does it get? A penny? With penny what have we done let me cite few examples: the overall Human Development index of the hill (Darjeeling) shows (0.65) and ranking at the fourth position after north 24 Parganas. Where the higher education facilities in the hills is almost nil still Darjeeling shows HDI on education as 0.72 next to Medinipore. Check the outlays of the government; only in 1990s outlays in Darjeeling was higher. Third, Governance is and was always an issue in the hills and state government never tried to straighten it because they were virtually running the hills and they loved to do so. Irrespective of the Government’s insufficient support, negligence Hill can come up to this high level then imagine what we can do once Gorkhaland is formed? Subrat Mukherjee, don’t compare Darjeeling with Purulia. We are dignified people with enough self esteem. Fourth, Darjeeling has no cultural affinity with Bengal. Darjeeling is unique in its demography, geographic constituents, language. This difference should allow us to be separate from Bengal.

I am the citizen of India. Gorkhaland is my birth right. When I can get Gorkhaland then why should I get satisfied with sixth schedule? West Bengal will never allow Darjeeling to be separated from it because it is one of the major source of revenue to it, they can muddle with the people of the hill easily. For their selfish desires Hill have suffered a lot till date, NOW is the time to fight back and get our right.