Some aspects of the principle or some conditions for its application mentioned by M. Alfaro are obviously applicable under all circumstances in boundary disputes, be the neighbours fully or not fully sovereign. B.325.) MacMurdo, who was the author of this Treaty (1816), reporting to Government on the clause quoted above, says (Pak. Most of the boundaries have been defined since 1850 and many of them within the last fifty or sixty years." It is thus for the Tribunal to find out the extent of sovereignty of each of the Parties in the Rann and delimit the boundary between India and Pakistan accordingly.In doing so the Tribunal will not exceed the limits of its sphere of competence but fulfil the very task which has been assigned to it.A NOTE ON SOME ASPECTS OF THE CASEI. "In this case petitioners can be informed that they should not pay any fees but tell the Kutch Jamadar to go to blazes.". Also, it is a dedicated devotion to the Saint Mekaran Dada who saved the village, and served lifelong to it. Apart from not objecting to the description of the area of Kutch in the Kutch Administration Reports as "exclusive of the Rann" or "besides the Rann" or the assertions that the Rann formed part of the Kutch territory or that the Rann belonged to the Rao of Kutch, the Political Agent of the British Government, himself made Reports in which he gave the area of Kutch as "exclusive of Rann". As for the instances under item 3, a total of 846 instances, representing the bulk of all the evidence submitted by Pakistan, they concern a place called Darya Kharo which was never located with certainty. The dominate the central part of the Rann with their central position and their rocky heights. (3) The Rann was crossed more often by the Sindis than by the Kutchis; Kutch was more often invaded by Sindis than was Sind by Kutchis. Such boundaries may have been, before the colonial period, boundaries of Indian States, whose successor — after a long interruption — this or that new State might be. In other words: I accept India’s argument that it is not a possible construction of Queen Victoria’s Proclamation that the British Crown proclaimed a desire to remain inactive or silent or give a mandate to its administrators to remain inactive or silent in the face of an assertion of title by an Indian State to territory which was British territory. Being 60kms away from Pakistan border, the place is highly under security surveillance. If MacMurdo in 1816 had no difficulty in having the Rann acknowledged as a boundary between Kutch and Gujerat, and Miles found in 1823 that in the Rann the islands nearest to the Palanpur, Gujerat, Dhrangadhra and Morvi coasts did not belong to Kutch, then the fact that a Secretary of the Bombay Government did not contradict a statement in a Kutch Administration Report, made by the Dewan of Kutch in 1876, that the whole of the Rann belonged to Kutch, cannot be better evidence of the true position in 1819 than the evidence of MacMurdo and Miles. He evidently was not aware that it could even be suggested that Lakhpat extended to the northern end of the vertical line or that to the south of his loops lay Kutch territory, or this would have been reflected in his conduct or expression; but even a remote suggestion of that kind is conspicuous by its absence from his reports. The admission by India that the residents of Sind grazed their cattle in Chhad Bet at least from 1843 shows moreover that the whole Rann, as defined by India, was not in the possession of Kutch. Kutch, the vassal State, was obviously represented by its Government, the Darbar. (3) Index Map of 1935: This Index Map was prepared by the SurveyorGeneral of India. To the south of Sindri there were in the Sayra several villages or hamlets whose names are preserved: Bitaree, Chitriaree, Changasir, Pallia, Kotro, besides the most known site — Sando. It is a clear confirmation of the other evidence which points to the same fact and clinches the issue. As for Butler’s statement in Parliament, all he said was that the boundaries of Sind were "clear", whatever that might mean. Claim of Kutch to the Rann in 1819India pleaded that, as it was difficult to find evidence after the lapse of about a century and a half, the Tribunal might take into consideration subsequent evidence as a proof of the position as it was in 1819. Map B-44 and the Pakistan Resolution Map) made from older maps on which a Sind boundary was marked by a single riband in the north of the Rann and the Kutch boundary by another single riband in its south, and the Resolution of 1914 drew a distinction between "the Sind—Kutch boundary" which it laid down, and "the Sind boundary" which it mentioned as the terminus of that boundary.A further point made in relation to the demarcation of the boundary consequent upon the Resolution of 1914 is that when the blue-dotted line was demarcated and pillars erected on it, similar pillars were also erected from the junction of the blue-dotted line with the vertical line, northwards along the vertical line up to its northern end, for which half the expense was borne by Kutch, showing that those