M.A. (POLITICAL SCIENCE) PART II PAPER-VII (OPTION-II) SEMESTER-IV (PUNJAB POLITICS)

LESSON NO. 2.3 AUTHOR : DR.J.R. SIWACH

WORKING OF COALITION GOVERNMENTS IN PUNJAB Punjab is one of those states where the Congress Party was in power without any interruption from 1947-67. This happened in spite of the fact that right from 1947 onwards the Congress party was faction-ridden and the various factions maligned each other by openly levelling the charges of corruption, favouritism and nepotism When the elections were held in 1967 Congress Party failed to win an absolute majority in the Assembly1 and surprisingly Giani Gurmukh Singh Mussaffir, the then Chief Minister and the six Minister were also defeated.2 This was the beginning of the coalition era in Punjab. Types of Coalition Ministry : There are many types of coalition governments : 1. Majority Coalition Government3 2. Minority Coalition Government.4 Each of these two type of Government have their own variants. For example, the majority coalition government may consist of (i) Bi party/Multi-party coalition in which neither/none of the parties has an absolute majority in the house,5 or 1. The party-wise position in the assembly was : Congress-48, Sant -24, Master Akali Dal-2, C.P.I.5, C.P.I. (M) 3, Jana Sangh 9, Republican 3, S.S.P. 1, and independents 9, Total 104. The National Diary, March 1-16, 1967, p. 1109. 2. Subhash C. Kashyap , Politics of Defections, 1969, ed., p. 232. 3. When in Political parties forming the coalition government have more than 50% membes in the assembly, It is majority coalition Government.Such coalitions existed in PESPSU in 1952-53, in Orissa from 1959-61. (Hare Krishran Ministry), 1967-70 (Singh Deo Minitry), 1971-72 (Biswanath Das Ministry), in Gujrat in1975- 76 (Babuphat Jashbai : Patel Ministry). In Kerala between 1961-63, 1967-68 (Nambodiripad Ministry) 1960-70. Achuta Menon Ministry), in 1971 Achuta Menon's Second Ministry, in Bihar from 1967-68 (Mahamaya Prasad Sinha and Bhola Paswan Ministries), 1969-72 (Hamhar Singh Bhola Paswan Ministries, in from 1967 to (Ajoy Ministry), from 1969-70 (Ajoy Mukherjee's third Ministry) in Jammu and Kashmir from 1975-77 (Sheikh Abdula Ministry) in Manipur from 1972-73 Aliaudin Ministry March 1974 - July 1974 (Alimudin's Second Ministry)-July 1975 to December 1974 (Y. Shaiza's Minitry, in Nagaland from February 1974 to March 1975 (Vizol Ministry). 4. When the numerical strength of the coalition partners is less than 50% in the assembly by the Government has confidence of the house because of the support extended by some party from outside but without joining the Ministry, then it is minority coalition Ministry. 5. The coalition government as mentioned in foot-note No. 3, page 2 are the examples of this type of Government. 82 M.A. (Political Science) Part II83 PAPER-VII (OPTION-II) (ii) Bi-party/Multi party coalition in which one of the partners has an absolute majority in the Assembly.6 Similarly, the minority coalition government may be either : (i) Bi-party/Multi-party visible coalition.7 (ii) Bi-party/Multi-party minority invisible coalition.8 Varieties of Coalition Ministries in Punjab In Punjab, various types of coalition Ministries have been in office. For example, the first coalition Ministry headed by Gurnam Singh between March 1967 and November 1967 was multi-party majority coalition in which none of the parties had an absolute majority in the Assembly. The second Gurnam Singh Ministry between February 1969 and June 1969 and the first coalition Ministry headed by Parkash Singh between March 1970 were bi-party coalitions in which neither of the coalition partners had an absolute majority. But in the case of second Gurnam Singh Coalition by the middle of June 1969, Akali Dal had gained an absolute majority in the house9 through defection from Congress and the admission of independents and hence, the character of the coalition underwent a qualitative change. It then become bi-party coalition in which Akali Dal had an absolute majority in the Assembly. The coalition Ministry headed by which came into existence after June 1977 was also a bi-party coalition in which Akali Dal had clear and absolute majority (58/117) in the Assembly. Same is in

