Are regional parties constitutional in india?

REGIONAL POLITICAL PARTIES IN THEIR AIMS & OBJECTS BELIVES THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA The Election commission of India register as Political Party.  REGIONALISM, RELIGIONISM, LINGUALISM, CASTEISM HAVE BEEN CAUSING MORE DANGER TO UNITY AND INTEGRITY OF INDIA. I request 120 crore Indians to shed narrow minded vote bank Politics and be Nationalist as per the constitution of India  that is Bhart one Nation one country and one citizenship. JAI BHART.  Kolla gangadhar, Advocate,  Chairman GLOBAL LEGAL SERVICES, Cell No; 9290673693, Email: globallegalservicesindia@gamil.com  Regional Parties, Religion Parties; Caste Parties,and Lingual Parties registered by Election Commission of India must be declared as unconstitutional by court. Then there will be unity, integrity one Nation one citizen, that is India (Bhart) will have not internal  peace & prosperity. 

Thank you Mr. Kolla Gangadhar for the supportive feedback. My view is that this subject deserves urgent and deep study. If what appears to be prima facie correct, gets confirmed, it would be worthy of moving judiciary immediately; because further continuance of such a serious mistake could be avoided at least in the ensuing general elections. 

With kind regards,

K S Venkataraman

It appears you have jumped to hasty conclusions without understanding the root cause of the present problems.

Nothing unconstitutional about regional parties, they are very much constitutional. It would be wasting the time of courts. On the contrary the so called national parties and centralized governance model are the parasites and root cause of various problems. In centralized model all the powers and resources get concentrated in the hands of few ruling elite. The centralized model of governance was created by British to extract and siphon money from the country. Unfortunately the same centralized model used by British is being used today.

The key to country's progress and future lies in decentralization of governance. The center can keep external affairs, external defense and fiat currency printing for itself. Rest of the powers need to be with the states, districts and villages.

Since it is late night, going for sleep, will give detailed reply and rebut your arguments later.

Thanks for sharing your views. I shall also wait to meet the points of your rebuttal.

Originally posted by : K S Venkataraman
	Are Regional Parties Constitutional in India? K S Venkataraman How can a person belonging to a regional organization, which does not relate itself positively with all the Indian citizens (of all states) can be given a portfolio in central government and asked to take care of all Indians? All these regional parties can be considered only ‘pressure groups’ and not political parties. Having grown like parasites at the cost of myopic ‘national parties’ in India, and after strengthening their bases in their states, now the parochial regional parties want to eliminate the last vestiges of unity and nationalism by forming a ‘Federal Front’!

Regional parties get boost only when the so called national parties fail to protect the regional rights and start abusing and exploiting various regions of the country. They are able to to it because power is concentrated in the hands of few ruling elite at the center. If states are strong they will make the nation state strong. If states are weak they will make the nation state weak. States are like foundations of the house. If the foundation is weak, the house is bound to collapse in due course of time.

Originally posted by : K S Venkataraman
	A friend of mine, Ms. Meenakshi Ananthkrishnan of Mumbai, recently wrote in a message: Maharana Pratap, an epitome of bravery, courage, patriotism and dedication. Faisal Khan, an epitome of sweetness, sensitivity, hard work and sincerity together are giving me a lot of inspiration to learn. The only grudge this inspiration is coming extrinsically. How I wish all the tears I shed and all the ideas I think transform into strength and I jump into the fire of ambition to fulfill my dream of Akhand Bharat, India of my dreams. It's said if we wish for something with all our strength, the entire universe conspires to make it true. So, today, I wish not only me but the strength of all my friends come together in giving me the strength, dedication and single-focused determination to fulfill my dream. I wrote to her and through her to the Indian Youth in general: “It is very good, Meenakshi Ananthkrishnan. It is this patriotic spirit of the youngsters that has kept our country alive and kicking, in spite of numerous aggressive waves of aliens and the unfortunate, conspiratorial alliances they were able to forge with the black sheep among the insiders. It is what keeps our hopes alive and enables persons like not to give up yet. … I too wish and pray that you and your friends will be blessed with the strength, dedication, and single-focused determination you aspire for; and be enabled to bring about the positive changes that are urgently needed by our motherland. But for that we should first of all save the Unity and Democracy in India.” Shady Trend of Post-Independence Politics in India Now there may not be as many direct foreign invasions; but the black sheep section is undoubtedly controlling the political and administrative systems and structures. Widespread corruption and bad governance are the obvious results, easy for all to see. The post-independence politicians have deliberately divided Indian citizens. In the name of federalism now they have taken up a dangerous plan of making regionalism dominant in the minds of the people and perpetuating the divisions already established in the name of religion, caste, language etc.