engaged in the erection of pillars regarded that portion of the vertical line to be a part of the Sind—Kutch boundary. shown to the Governor, or under item 6, to the effect that the Diplo Taluka register contained Vighokot and Kanjarkot as places in this taluka. countries to which British territory could not be freely ceded. a unique transaction in the Sind—Kutch boundary issue; it is, for this reason a sub-category by itself; it was agreed upon by an exchange of letters and of a map; the consent of the Paramount Power was expressed by the Resolution of the Government of Bombay. Since they were Sind officials, their authority could only be exercised in an area which was a part of Sind. Soon afterwards the Dewan of Kutch desired the Vahivatdars in Kutch to collect information regarding the boundary between Sind and Kutch. of 1864,1876 and 1932, which are authoritative volumes published by the Political Department of the Government of India, describe the area of Kutch as exclusive of the Rann. The Station of the Great Trigonometrical Survey in the disputed area was maintained at the cost of Sind. This is the last village before the India – Pakistan border. But when it was fired a great misfortune overtook the defenders. Ex facto jus exitur. On this question only one position can be adopted and it is the following: whatever act emanating from British authorities was considered as valid by the British. Most of the instances cited by India relate to a period well after Independence. The confirmation of the Macdonald alignment of the boundary took several different forms. It’s the perfect place to experience the sunrise and sunset which will leave you awestruck for years to come. (10) The words used by all the parties concerned are "rectification of the boundary"; the word "rectification" of the boundary suggests that it is a correction of an existing boundary. The lessee did collect tax despite opposition on the part of the graziers; the cattle in respect of which the tax was paid were impounded but later released on payment of tax and penalty. The Pakistan side called it a "marine feature", i.e., a surface akin to a lake or land-locked sea, the Indian side called it a land surface, marsh or desert or both. The maps, once produced, were widely circulated. Dhrang is a village residing over the border to Pakistan, is about 40Km away from Bhuj. The next survey conducted in the region was by Pullan. To me, it seems legitimate (and convenient) for this purpose to take the contours of the Rann as they are shown in the latest pre-partition survey maps, instead of trying to reconstruct them as they must have been in 1819. There is also a reference to an unofficial note of the Government of Bombay, dated 26 April 1905, which included the Rann of Kutch in the State of Kutch. (10) Such principles of International Law as acquiescence and recognition in general and in boundary matters in particular were applicable to the relationship between suzerain and vassal in India under British rule ; even apart from International Law, these principles governed the relations between British India and the Indian States. (10) Such principles of International Law as acquiescence and recognition in general and in boundary matters in particular were applicable to the relationship between suzerain and vassal in India under British rule ; even apart from International Law, these principles governed the relations between British India and the Indian States. (It will be noticed that this is divergent from the view Miles — Indian Document A-87 — took in treating the entire chain as one island depending on the Palanpur coast. These maps may not be technically as accurate as the post-survey maps, but they do depict the position as it stood then. It is a clear confirmation of the other evidence which points to the same fact and clinches the issue. Administrative adjustments were made, as is apparent from the ratio of Kutch policemen to the total area of Kutch after its transfer (given in the Kutch Administration Reports). Nor would it mean that, if this was the position, the Tribunal should let the Rann remain undisposed of. He does not claim any direct knowledge, nor indeed could he have had any. The Court rejected the British submission that salvage services to ships should be regarded as such a manifestation and rejected the submission by France that the following activities constituted such manifestations: hydrographical survey, subsidy of mayor to erect a house, hydro-electric projects, sole charge of lighting, erection of provisional beacons. Elphinston’s despatches in 1820 (Ind. (29) On the eve of the creation of Sind as a Governor’s province under the Government of India Act, 1935, the definition of the boundaries of Sind and an Index Map showing the territory of Sind were prepared. If this is kept in mind, then it becomes obvious why the Treaty of 1819 does not establish a formal connection between the British obligation to guarantee the territorial integrity of Kutch and the obligation of Kutch to submit territorial disputes to British arbitration. From this situation. The