Module Detail Subject Name Political Science Paper

Module Detail Subject Name Political Science Paper Name Indian Politics: II Module Reorganistaion of States: Language, Religion, Name/Title Region and Culture Module Id Pre-requisites Objectives To know the concept of reorganization of states. To know the linguistic bases of demands of states in India. To discuss the role of state reorganization commission To analysis the different movements for separate statehood. Keywords Reorganisation of State, linguistic states, State Reorganisation Commission, Movement. Role Name Affiliation Principal Investigator Professor Ashutosh Kumar Panjab University, Chandigarh Paper Coordinator Prof. Sanjay Lodha; MLS,University, Udaipur Delhi Prof. Rekha Saxena University, Delhi Content Writer/Author Abhay datar (CW) Content Reviewer (CR) Prof. Asha Sarangi JNU, New Delhi Language Editor (LE) Professor Ashutosh Kumar, Panjab University, Chandigarh Module: Reorganisation of States: Language, Religion, Region and Culture The reorganization of the states on the basis of language, a process that began with the formation of Andhra Pradesh in 1953 and in a sense concluded with the tripartite division of Punjab in 1966, did not only alter the internal geographical boundaries of India, but also altered the established structures and patterns of politics at the sub-national level. The provincial boundaries inherited by an independent and partitioned India in 1947 were largely a legacy of colonial rule. The provincial boundaries during British rule were largely a consequence of the manner and the sequence in which the East India Company acquired or conquered territories. Later, administrative convenience of the colonial rulers was the prime factor governing these boundaries. Territories were transferred from one province to another as on a largely ad-hoc basis. As a consequence, in the early 20th century, a majority of the British Indian provinces were multi-lingual. The population of both the Bombay Presidency and the Madras Presidency consisted of four major linguistic groups. The Bengal Presidency, the Central Provinces and the Punjab too were linguistically diverse. Only the United Provinces (the Uttar Pradesh of today) could be reasonably described as being linguistically homogenous. The uniformity of the administrative apparatus and the use of English as a common medium of higher education under British rule fostered the development of a sense of a common Indian identity. However, concurrently, the use of Indian languages in primary and secondary education, the introduction of these languages as a separate area of study in the universities, the development of the newspaper and publishing industries as well as the spread of the printing press beyond the large urban centers helped sharpen the sense of regional identities which in turn were largely constructed around the regional languages. With the colonial rule came employment opportunities and the development of new professions like that of the lawyers. As education spread through a wide-cross section of Indian society, competition sharpened among various social groups to derive benefits from the opportunities being offered by the Raj. In multi-lingual provinces, this competition became one between the various linguistic groups. If some groups believed that the others were monopolizing the resources being made available by the colonial state and hence stepped up demands for a large share, others, who had been the first to have access to these same resources sought to retain their dominant positions. Early Demands The first demands for separate administrative units on linguistic lines came from eastern and southern India. Demands were made in the early years of the 20th century for Bihar to be separated from the huger province of Bengal. Bihar had been administered from Calcutta (now Kolkata) since the mid-18th century after it had passed under the control of the East India Company. There was an element of resentment against the domination of public life and the professions in Bihar by individuals who came from Bengali backgrounds. Demands also arose for a separate province of Orissa, largely on similar lines. These demands received a fillip with the creation of a separate province of Bihar and Orissa in 1912 with the annulment of the partition of Bengal. In the Madras Presidency, demands were made for separate province for the Telugu speakers, which was to be named Andhra. This demand also was actuated by feelings that the Telugu speakers were losing out to the Tamil speakers, and hence a separate province was a necessity. The Indian National Congress, while promoting national unity and thus by extension deprecating claims for separate provinces, however, did realize by the first two decades of the 20th century to concede the strength that lay behind these demands. As a result, initially Bihar, and then later Andhra and Sindh were accorded the status of separate provincial units as far the Congress organization was concerned. But the nationalist elites were not unanimous on this count. A resolution introduced in the Viceroy’s Legislative Council in 1918 was defeated with stalwarts like Surendranath Banerjea, Tej Bahadur Sapru and M.A. Jinnah ranged against it. The opponents believed that this would divert attention from the forthcoming constitutional reforms, which they believed was the more important question. The position of the British Raj was on the other hand ambivalent. The Report on Indian Constitutional Reforms or the Montagu-Chelmsford report supported the idea of reorganization of provinces on the basis of language since that would make the resultant administrative units more compact and homogenous and thus easy to govern. It also pointed out that such reorganization would enable the local administration to be carried out in the local language and further draw into politics individuals not familiar with English. However, the report left it to the provincial governments to test public opinion before any such reorganization was seriously considered. By 1920, the Congress moved a step ahead on this issue. It decided to restructure its organization structure on the basis of language, which increased the number of provincial Congress units. However, by establishing separate Congress organizations for the city of Bombay and the rest of the Marathi speaking areas of the Bombay province, it did sow the seeds of a future problem. Furthermore, the principle of language was not consistently follower. In the Marathi speaking areas of the Central Provinces and Berar, two separate Congress provincial organizations were created, reportedly to accommodate the political ambitions of the regional leadership. Later in 1928, the All-Parties Conference’s Report, known as the Nehru Report, appointed to draft a constitution for a future free India, also recommended the reorganization of provinces on linguistic lines, though it refrained from making definite statements in almost all cases. It argued that such reorganization would be conducive to rapid progress. One of the first concrete moves towards using language as a basis for redrawing provincial boundaries came with the Government of India Act, 1935. It separated Sindh from the Bombay Presidency, and Orissa from Bihar to form separate provinces. The separation of Sindh, a Muslim majority region in Hindu majority Bombay, had more to do with communal considerations though language was one of the relevant factors. The formation of Orissa was however primarily governed by linguistic considerations. The Congress during this period continued to support the demand for linguistic provinces. Resolutions were passed in some provincial assemblies, where the Congress enjoyed a majority, asking for the creation of new provinces. Yet, not all Congress leaders were convinced of wisdom of such demands. Even Mahatma Gandhi, under whose leadership the Congress had restructured its provincial organizations on the basis of language, urged caution. His cautiousness on the issue increased as time went by. On the other hand, provincial leaders also made efforts to create unanimity among themselves on the issue. The leaders from the coastal Andhra and the Rayalseema region signed an agreement known as the Sri Bagh Pact in 1937 which promised balanced regional development in any future Andhra province. Independence and After With independence, came partition. On the eve of the achievement of freedom and also immediately after it, there were renewed demands for linguistic states. However, on the backdrop of the partition of the country, the national leadership was now naturally concerned about the fissiparous potential of such demands. It was believed that linguistic states could pose a danger to the unity of the newly independent country by encouraging regional identities at the expense of an over-arching national one. However, insistent demands for the formation of linguistic states continued which were not only supported by leading intellectuals and litterateurs from various linguistic groups, but also by several Congress leaders. Attempts were once again made to arrive at a consensus within particular linguistic groups and reassure those who felt that they might lose out in a linguistic state since they belonged to a backward area. The Akola Pact, signed between the Marathi speaking leaders and leading public figures belonging to the Bombay province and the Central Provinces and Berar in 1947 was one such attempt. The national Congress leadership was disinclined to concede these demands and hence resorted to stalling

Load more