Ideas appear to be biased and prejudiced. There have been many epitomes of bravery, patriotism etc. Rana Pratap was not the only one. As far idea of Akand Bharat is considered, it is idea of some fanatic right wing elements who are opposed to democratic values. Before 1947 these very right wing elements wanted partition of the country on religious lines and now surprisingly they have reversed position and want Akand Bharat. First they should decide want they actually want and avoid misleading people. Please read below information:

While Mohammed Ali Jinnah and the Muslim League bear heavy responsibility - since they demanded and pressed for Pakistan - the Congress cannot escape blame. Least of all the hypocritical Sangh Parivar. Its chief mentor V.D. Savarkar formulated the two-nation theory in his essay Hindutva, published in 1923, 16 years before Jinnah came up with it. The Hindu Mahasabha leader Lala Lajpat Rai wrote in The Tribune of December 14, 1924:

"Under my scheme the Muslims will have four Muslim States: (1) The Pathan Province or the North-West Frontier; (2) Western Punjab (3) Sindh and (4) Eastern Bengal. If there are compact Muslim communities in any other part of India, sufficiently large to form a province, they should be similarly constituted. But it should be distinctly understood that this is not a united India. It means a clear partition of India into a Muslim India and a non-Mulsim India." This was 16 years before the League adopted the Pakistan Resolution in Lahore, on March 23, 1940

Source https://www.hindu.com/fline/fl1826/18260810.htm

Freedom fighters, historians oppose move

By Our Special Correspondent

NEW DELHI FEB. 25. Can the portrait of a man who pledged fealty to the British, propounded the two-nation theory and was implicated in the plot to assassinate Mahatma Gandhi, hang alongside national heroes in the Central Hall of Parliament? The question is being asked on the eve of the installation of the Hindu Mahasabha leader, V.D. Savarkar's portrait in Parliament.

At a press conference in the Capital today, historians, freedom fighters and civil society groups presented a case against Savarkar being clubbed with the heroes of the Independence movement whose portraits hang in Parliament.

The anti-communalism group, Sahmat, said Savarkar's claim to recognition as a patriot and freedom fighter, "ended ignominiously within months of his incarceration in the Cellular Jail in the Andaman Islands." He sent mercy petitions to the British authorities in 1911 promising "the staunchest loyalty to the British Government" in exchange for his release. Savarkar, in the petition, also expressed his willingness to "serve the [British] Government in any capacity".

The Delhi Historians Group said that Savarkar also propounded the two-nation theory. In 1937, three years before Jinnah, he wrote "I warn the Hindus that the Mohammedans are likely to prove dangerous to our Hindu Nation. We Hindus must have a country of our own in the Solar system." In 1943, he declared that he "has no quarrel with Mr. Jinnah" on this subject.

Savarkar, named as a conspirator in Mahatma Gandhi's assassination, was not convicted, not because of lack of evidence but because of a "technicality" said lawyer Anil Nauriya.

In a letter to Jawaharlal Nehru on February 27, 1948, Sardar Patel, then Deputy Prime Minister, wrote: "It was a fanatical wing of the Hindu Mahasabha directly under Savarkar that hatched the conspiracy and saw it through."

Vishwanath Mathur, a freedom fighter who did time in Port Blair's Cellular Jail for his part in the anti-colonial movement, said Parliament's decision mocked the sacrifice of those who died for Independence. Savarkar, he said, was a "coward being portrayed as a revolutionary".

Source https://www.hindu.com/2003/02/26/stories/2003022603851300.htm

It is clear from the above that shady trend had started well before 1947 and people with similar communal and undemocratic ideas are very much in and outside the administration and causing problems.