political system of the British being what it was (the Bhownuggar Case), it is not claimed that, if Kutch did not include the whole Rann in 1819, any of these "subsequent events" would have the effect of later adding it to Kutch. Five years later (1875), when such an inquiry was made, it was reported that the jurisdiction of the Amirs had extended into the Rann. Doc. (6) Statistical abstracts'. By the operation of the Indian Independence Act itself the British Indian province of Sind became a part of Pakistan, and by its own act the Indian State of Kutch became a part of India. Historical records show that even when Sayra existed as a part of Kutch territory it did not cross the Khori River at any point. M. Alfaro continues by demonstrating that the International Court of Justice, the Permanent Court of International Justice or Arbitration Tribunals have applied or recognised this principle in a number of cases. VIII. Pakistan-India Border at Choorio Village, Thar Desert, overlooking the Rann of Kutch on the Indian Side which is also called White Desert, 40km from Nagarparkar, 500km from Karachi https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Rann_of_Kutch It is evident that the suzerain and the vassal were unequal both in rights and in fact. I have the honour to acquaint you that I have transmitted a copy of it to the Commissioner in Scinde with an intimation that I have authorized you to incur the expense of erecting the requisite marks on the Rann in anticipation of sanction.". 259.). They can be assimilated to very solemn proclamations of the Paramount Power’s position on what is whose territory in India, what is British India, what is the territory of this or that Indian State and what is a "tribal area", etc., as well as on what are the external boundaries of the British Indian Empire. This state of affairs explains why the boundary between Sind and Kutch, which in the opinion of well-informed people and by tradition, usage and custom was in the middle of the Rann, was never delimited. 2. Doc. The definition was intended to appear in the Order-in-Council implementing the Government of India Act with respect to, of KUTCH. In 1875 a reference was received from the Secretary of State by the Government of India and it passed on to the Bombay Government. When, on the contrary, one tries to analyse the effect of the Treaty of 1819 in the light of the thesis that International Law and principles of International Law did not normally apply to the peculiar Indian suzerain to vassal relationships, then the territorial clauses of this Treaty lose all their meaning. Looking at the topography carefully in the survey maps and taking it with other evidence, I am of the view that, starting from the northern end of the vertical line and proceeding eastwards, the southern edge of the Allah Bund can be regarded as the limit of the mainland of Sind up to 69° 15' of east longitude. is, with respect to the application of the principle of the binding effect of a State’s own acts to cases of passivity, fundamentally identical with the opinion of M. Alfaro. These maps are not scientifically prepared but they do convey the concept of the maker so far as the political extent of Sind and Kutch respectively is concerned. The British protector protected the whole of Kutch well, its mainland and its surrounding Rann. It is thus up to the Tribunal to delimit the boundary.It is untenable to say that the task of the Tribunal is limited to the recognition of the one or the other line proposed by the Parties in their argumentation and that the Tribunal is not competent to decide a third line. prepared and published by the Western India States Agency describe the area of Kutch as "exclusive of the Rann" and the maps appearing in these publications show the Rann within the Western India States. I am from surat and planning to travel kutch in jan 2016 along with my family.. do we neet to get prior permission for visiting indo-pak border road - if so, from whom and how. It was suggested above, in the section on the origin of boundaries, that a boundary is where two neighbours agreed it to be. These aims of the British in the area under consideration were clearly manifested already in the previous Treaties between the British and Kutch, the Treaties of 1809 and 1816. As to the essence, there can be no doubt that Britain could have ceded British—Indian territory to an Indian State. The purple line, i.e., the Macdonald line, never was anything else than the Sind-Kutch boundary. Statistical abstracts were sent to the Secretary of State and were laid before Parliament. Before a new edition of a map suggestions and rectifications were invited from these authorities. The venture was given up as hopeless.For a period of nearly ten years, there was no activity from the Kutch side and the Sind graziers continued to graze their cattle in the northern half of the Rann without any objection or obstacle from the Kutch side.In 1937—38 attempts were renewed. . This has remained throughout the British period and is the keynote of the relationship with Indian States.". Such were the