This is what Wikipedia informs regarding Separate Vidarbha movement:
The following events led to the later movement:
- 1853: After British conquests from Mughals and Marathas in central India, in 1853 the Nagpur Province was formed with Nagpur as capital. It was administered by a commissioner under the central government.[1]
- 1861: Central Province (CP) was formed by Britishers with Nagpur as capital, in the year 1861, after merging some more north-eastern areas into it, such as Chhindawara and Chhattisgadh.
- 1903: On 1 October, Berar was also placed under the administration of the commissioner of Central Provinces. It was then named as Central Province and Berar.
- 1935: The Government of India Act, passed by British Parliament formed a provincial assembly, providing for an election. "CP and Berar" was kept a separate entity, with Nagpur as capital.
- 1938: The CP and Berar assembly passed a resolution for creation of the separate Vidarbha State unanimously, at Nagpur on 1 October 1938.
- 1950: When the Constitution of India went into effect in 1950, "CP and Berar" became Madhya Pradesh, with Nagpur as capital.
1960 :
Statehood demand[edit]
The Vidarbha region is nationally distinguished and geographically very distant from the state capital, Mumbai. Vidarbha is also historically different, culturally distinct, politically distracted, economically distressed and sentimentally quite different from western Maharashtra but was always dominated by it.
The demand for a separate state of Vidarbha was raised for the first time over 100 years ago. As a result of which, the Central Provinces legislature passed a unanimous resolution to create a separate state of Mahavidarbha on 1 October 1938 at Nagpur, much before the demand for a "Samyukta Maharashtra" was even conceived.[2]
After merger with the new state of Maharashtra, the demand of separate statehood was raised time and again, with an economic view, quoting the increasing developmental backlog.
State Reorganization Commission[edit]
The Government of India appointed the first State Reorganisation Committee (SRC) under Chairmanship of Fazal Ali on 29 December 1953.
Vidarbhite leaders at that time, like M S Aney and Brijlal Biyani, submitted a memorandum to State Reorganisation Commission (SRC) for a separate Vidarbha State.
Bharatratn Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar had also favoured a "One state - One language" principle for reorganisation of states. Accordingly, he submitted his views about forming at least 2 separate states of Marathi-speaking people, instead of a single large state of Maharashtra. As per his opinion, one state should have one language but at the same time, there can be two or more separate states of one language, depending upon the need for efficient administration, geographic and historical need and sentiments of local people. He had clearly favoured "Vidarbha State" with Nagpur as capital, saying, "Single government can not administer such a huge state as United Maharashtra." [3]
The Fazal Ali SRC, after considering these memoranda and all other related aspects, favoured a separate Vidarbha State with Nagpur as capital in the year 1956.
But even after the recommendation of SRC headed by Fazal Ali, under the influence of western Maharashtra congress leaders, Vidarbha was made part of the new state of Maharashtra in 1960 by the central government, favouring the "One language - One state" principle and Nagpur city lost the capital status. Nagpur thus became the only city in independent India, which lost "state capital status" after historically being a capital of the biggest state of India (by area) for more than 100 years.
Nagpur Pact[edit]
The 1953 Nagpur Pact assures equitable development of all the regions of the proposed Marathi State. Most prominent clause of the Nagpur Pact was: one session of Maharashtra state assembly in Nagpur city every year, with minimum six weeks duration, to discuss issues exclusively related to Vidarbha.
The signatories to the pact in 1953 were:
- Yashwantrao Chavan, then Minister in Morarji Desai ministry of Bombay State
- Ramrao Krishnarao Patil, Gandhian, Ex ICS Officer and member of first Planning Commission.[4]
Merger with Maharashtra[edit]
On 1 May 1960, the Vidarbha state, favoured by Fazal Ali SRC, was merged with a newly formed Maharashtra State, under the agreement Nagpur Pact.
Post merger developments[edit]
The Vidarbha region under new Maharashtra state continued to suffer in development. This gave impetus to the demand of more equitable development of all regions of Maharashtra. The area supplies raw material in the form of electricity, minerals,and rice and cotton to the more-developed western Maharashtra. People of the Vidarbha area find themselves 600–1,000 kilometres (400–600 mi) away from the state capital, Mumbai, and have a feeling of this region being a colony of western Maharashtra.
Under these circumstances, the Maharashtra Government appointed a committee, to study regional imbalances in Maharashtra. The committee found that:
- "The failure to report to the state assembly every year in terms of the Nagpur Agreement, has been a serious lapse on the part of the state Government. If a report had been made to state legislature, as per the Nagpur Agreement, the matter would have received sustained attention. In the circumstances this did not happen."[5]
Political groups associated with the movement[edit]
A staunch Vidarbhite Madhav Shrihari Aney won the Nagpur loksabha seat in 1962, on separate Vidarbha state agenda as an independent candidate.[6]
Raje Vishveswarrao won Chandrapur loksabha seat in 1977, on separate Vidarbha agenda.[7]
Mr Jambuwantrao Dhote won, Nagpur loksaha seat in 1971, as a Forward Bloc candidate, with a clear separate Vidarbha state agenda.[8] Vidarbha Janata Congress was founded by Mr Jambuwantrao Dhote, on 09-09-2002 for the separate Vidarbha state.
Former central cabinet ministers of congress party, Vasant Sathe and N. K. P. Salve, formed the Vidarbha Rajya Nirman Congress in 2003, with a clear separate Vidarbha-state agenda.
