nepe guru,

there is right(peace) and wrong(conflict) and when thing is wrong people tend to analyze what could have been a right way or what went wrong. When thing is right it is irrevalent to mass how wrong made it right or why right was wrong, simple and that song is the reflection of that. ofcourse it could be a dose of prozac for intellectuals for their self satisfactory thesis, no argument here.

with making correction of 2 lakhs to 22, there is no moment to be proud of if you know the fact ( or you may be not in mood to advocate  revoking their citizenship). Here is an excerpt analysis by late harka gurung how inlflux of indians seemed to vanish in 90ties but they were not gone anywhere (by acquiring citizenship in highly dense hilly areas including kathmandu valley). And the cycle seems to repeat itself ( don't forget the citizenship vending machine this time)

Looking at the data by region, the number of Indian Citizens increased only in western Terai, western inner Terai, and Kathmandu valley. In Centeral terai, there was a drastic decrease in Indian Citizens, i.e., by half. The number of Indian Citizens declined by 84 percent in the mountains, 55.1 percent in hill, 35.6 percent in Terai, and 27.2 percent in inner Terai. According to the census data, only nine out of 75 districts saw an increase in Indian Citizens: Kathmandu, Bhaktapur, Dang, Chitwan, Kanchanpur, Kailali, Bardiya, Banke and Parsa. In all other districts their number declined.

The question up arises: was there any policy implemented or some events, which made Indian citizens, leave Nepal in large numbers during the decade 1981-1991? Two points of reference may be mentioned here. First, in 1987, Nepal tried an initial exercise to introduce a work permit system in Kathmandu Valley? This could not be implemented due to Indian objection. In fact, the number of Indian Citizens in Kathmandu Valley increased by 57.5 percent during the period in question. Secondly, the economic blockade implemented by the Indian government during 1988/89 led to disruption of normal relationship between the two countries. However, the population census was carried out in June 1991, and the economic blockade had already been lifted with the restoration of democracy in 1990. Soon after the relationship between the two countries had even the democratic restoration been to be qualified by the euphemism of ‘common rivers’.

The dichotomy of the census data showing a decrease in Indian Citizens, on the one hand, and the obvious influx of Indian citizens, on the other, can be resolved with one conclusion. The reason for the drastic decline of Indians in Nepal is not that they have returned home but that they have acquired Nepali citizenship. For example, the largest reduction in the number of Indian citizens in Jhapa (8154) and Morang (5061), where more citizenship certificates –256, 257 and 288,897 respectively-were distributed. There is very little variation among sources on the number of Indians acquiring Nepali citizenship: 57.7 percent in the 1983 migration report and 62.8 percent according to official Indian records. What is distressing in this context, is that political parties are following their own narrow agenda even on a subject as critical as citizenship. The Dhanapati Upadhyay Commission (1994) setup by the UML government had the Congress member boycotting and the Sadbhavana Party member dissenting, while the Mahanta Thakur Committee (1995) setup by the Congress did not have a UML member. Therefore, the Citizenship Bill-2000, submitted without a broad consensus, is a challenge to the country’s national interest.