6. In the Akali-Janta coalition government, formed after the election of May 1977, Akali Dal had an absolute majority in the assembly. Similarly, in West Bengal the CPM had 94 seats out of 294. (The Tribune, June 18, 1977). 7. When the numerical strength of the parties forming the government in less than 20% in the Assembly, out the Government has the confidence of the hosue because of the open support extended by some party of parties form outside, then, it is a minority visible coalition government. Such Government existed in Tavancore ochin in 1954 in Bihar in 1969 (Mandal MInistry) and again in 1969 (Paswan Ministry) in Kerala, in 1969 (Achuta Menon Ministry) and again in 1970 in West Bengal in 1971 (Ajoy Mukherjee's in Ministry, in Gujrat in 1975 (Babubhai Patel, Jashbhai Ministry) and in Jammu and Kashmir in 1967 (Sheikh Abdullah's Ministry). 8. When a Minority government without visible supporters had the confidence of the Hosue because of the indirect support either by abstaining M.L.A. on crucial voting then it is a Minority invisible coalition. For example, Singh Deo Ministry in Orissa in 1970 was in minority but it could not be defeated because on crucial occasions some of the M.L.A.'s either absented or absained from voting (Asian Recorder, April 30 to May 6, 1970, p. 9522). Similarly, when there was split in Akali Dal in Punjab in March 1970 the Congress party instead openly supporting he Badal Ministry in July 1970 evtended indirect support by abstaining at the time when the motion of no confidence was moved. M.A. (Political Science) Part II84 PAPER-VII (OPTION-II) case of Akali BJP coalition formed after Feb. 1997, 2007 and 2012 elections. Parties of Defection and Political Instability : The coalition Ministries in Punjab were not very stable. The main reasons for the fall of the coalition ministries were : (i) the personal political ambitions of the Akali Dal leaders. (ii) the role of Congress in encouraging the politics of defection. (iii) ideological differences among coalition partners; and (iv) the rigid attitude of the Akali Dal as well as the Jana Sangh on certain questions like the affiliation of the college of Jalandhar district with Guru Nanak Dev University. As stated above one of major reasons for the fall of the coalition Ministries in Punjab has been the personal political ambitions of the Akali leaders. After the defeat of the Congress party in 1967, Lachhman Singh Gill was keen to become the Chief Minister and he was disappointed when the Akali Dal decided to have Gurnam Singh (a retired judge of Punjab and Haryana High Court) as the Chief Minister. Though he was taken in the Council of Ministers, yet it did not satisfy him. Hence, he along with 16 other MLAs defected from the on November 22, 1967 which led to the fall of the first coalition Ministry headed by Gurnam Singh.10 The cause of the fall of the second Gurnam Singh coalition Ministry in March 1970 was also the factional politics of Akali Dal. There were acute differences among the various factions of the Akali Dal of the selection of three candidates for the Rajya Sabha. The working committee of the Akali Dal authorised Sant Fateh Singh to nominate two candidates of the party. While taking this decision he neglected the claim of Bhupinder Singh, the Senior Vice-President of the Akali Dal (Master group) which annoyed the Master group. The group therefore nominated Gyani Bhupinder Singh as third candidate of the party. Gurnam Singh supported him and hence he won the election, whereas one of the two official candidates of the Akali Dal were defeated. As a result of, Sant Fateh Singh excelled Gurnam Singh from Akali Legislature party. On the same day, that is on March 25, 1970 when the Assembly met, Balwant Singh, the then Finance Minister refused to move the Appropriation Bill. Therefore, the Chief Minister quickly rose and moved the Bill. When the voting took place on the Bill it was opposed by 22. Four members of C.P.I., 28 members of the Congress and one member of S.S.P. abstained from voting. The voting pattern showed that the Chief Minister was in a hopeless minority in the Akali Dal because out of 44