Originally posted by : K S Venkataraman
	The Emergence of Regional Politics sans Nationalism The linguistic reorganization of states in 1950s was a bad beginning. Afterwards using language as a political weapon to divide the Indian citizens has become very common among the politicians. When MGR formed a party, the ruling party fostered a serious anti-Malayalee feeling in Tamil Nadu for a few years. Luckily that party was ousted and could not sustain that inimical feeling among the people. The thoughtless attempts to make Hindi the national language of India has succeeded only in creating an aversion in the minds of the non-Hindi speaking people. Several examples may be added but I only want to make the point clear here. During the British rule, there were groups which did not support the Independence struggle of the Congress party and were engaged in businesses that were against the principles of the Congress like prohibition, avoiding the use of foreign goods etc. After Independence these people entered Congress and other national parties; and gradually gained control. In due course they separated from the mother organization and formed state / region level parties incorporating the words like Congress, Janata etc. The so-called national parties have foolishly sold themselves and the rich patriotic traditions inherited by them out, in their attempt to somehow safeguard their hold in the central government; and at present they are at the mercy of regional pressure group leaders. There is not a single national level leader who is affectionately remembered by the people everywhere in the country! There is not a single national party which can boldly declare that they would form Indian government on their own!

Probably you are confusing between Nation State and Nation. What is a Nation? Nation is a community of people who share a common language, culture, ethnicity, descent and history. They all have their own separate language, culture, ethnicity, descent and  history. By this definition India is a sub continent and home to various nations. Thus Tamils, Punjabis, Bengalis, Assamese etc. are separate Nations since they have separate language, culture, ethnicity, descent and history. But they are part of a recently created political nation state called union of india. Please note the word "union". It signifies diverse nations forming into a political "union".

If you read the first Article of the constitution, it states that India is a union of states. The very need to form an union in the first place arises because they are not one but separate identities(nations). Like a man and a woman are separate individuals but form an union through marriage . But the same marriage can end in divorce if there is no happiness or mutual interests are not taken care. Similarly if the political entity called India(union of states) has to survive, it can survive only by ensuring happiness and protecting the interests of diverse nations within it by some mutually beneficial relationship, and not by crushing or discrimination against the states under one conspiracy or lame excuse or the other. Thus to protect common language, culture, ethnicity, descent and history of the states, the creating of states on basis of language was one such prudent attempt in right direction.

Agree trying to make Hindi as so called national language is a thoughtless idea. Probably it is idea of some right wing elitist supremacists of hindi speaking cow belt of north india. English is a better option.

The corrupt are present in all political parties regardless whether national or regional. It is the present political power structure and culture of impunity that attracts them.