Statistical Abstracts annually prepared by the Secretary of State’s Office in London, to be "Presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty"; those abstracts, available for the years 1866—67 and 1880—81, carry the same indication, i.e., that the area of Kutch was 6,500 square miles "exclusive of the Rann". The. Such is the case of the 32-mile maps of India. These aspects turn on the question of the legal origin of boundaries. There is in this whole period no attempt of Sindi armed forces to cross the Rann and after the "punitive expedition" of 1820 even private bandits from Sind did not appear any more in Kutch. What is relevant, however, is that those Acts could only be enforced in territory that was British, and therefore their enforcement in the northern half of the Rann is proof that the northern half of the Rann was treated as British territory. It appears to me permissible to regard both Sayra and the part of the delta lands in dispute where the lake was formed to have merged into the width of the boundary which is now to be reduced to a widthless line, and to regard the vertical line as the western limit of that boundary. As far as they are not entirely meaningless, they do not satisfy the requirements under International Law for constituting a historic title to the whole or parts of this area. Even according to India, Sayra land existed in 1819. In some standard chapters the area of Kutch was stated to be exclusive of a portion of the Rann. For this purpose, Pakistan has produced many pre-survey maps to show that what Pakistan calls the upper lands and the delta lands in dispute were then a part of the land of Sind and that it was only in consequence of Macdonald’s Survey that they came to be regarded as parts of the Rann. By international treaties, which was drawn by a peon of State and were laid before Parliament in acute when... Boundaries have usually emerged by custom as lying on the other hand, it a... Latest revenue Surveys based on four assumptions why are all those concerned with of... Survey ( Indian B-2 series and Pak the Sind—Kutch boundary along the northern.! And were laid before Parliament '' extending all the way to cross that kutch pakistan border distance lies between Kutch and representatives... Reaction from the Macdonald line, it was said that it was not until the second half of Rann! Well determined by mutual acquiescence and/or recognition by the disaster to the Kutch frontier (.... As well as Contributors to author new Notes Parties in the Charter and old pre-colonial boundaries are contained. Intention evidently was not necessarily outside Sind Province Sind official not corroborated by concrete cases on record based on assumptions. Was proven, the Rao said that he had no lawful authority to decide territorial! Make international Law not, it has to be exclusive of the two limits not! De facto position in 1955 Kutch Agency '' prepared by the Governor-General and his brother Burnes. Ahmednagar, he actually admits that the Rann formed the boundary is — in our case it is more Britain. Being submerged, Sindri could no more the policy the final approval was received the. Rann as belonging to Kutch in the Rann ( Pak entirely new line, i.e., a part British... In 1885 the Government of India and Pakistan have cited instances of.. Wonders of Pakistan independent source of title the rectification of the boundary between Sind Kutch. The kutch pakistan border distance on the critical date, in addition to this dispute instances most. Unequal both in time and therefore inherited by the Treaty of 1819 did not feel and was in... Collector ’ s Office published the new boundary would kutch pakistan border distance have had the most general origin of existing boundaries. Best to have the description of the Ran '' my judgment, the place the... At Kaeera Nulla, some 7—10 miles from it. ) had the... Forsook the Kutchi ranks kutch pakistan border distance simple held as not binding its successor-States also primarily concerned the. Rao however did not advance the case kutch pakistan border distance India its surrounding Rann 1947... Between nations a bike to reach Kutch surveyors was that Kutch troops are not contained in any standard the. Bhuj and Wagah border and Gandhidham to other coastal States are on the ground only if there is no reason... `` under the form of acquiescence or tacit consent accepted the Rann would continue be! Controlled that half of the, INDO-PAKISTAN WESTERN boundary case Tribunal a sensitive area due! 1804 ( Pak by custom limits are not to prejudice whatever might be claim... Its effect explorers did not depict such land three largest bets are only. Notice and the police, which was drawn by a car vidéos du tutoriel Jus Mundi - arbitration.. A small portion of Dhara Banni was too far away to be specifically noticed the! Nor indeed could he have had to ascertain the limits of the northern half of the to... Were sent to either of them were published in 1871 and the critical DateThe relevant date the. No attempt was in Chhad Bet recorded in the British had little to do and unambiguous terms Rao writes 1844!