9. (D.C. Pavate, My Days as Governor, 1974, p. 168) J.C. Anand; "Punjab : Politics of Retreating Communalism" in Iqbal Narain (ed.), State Politics in , Meenakshi Parkashan, 1967, p. 282. 10. The Sateman, 26, 1970, p.1. M.A. (Political Science) Part II85 PAPER-VII (OPTION-II) members who voted against him as many as 35 were Akalis. This led to his resignation on March 26, 1970.11 The coalition Ministry of Badal which came into office immediately, after the fall of Gurnam Singh Ministry in March, 1970 with Jana Sangh as the other partner, ceased to be a coalition in June, 1970 when Jana Singh went out of it on the question of colleges of Jallandhar district with Guru Nanak Dev University.12 This reduced the government to minority in the Assembly. On July 1, 1970 five Akali members defected which further reduced the strength of Akali party. But the Congress party was not prepared to oust Badal at that time, thence two motions expressing lack of faith in the ministry felt though for want of the required minimum number of supporters. Only 19 members belonging to Jana Sangh, C.P.I., and Gurnam groups supported the motions when the minimum number required to move the motion was 21.13 The Congress party which had 28 members remained neutral Badal resigned in June 1971 when 19 Akali M.L.A.'s led by Gurnam Singh again revolted against him.14 This shows that both the Gurnam Singh and Badal Ministers went out of office because of this factional nature of Akali politics. Either there was a split in the Akali Dal or defection took place which resulted in the fall of the governments in quick succession. II. Role of the Congress Party vis-a-vis t he Coalition Government When the coalition Government came into existence in Punjab in 1967, the Congress party automatically occupied the opposition benches. the Congress party which had been power continuously for a period of twenty years was not prepared to play the role of responsible opposition. Hence, right from the beginning, it was keen to break the United Front by encouraging defections. It therefore, quickly reached an understanding with L.S. Gill and promised to extend support to him from outside if he defeated form the United Front. Hence, Gill along with his 16 supports came out of the United Front. When he did so, the Congress Party extended its support to him.15 This suited the Congress party because by following this policy it was able to have a puppet minority Government in office which was purely at the mercy of the Congress party. But to it dismay, Gill was built of a different stuff and was not prepared to play the role of puppet. Hence, it had no alternative but to withdraw its support in and as a result thereof Gill had to resign which ultimately led to the imposition of the President's rule on August 23, 1968.16 11. D.C. Pavate op. cit., p. 131. 12. Ibid, p. 198. 13. Ibid, p. 198. 14. The Times of India, June 14, 1957, p. 1. 15. D.C. pavate, op. cit., p. 185. 16. Ibid, p. 73 M.A. (Political Science) Part II86 PAPER-VII (OPTION-II) III. Relation between the Governor and the Coalition Government : One of the interesting development of the coalition era in Punjab was the contradictory role of the recommendation of the dissolution of the Assembly or the recommendation of the outgoing Chief Ministers. For example, he refused dissolution to Gurnam Singh in November 1967 but granted it to Parkash Singh Badal in June, 1971. While rejecting the advice of Gurnam Singh, the Governor said, "it is not fair either to the tax payer or to the Governor to got to the polls now and then. as long as it was possible to foam a Government was who should do it, only recently we had the general elections. Dissolution of the Assembly would have meant enormous waste of money in holding fresh election.17 But this logic was not followed in 1971 when he granted dissolution to Badal just one day before the beginning of the budget session.18 In this case too there was a possibility of an alternative Ministry While defencing the decision to dissolve the Assembly in 1971, Governor wrote, "I could not refuse to accept the Chief Minister's advice to dissolve the House, especially when he advanced good reason for this and had not been defeat ed in the House, at the time he advised me to dissolve it.19 But the case of Gurnam Singh in 1967 was also exactly the same because he too was not defeated on the floor of the House, when he resigned and advised the Governor to dissolve the House. The only difference if any, was that Gurnam Singh gave the advise on the day, the assembly was to begin its session. In both the cases the defeat was quite imminent.20 Moreover, in certain other matters also the Governor refused to accept the advice of the Chief Minister. For example, the Governor refused to issue an ordinance permittng the state legislators to hold the office of profit because in his opinion such ordinances amounted to corrupt practices. But B.N. Chakavarti, the Governor of Haryana, his next door neighbour in the same city of Chandigarh had already issued such an ordinance. The Governor was also not prepared to allow Badal to expand his Ministry in May 1970.21 IV. Size of Coalition Ministry : In a coalition Ministry the Chief Minister is neither free to decide about the size of Ministry nor about the person to be taken in it. The size of the coalition ministry is decided by the coalition partners and the various parties joining the Ministry nominate their candidates who would be ministers. The size of the coalition Ministry is usually large but this was not a fact so far as the first two coalition ministries