Originally posted by : K S Venkataraman
	Argument against the Regional Parties India is a single sovereign nation; one political entity. The concept of national sovereignty is not divisible. The states are there not to function like separate countries. Indian Constitution has not envisaged a loose confederation. That is why states can be formed or altered by the central government at will. The emergence of regional parties has gradually given room for attaching undue importance to the term federation in India. They are teaching the people of their states to hate the people of the rest of India. The youth are dreaming of Akhand Bharat; right under their nose the existing truncated Bharat is getting fragmented. For example, an US citizen would say, “I am an American. I live in Texas State.” In Tamil Nadu most of the people have been brainwashed to say, “I am a Tamilian first; then only I am an Indian.” It is not much different in any other state. The apathy and lethargy of the people have allowed many institutions to come into being, grow and flourish, which are verily cancer to the unity and democracy in India. Most dangerous of them are the so-called regional political parties, which are unconstitutional. How can a person belonging to a regional organization, which does not relate itself positively with all the Indian citizens (of all states) can be given a portfolio in central government and asked to take care of all Indians? All these regional parties can be considered only ‘pressure groups’ and not political parties. But they are threatening to become fait accompli unless we act quickly and the judiciary boldly interferes.   Only the persons and institutions committed to the welfare and development of all the Indian citizens can be entrusted with the responsibility of governance, not only in the central government but also in any individual state. How can a person admittedly concerned only with the development of Dravidians be entrusted with the responsibility of governance in any state or center? Leave alone their own arbitrary and mischievous interpretation of the term Dravidians. Similar examples may be given from other areas of India also. Simply because the national parties in India lost their direct contact with the people of India due to their wrong policies and selfish objectives, they allowed the regional parties to emerge. Now, the national parties have actually lost their ‘national’ tags and have been reduced to the position of pathetic dependents on the regional pressure groups! The ‘Federal Front’ being proposed by some of the regional ‘parties’ is nothing but an attempt to eliminate the last vestiges of nationalism from the body politic in India. In these modern days where is the need for smaller states if there is a real national feeling among the people? While the world is becoming a global village, India is returning to the good old days of hundreds of petty rajas! And this happens in the name of democracy! The aggressive advocates of separate states are talking as though they belong to separate countries!   The social crusader Anna Hazare has emphasized:1 “But my view is that in the Indian Constitution there is no scope for political parties to fight elections as a group. I feel that people must contest as individuals and then the majority of those elected should come together to govern.”   Anna Hazare has maintained that all the political parties are unconstitutional. He has said:2 “Indian Constitution has no mention of political parties and hence the existence of all parties is anti-constitutional. I make no difference between Congress, BJP and AAP.” In last time of his life Mahatma imagined the misuse of ‘Congress’ name after his death. Gandhi’s last wish was to abolish the ‘Congress’.3 Actually the political parties are only like intermediaries between the people and their Government. The stand of Anna Hazare is very sensible. The contribution of the political parties to improve the standard of political administration in India has been next to nothing. Their disservice by way of dividing the Indian citizens on the lines of religion, castes, language, region and class has far outweighed whatever little they did to the people; they have only brought down the standard and efficiency of governance by undue interferences and corruption. So What Anna Hazare has said is very much justifiable. But in addition to all these general reasons against all the political parties, the so called regional political parties are obviously unconstitutional because they are a direct threat to the sovereignty and integrity of India, which is the be-all and end-all of our constitution. So the first step should be to remove them completely from the political scene of India.

As said earlier it is the centralized concentrated power in hands of few that is cause of problem. Such concentration of power is causing injustice and loot. Result is people are rebelling and saying enough is enough. Neither national parties are solution nor regional parties or federalism are problem. Neither suppressing regional identities and aspirations are going to work. Rather it will be counter productive and hasten the downfall of political entity called India.

Originally posted by : K S Venkataraman
	What We Ought to Do? The next year (2014) general elections may be the last chance for the Indian citizens to save the country from the corrupt and criminal politicians; and make good governance a reality in our motherland. Preserving and promoting the spirit of nationalism is the first step to achieve this. Those individuals and institutions, who do not identify themselves with the One Nation that is India, should be thrown out of the political system altogether. The diversity of culture and religion in India is actually a gift to us. It should only lead to better creativity, happiness and development. But the regional parties, which are in reality only pressure groups, have already succeeded to exploit this diversity to divide the Indian citizens and weaken the central government. The National sovereignty cannot be shared by many states. States are administrative divisions and cannot claim sovereignty. The division of functions has been elaborately given in the constitution only for the sake of efficiency; they do not imply partial abdication by the Indian national government. No party can be allowed to function in India only with regional identity, as it is certainly leading to disunity among the Indian citizens. These ‘parties’ are only facilitating the locally influential politicians to misguide the mass and spearhead violent agitations for division of existing states just to carve out empires for them, without any interest in nation-building.  The constitutional validity of the regional parties is flimsy and doubtful. If they are not against the words of the constitution, they are definitely against the spirit of the constitution that describes India as a single nation. The constitutional and other legal provisions relating to the mushrooming regional political parties need to be critically examined because on the face of it they are not in conformity with the basic requirements of national unity and integrity. If necessary our constitution should be amended suitably allowing only nationalistic parties in the political system.

Are we aware of what is actually going on in the elections? What is the real game that is being played with people of India? Glimpse of the tip of the iceberg below:

Drug mafia funding elections, former DGP tells HC

Chandigarh, September 10
Punjab’s former Director-General of Police (Prisons) Shashi Kant today claimed that drug smuggling worth over Rs 60,000 crore took place annually in the state and the money went into funding the elections. He also filed a petition today alleging that drugs were not just being smuggled from Pakistan but also manufactured in the state itself. As the matter came up for resumed hearing this morning, the state claimed before a Division bench that Kant had never submitted the report to the state authorities.

Source https://www.tribuneindia.com/2013/20130911/punjab.htm#15

Former Director-General of Police (Prisons) Shashi Kant was also DGP(Intelligence). As per him persons from Congress, BJP, Akali Dal are involved in this drug trade. As per him the central government and various central intelligence agencies are also responsible for their failure. As per him the present politics and various political parties is nothing but a friendly match being played. I hope you understand what he means to say.

Remember over Rs 60,000 crore income annually is not a small amount. Who are the beneficiaries of this drug money in elections all over India? Apply your mind and you will be able to understand the rest of the narco politics going on this country.

Study the effects of drug money in other countries. In those countries the drug money has been able to buy all the three wings of government i.e. executive, legislature and judiciary. And also the media. So let us wake up to the reality before it is late.

In light of the above facts it also becomes necessary to be aware that Electronic Voting Machines are not secure from being tampered to doctor the voting results. Attackers with physical access between voting and counting can arbitrarily change vote totals and can learn which candidate each voter selected. The design of India’s EVMs relies entirely on the physical security of the machines and the integrity of election insiders. Given the prevailing corruption and narco politics, this is not very encouraging. A detailed discussion of security flaws of EVMs can be read in the following link https://indiaevm.org/qa.html

It appears from the posts of Ex. DGP Shashi Kant that police is "warning" him for exposing the narco politics nexus. More details can be read the following link for Facebook page of Nasha Virodhi Manch - SK by Ex DGP Shashi Kant https://www.facebook.com/NVM.S.Kant

Mr. K. S. Venkataraman wants to say that the Indian Constitution does not support regional parties. What is the role of a political party in a democracy? They propose candidates to stand for elections to the Parliament or to any of the State Assemblies. If a candidate gets elected either as an M. P. or an M. L. A., they have to take an oath of allegiance to the Constitution of India, before entering the legislature. The right to contest for seats in the legislatures is the right of every citizen. He can belong to a party, national or regional or can be an independent. The Constitution is silent on political parties, either national or regional.

Long ago, I visited the then Soviet Union. First I went to Moscow and from there to Alama Ata the capital of Kazakstan.  In Moscow almost all people were Europeans speaking Russian. In Kazakstan they had a Mongolian features and did not speak Russian. I knew even before that U. S. S. R. meant the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Each of the unit there was a Republic and not a State, as we know here and the United States of America. In fact to go from Moscow to Alma Ata I had to obtain a visa as one would have to when one wants to go to another country. Actually I visited a Laboratory there and met there many scientists. They had very much heard of India but knew very little about the country. They wanted me to tell about India. Addressing a meeting, I told them that India was a country of diversities of race, religion and languages and all stay in harmony as one nation. I also said that I was happy to see that the Soviet Union was also similar. All these were in 1972. Seventeen years later the Soviet Union collapsed and all those “stan” countries and many others became independent nations. In other words only dictatorship and armed might could hold those disparate regions together.

Now let me go to another example. When I was in school, the British were ruling this country. In geography I studied that India was as large as Europe without Russia. The Second World War was raging then. In due course the War ended and peace came to Europe. I admire the Europeans. They came out much wiser from the War. They realized the foolishness of fighting and killing each other for petty and selfish interests. They decided to put an end to all their past animosities and proposed the idea of European Economic Community. In the beginning Britain wanted to join the community. But Gen. De Gaulle wanted to keep them at bay. Later the British themselves decided keep out.   The EEU expanded eastwards and southwards and in due course Muslim Turkey also decided to join.