17. The Tribune, November 26, 1967, p. 1 18. The Times of India, June 14, 1971, p.1 19. D.C. Pavate,Op. Cit. p. 185. 20. The Tribune, March 18, 1970, p. 8. 21. Ibid. M.A. (Political Science) Part II87 PAPER-VII (OPTION-II) headed by Gurnam Singh were concerned. The first coalition Ministry had eight Ministers of Cabinet rank, including the Chief Minister, two Ministers of State Six Deputy Ministers and one Parliamentary Secretary.22 Party wise distribution of ministerial office was as follows.23

Party Cabinet Ministers Deputy Parliamentary Total Minister of State Minister Secretaries Congress 1 2 3 - 6 Defectors Independents 1 - 3 - 4 Akalis 2 - - - 2 Jan Sangh 2 - - - 2 CPI 1 - - - 1 Republican 1 - - - 2 Total 8 2 6 1 17

On November 21, 1967 a day before the beginning of the session, the Chief Minister expanded his Ministry by appointing three new Parliamentary Secretaries.24 It means the total strength of the Ministry including Parliamentary Secretaries went up to 20. The second Ministry of Gurnam Singh which began with five Ministers had 16 Ministers before it went out of office.25 The Badal Ministry, on the other hand, had as many as 26 ministers.26 It is interesting to know that all the coalition Ministries had many defectors as Ministers. In fact, in 1967 there were as many as six Congress defectors as Ministers and if others four independents who were also Ministers are added to them, out of 16 Ministers, there were as many as ten defectors and independents.27 The Ministers of L.S. Gill consisted of all the defectors. Defeat of the Government on the Motion of Thanks : One of the most interesting development of the coalition in Punjab was the defeat of the Government on motion of thanks of the Governor for his address and that too at a time when the ministry had the confidence of the House. This happened when on the issue of Punjabi Language four Akali Legislators voted against 22. Ibid, May 20, 1970, p. 1 23. Subhash, C. Kashyap, The Politics of Defections, 1969, p. 243. 24. Ibid, p. 247. 25. Iqbal Narain, edited, State Politics in India 1976 p. 282. 26. D.C. Pavate, op. cit., p. 145. 27. The Statesman, April 6, 1967, p.1. M.A. (Political Science) Part II88 PAPER-VII (OPTION-II) Government and as a result thereof the Ministry was defeated by 53 voted against government and as a result of thereof the Ministry was defeated by 53 votes to 49. Ordinarily, when the government is defeated at the floor of the House, the Chief Minister is supposed to submit his resignation as was done by C.B. Gupta in 1967 and by. T.N. Singh in 1971 in U.P. Because it is considered a vote of no-confidence in the Ministry. Gurnam Singh, the then Chief Minister, did not adopt this course of action because the four recalcitrant M.L.A.s made it clear that they were with the government.28 That was the reason, the Governor also did not withdraw his pleasure in this case because he was of the opinion that situation was not so clear as to justify the dismissal of the Government on that day, when the Congress opposition's amendment to the motion of thanks to the Governor's address was carried.29 He was of the opinion that before the pleasure is withdrawn, either, a formal vote of no confidence should be passed or a formal vote of confidence should be ejected. VI. Governor's Address About the Governor's address, it is important to note that though the Governor's address is a Government address, yet the Governor may refuse to read these parts of the address which try to humilitate him. This course of action was followed by Governor Dharam Vira in West-Bengal in 1969. However, D.C. Pavate in Punjab read an address which was not only a reflection on his conduct as a Governor but also a reflection on the Supreme Court30 and as a result thereof the Congress Party in Punjab Assembly demanded his recall. This course of acti on it seems was adopted by him because he as not prepared to face the music which the Governor of West-Bengal had to face. VII. Opportunistic and Unprincipled Alliances : Opportunistic and Unprincipled alliances were the product of the politics of the coalition Governments in Punjab. The first coalition Ministry had Congress defectors. Independents, Akali, Jana Sangh, C.P.I., and Republicans as Minister. It was a combination of Leftists (CPI) and the Rightist (Jana Sangh) on the one hand and of the Communalists (Jana Sangh and Republicans) and secularists (CPI) on the other. The defectors were there as political jokers whose only principle in politics was to become Minister or a Chief Minister.31 VIII. Government by Defectors : The Government consisting exclusively of defectors, headed by Lachhman Singh Gill came into existence on November 25, 1967. It is interesting to note that on the basis of the Governor's report, the Government of Rao Birendra Singh in Haryana 28. Ibid. 29. Lok Sabha Debates, 4th Series, Vl. VIII. Nos. 41-45, July 20, 1967, Cal. 3477. 