In the school we were asked to write essays. We were to discuss whether India was a country or a continent. During those days I did not realize the real import of the question. The Indian National Congress wanted India to remain united as Akhand Bharat. The Muslim League argued that the Muslims were a separate nation and wanted Pakistan. Madhav Sadashiv Golwalker, the Sar Sanghchalak of the RSS wrote a book titled “We, Our Nationhood Defined. The burden of his argument was that it was Hinduism that united India as a nation, notwithstanding linguistic and other disparities. The communists argued that with so many languages, India was so many nations. They had in their mind the picture of the Soviet Union.  When it was decided to split India into two nations, many thought that Pakistan based on a strong Islam would remain united, whereas India with its vast diversities would split into fragments. But actually Pakistan split into two, geographically divided by India. India has remained united at least so far for the past 66 years. No one can say whether it will continue to remain united.  After the partition until the Nehu-Liaquat Pact of April, 1950 many Muslims migrated to their father-land, West and East Pakistan. Almost all the Hindus were driven out of West Pakistan and some Hindus out of East Pakistan. The Sindhis, Punjabis and Bengalis, who came here as refugees, were accepted in India. There is no Sindhi speaking region in India. But still they are not considered outsiders here. The Muslims, who migrated to Pakistan and their descendants, are still called Mohajirs, meaning refugees. In Pakistan there is an organization called PONAM i.e. Pakistan Oppressed Nations Movement. Mohajirs, Sindhis, Baluchis and Pakhtoons are parts of PONAM.

Many blame the British for creating Muslim separatism as their policy of divide and rule. I do not agree. Muslim separatism has its origin in the propagation of Pan Islamism. During the World Wars, the loyalty of the Roman Catholics was suspect among the nations of Europe. Muslims, like the Catholics, believed in an Islamic World across national boundaries. If the British really wanted to follow a policy of divide and rule, they would have divided India into linguistic provinces. They did not do that.

Long ago I visited the then Federal Republic of Germany. The German Government was my hosts. They had sent their staff-car to Cologne airport to pick me up. On reaching the Hotel, after a long journey, the driver opened the log book and pointing the finger at the page uttered “naame”. The pronunciation in German is just as its Hindi equivalent. The word is same eastward all the way up to North India. Actually the word changes only after one crosses the southern border of Maharashtra. The word becomes hezaru in Kannada and peru in the other three south Indian languages. The British knew very early that the European languages and the North Indian languages belonged to the same family, indicating a common origin. They called it the Indo-European family. The four southern languages were different.

Unwittingly or purposely Sir Arthur Mortimer Wheeler, the British archeologist, after the excavations in Mohenjo Daro, came with the proposition of Aryans and Dravidians. The Mohenjo Daro and Harappa civilizations were dated around 4000 to 5000 BC. It was because the old coins of Mesopotamia and Babylon were found there. After that any artifacts or historic records of Indian history were available only from about 600 BC, i.e from around the time of Mahavira and Gautham Buddha. The people of North India from 600 BC were called Aryans. The people of Mohenjo Daro were probably Hindus, but not Aryans. The reason that they were Hindus was because female figurines representing Goddesses were obtained from there. God has also a female form only among Hindus. The coins obtained from there showed animals including the elephant, but no horse. Aryans had horses. Tombs containing skeletons of humans and horses were found in central Asia. The conclusion (not mine) was that the Aryans came from Central Asia with their horses and drove southwards the Mohenjo Daro people. The people now south India is their descendants. South Indians speak languages akin to each other but distinctly different from the “Indo-European” languages. The South Indians were called Dravidians. North Indians are fair and tall and south Indians were dark and short. What more do the North Indians want? They were blood relations of the white Britishers and superior to south Indians. The non-Brahmin but high caste Tamilians gave it a twist. The Smitis, Vedas, Upanishads and the two epics were in Sanskrit. So they were not Dravidians and Dravidians were not Hindus. The Brahmins were Aryans and agents of North India to suppress the South. Kamba Ramayanam, though in Tamil, should not be accepted. Their arguments were rationalist and atheist as claimed by them. One can go on writing about the absurdities of their theories. But my purpose here is not that. These leaders of Tamilnadu tried to rope in other Dravidians speaking the other three Dravidian languages. But there were no takers. Anti-Brahminism and Tamil separatism were preached by these people and Anti-Hindi became a weapon in their hands.  Bharat Ratna M. G. Ramachandran once said that he would fight the north Indian army with Tamilnadu police force. It may be because the Madras Regiment was still under the control of the Indian Army and they were taught Hindi (Urdu) though not by north Indians, but by the Britishers. However after capturing power in 1967 and banishing the Congress from there, they had no need for Tamil separatism. Karunanidhi or his sons may make anti-Hindi statements. But among the population there is no anti-Hindi feeling.  They know that they need north India and Hindi for employment and business purposes.  

Before 1956, there was no Marathi chauvinism in Mumbai. I was a student and we did not differentiate among ourselves as Marathi and non-Marathi manoos. But late in 1956 after the States Re-organization Commission there were riots in Mumbai. Mr. Morarji Desai, a tactless, adamant Guajarati, was then the Chief Minister of the Bombay State. The Samyukta Maharashtra Samiti was formed instantly and in a demonstration at Flora Fountain there was police firing resulting in deaths. What more was required to ignite the flame of Marathi chauvinism?  At the General Elections in 1957, V. K Krishna Menon, a South Indian was the Congress candidate from North Bombay. Jawaharlal Nehru was still held in high esteem in Bombay and Maharashtra and Krishna Menon won the elections. However, otherwise Congress got a drubbing in Maharashtra.  In due course, Maharashtra State was formed in 1960 with Bombay as its capital. In 1962 Krishna Menon, then Minister for Defence Production, again won from Bombay as the hero of “Goa liberation”. After the Chinese aggression in 1962, Nehru lost much of his aura. He had to drop Krishna Menon from the cabinet and later he had to resort to Kamaraj plan to drop his unwanted baggage like S. K. Patil, the then strong man of Bombay. Nehru died in 1964 and his successor Lal Bahadur Shastri died in January, 1966. By the time of the election year, 1967, Indira Gandhi was the Prime Minister. Krishna Menon was again a candidate from North East Bombay. But Congress put up Barve to oppose him. In order to defeat Krishna Menon anti-South Indian feeling was inflamed in mid-1966 itself. The Shiv Sena was formed with Bal Thackeray as its leader. Krishna Menon lost the election. In 1969, when Morarji Desai wanted to visit Bombay, the Shiv Sena wanted to gherao him. As a measure of preventive detention, Bal Thackeray was taken into custody. Shiv Sena riots erupted all over Bombay, many South Indian establishments were attacked and the whole of Bombay was held to ransom for several days. After that no Government had dared to touch Bal Thackeray, whatever he may do or whatever he may say. Violence against fellow citizens got approval as a democratic action. Now Shiv Sena and its rival Sena have claimed everything short of an Independent Maharashtra. Sachin Tendulkar was castigated by Bal Thackeray for saying Mumbai belonged to all Indians. Some years before the Indian cricket team were leaving for an International tournament. Each cricket player appeared on the TV and said how he will patriotically defend India. Each one ended his talk with Jai Hind. But Sachin Tendulkar alone ended with Jai Maharashtra. He was playing only for Maharashtra and not for India. From 1947 to 1950 Pakistani’s drove out Hindus from there. Now the two Senas are vying with each other to drive out North Indians. Luckily they are not allowed to possess arms as Democratic Indian (he doesn’t disclose his true identity) wants. If so, there would have been bloodshed. The Congress Government keeps watching. Why should they get involved when others are doing the dirty things for them? We do not know when it will be the turn of South Indians again.

They say that India is the third economic power in Asia and the fourth one in the World. The country is supposed to be racing towards economic super power status. Now if Maharashtra or any other State becomes an independent country, do they think they can attain super power status? USA would not play with India the way they played with Iraq or now with Iran. If they are not playing with Pakistan, it is only because the U S A needs Pakistan. If any of the States become independent, in no time it will become a vassal of the United States or China. If China becomes a democracy we do not know whether it will go the way of the Soviet Union. If India is one country, it just means that it is one country, no compromise and no ifs and buts. In the modern World a country means one economic unit, a common wealth. In fact Europe wants to become an Economic community even before or without becoming a country. Workers from Turkey go to Germany for working there. Workers from Bihar go to Punjab. The latter is a prosperous State and Bihar a poor one. In fact Biharis are going to places all over South India in search of work. There are problems because some of them take to crime. But the solution is not to keep them out. Solution should be found without that.

India is vast and it is difficult to achieve all-India acceptance. As Deve Gowda was shot upwards from being an obscure caste leader to the position of the Prime Minister of India, every Tom, Dick and Harry, some wearing mundus, as Shoba De said, started dreaming about becoming the Prime Minister. As they cannot achieve all-India eminence, they started catering to parochialism and linguistic chauvinism. No one seems to care. Is India moving towards Balkanization?