30. The Statesman, March 15, 1968, p.1 31. Ibid, March 19, 1968, p.1 M.A. (Political Science) Part II89 PAPER-VII (OPTION-II) was dismissed on November 21, 1967 so that the defectors in the form of "Aya Rama" and "Gaya Rama' may be penalised but in Punjab when this drama was staged on November 22. Lachhman Singh Gill and others who were the defectors were awarded with ministerial offices. By implicaiton it means that defections in Haryana were bad but defections in Punjabi were good. This is an example of corrupt and unprincipled politics. IX. Akali-Janta Coalition : The Akali-Janta Coalition Ministry was formed after Assembly elections held in June, 1977. The contradictions inherent in coalition did not take long to put their strain on the ministry. The infighting among the Akalis led to the dismissal of Minister for Education, Sukhjinder Singh. The coalition government came under a strain when the Akalis put forth the demand for more state autonomy which was resisted by the Jan Sangh wing of the Janta Party. However the Janata Party resigned from the Government when the Akalis withdrew their support to the Desai Government in the centre at the time of split in Janta Party in July 1979. X. Coalition Governments after 1992 In the 1996 Lok Sabha the Congress defeated and on the other hand, the Akali Dal was consolidating its position as a predominant party in the state. Keeping in mind the necessity of having supplementary support of the Hindus, it turned back to the BJP, its old alliance partner, in 1997 Punjab Assembly election. On its part, 'the BJP viewed this arrangement as the first of many regional pacts that would lead it to the national power'. The BJP had emerged as the single largest party in the 11th Lok Sabha elections held in May, 1996. As the speculation intensified about the possibility of the BJP forming its first ever government, 'the Akali Dal (Badal) made a public declaration of support for the BJP's claim'. Out of sheer political expediency, the Akali Dal and the BJP again joined hands in 1997 Assembly election. As usual, the most obvious basis of 'the alliance between the BJP and the Akali Dal was the anti-Congressism'. It suits to both as the Akalis get Hindu support and their base in the Sikh peasantry nicely complements the BJP's support in urban-Hindu dominated constituencies. In fact, the 1997 election brought about promising electoral party alignments. For the first time in the political history of Punjab, the alliance of the Akali Dal with the BJP was struck before the elections. The motivation of two partners however differed: the Akali Dal's principal objective was to take power in Punjab but for the BJP, this strategy was not limited to the short-term benefit of a regional victory. In the long run, the party was counting on the Sikh vote in other state elections, whereas in , as stated somewhere else too, they could make the balance till in its favour. The Akali Dal- BJP alliance triumphed with a landslide victory by capturing 93 of 117 Assembly seats and nearly 48 per cent of the votes polled. The Akalis particularly did well in rural (70) and semi-rural(24) constituencies. The Akali Dal's share of the popular M.A. (Political Science) Part II90 PAPER-VII (OPTION-II) votes was slightly less than the record 38 percent it achieved 1985 Assembly election. Over the years, on the whole, the Akali Dal has stood with the BJP through thick and thin. The BJP has also reciprocated with the same spirit. The Akalis, in alliance with the BJP, not only ruled the state as a senior partner but also shared the power, right from the Janata Party's days, in the central government as well. In 1998, the Akali Dal became a participant in the twelve-party Vajpayee-led coalition government at the centre. The longstanding anti-Congress tradition of the Akali Dal and the complementary electoral bases of the two parties have been the major factors behind the sustenance of the alliance. The Akali-BJP alliance first time successfully completed its five year term in the state from 1997 to 2002. All the previous Akali-led coalition ministries in Punjab had remained almost unstable. The major cause of the instability of such ministries had been the struggle for power within the Akali Dal. The aspirants of the Chief Ministership always looked for a chance to topple the government and capture power by every hook and crook. The second major cause has had been the Congress. Having sufficient strength in the house, the Congress always encouraged one or the other Akali faction to defect from the ruling one. Moreover, the differences between the coalition partners have also led to the fall of Akali coalition governments in Punjab in the past. Although the Akali-BJP coalition experiment helped in moderating the fundamentalist edges and the alliance partners enjoyed the first time full tenure, the sky-high expectations of the people from the Akali-BJP combine and the rampant state corruption became the root cause of their defeat February 2002 Punjab Assembly election. The tenth election of Punjab Vidhan Sabha was held on February 15, 2007. The Akali Dal again contested the election in alliance with the BJP. On the other hand, the Congress, under the combined leadership of Chief Minister, Capt. and the state party president, Shamsher Singh Dullo, preferred to go alone. Apart from the unprecedented bouts of mudslinging allegations and counter allegations, both at election rallies and though media advertisements blitzkrieg, the poll battle ever after the reorganization of state in 1966. The Punjab electorate favoured a change, giving the Akali-BJP alliance yet another chance to govern the state. As compared to 2002, the Akali Dal succeeded in improving its tally from 41 to 49 in 2007. The more surprising was its alliance partner's (the BJP) triumph as it roared to success in 19 constituencies against two (initially three) it held in the outgoing house, giving the combine a total of 68 out of 117. In 2012 elections Akali-BJP again managed to won the elections and it was the first time in the electoral history of Punjab that a party was repeated. Parkash Singh Badal became a record fifth time Chief Minister of Punjab. M.A. (Political Science) Part II91 PAPER-VII (OPTION-II) XI. Conclusion In crux, it can be said that the collation politics in Punjab encouraged the Hindu-Sikh harmony and succeeded to fill the gap between the two major communities and helped the Akali Dal and the BJP to broaden its support base among masses in the state. Politically, a bi-polar alliance system has developed at national level, i.e. the Congress and its allies vs. BJP and its allies. Alliances politics has smoothened the centre-state relations. In Punjab, the Akali Dal-BJP alliance in 1997- 2002 facilitated political stability as it enabled the Akali Dal-led ministry to complete its full term despite the split in the Akali Dal. The Congress party has its own strong base in Punjab. It does not feel the necessity to ally itself with other parties.

BOOKS SUGGESTED 1. State Politics in India (Ed.) : Iqbal Narain 2. State Politics in India (Ed.) : Myron Weiner 3. My Days as Governor : D.C. Pavate 4. Dynamics of Punjab Politics : Dalip Singh 5. Coalition Governments in Punjab : Jamsh Ali Khan M.A. (POLITICAL SCIENCE) PART - II PAPER-VII Semester-IV (OPTION-II) (PUNJAB POLITICS)

LESSON NOS. :

UNIT-I SECTION-A

1.1 : Socio-Economic Determinants of State

Politics

1.2 : The Reorganisation of Punjab and its Impact

on the politics of the state

1.3 : Political Parties in Punjab

1.4 : The Bhartiya Janata Party in Punjab

1.5 : Sikh Militant Movement in Punjab

UNIT-II SECTION-B

2.1: The Demand for State Autonomy

2.2: Anandpur Sahib Resolution

2.3: Working of Coalition Governments in Punjab.

2.4: Farmers suicide & drug addiction in Punjab

(To be send separately)

2.5 : Emerging Trends in Punjab Politics NOTE : Students can download the syllabus from department’s website www.dccpbi.com