An internal committee of congress party, led by P.A. Sangama, studied the merits and demerits of demand, and after many discussions with a cross-section of people, politicians and organizations, recommended formation of the separate state of Vidarbha.
Former member of parliament from Nagpur, Banawarilal Purohit floated the Vidarbha Rajya Party in 2004, just before the loksabha elections, with a clear agenda of the separate Vidarbha state.
After declaration of the separate Telangana state by central Government on 9 December 2009,[9] all these and more than 65 other organizations have joined together, demanding the separate Vidarbha state. This umbrella group is known as Vidarbha Rajya Sangram Samitee.[10] Most prominent amongst this group is the Bharatiya Janata Party, which is committed to the cause of the separate Vidarbha state, as per its national manifesto. Bharipa Bahujan Mahasangh (BBM) leader Prakash Ambedkar, Nationalist Congress Party (NCP), Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), Samajwadi Party (SP), all the factions of Republican Party of India (RPI) have pledged full support to the separate Vidarbha-state movement. Congress party member of Parliament from the Nagpur constituency, Vilas Muttemwar, and member of parliament from Wardha constituency Datta Meghe are at the forefront of the separate Vidarbha movement.
* * * * *
An online petition for separate Vidarbha State informs as follows:
Demand of Separate Vidarbha state
- Petition byNagpur, India
HISTORY OF DEMAND FOR CREATION OF VIDARBHA STATE (PRE 1956) 2.1 Till the defeat of Raghuji II of Bhonsla dynasty by the Britishers in 1817, Vidarbha was an independent kingdom with Nagpur as Capital. Even after the merger of the kingdom in British India in 1856, the aspiration of Vidarbha remaining independent Province/State continued. It is said that in 1888, the then British Commissioner had proposed creation of separate Vidarbha Province. In 1903, The Central Provinces & Berar (C.P. & Berar) was formed including the original 8 districts of Vidarbha (now 11) with Nagpur as its Capital. In 1905, demand of separate Vidarbha was revived during the regime of India’s then Secretary of State, Mr Montague who had visited India. The Constitutional Commission on Reforms Report in 1918 mentioned that need based Provinces of Orissa and Vidarbha (Berar) require to be considered. 2.2 In 1924, Late A s s e m b l separate Sta Shri Bapuji Aney raised the demand of te of Vidarbha in the Assembly. Further, in Round Table Conference the demand for s eparate Vidarbha was raised. it’s session s held All India Congress Committee in in 1920 at Nagpur and in 1927 at Madras , y considered the matter of reorganization of the States in the country. Looking to the general feelings of the people of Vidarbha, a resolution was unanimously passed for creation of separate State of Vidarbha. 1 st October Resolution of Vidarbha Province 1938, the of C.P. & Berar of eight districts pas sed the On . This resolution was brought in the assembly by Barrister Ramrao Deshmukh. T his Resolution was pass unanimously by the Assembly. ed 2.3 A week before the Independence of India, the Congress Party Leaders in the Marathi speaking areas of the then C.P. & Berar and Maharashtra entered into an agreement known as “Akola Pact” on 8th of August, 1947 (Annexure–A). In the Akola Pact it was agreed to establish two separate States of Marathi speaking people, one Vidarbha and second – Rest of Marathi speaking areas of Maharashtra. This pact also agreed to have two separate Legislative Assemblies, separate judiciary, separate Ministry but under one Governor. There was also a solemn affirmation made in the Akola Pact that in case it is not possible to have separate States under Akola Pact, then all the signatories to the Pact will make effort for formation of Separate State of Vidarbha. 2.4 In 1948, Dar Commission while discussing the reorganization of States said in its Report “It might be possible two separate Marathi speaking provinces namely, 1. Mahavidarbha comprising of the eight districts of Central Provinces and 2. Deccan consisting of eleven districts of Bombay.
2.5 In Jaipur Session of AICC in 1948, a Committee of Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Vallabbhai Patel and Dr. Pattabhi Sitaramayya (JVP Committee) was formed. This Committee stated that “We have defined and accepted areas of Maharashtra, if they choose from themselves into separate province to Berar of Vidarbha and Nagpur, as whether this area joins the new Maharashtra or favour the formation of separate State, this should be the choice of Vidarbha and Nagpur”. 2.6 Again, the Marathi speaking leaders discussed the issue of reorganisation of the States and entered into an agreement known as “Nagpur Agreement“on 28th September 1953. (Annexure - B). The signatories agreed to form One State of Marathi speaking people with certain conditions. The conditions were that the allocation of funds for developmental expenditure to different regions will be in proportion to the population of each Region and special attention will also be given to the backward/ undeveloped regions. It was agreed that the report regarding the allocation of funds Region-wise and its implementation would be placed before the State Assembly every year. It was also agreed to give adequate facilities in proportion to the population of these regions for education and employment in the Govt. services. It was further agreed that the Government shall officially shift to Nagpur for a definite period and at least one Session of the State Legislature shall be held every year in Nagpur. It is worthwhile to note that this agreement had no legal status nor it was accepted by any Constitutional Authority. It is also worth noting that some signatories of Nagpur Agreement were also signatories to Akola Pact which envisaged separate Vidarbha State. 2.7 States Reorganization Commission (SRC) under the Chairmanship of Justice Fazal Ali with Shri Hridhyanath Kunjaru and Shri Sardar Panikkar as Members was set up in Dec 1953, known as “Fazal Ali Commission” to examine the reorganisation of the States in the country. The Commission gave its report in 1955 and recommended formation of separate State of Vidarbha on various grounds. The recommendation of the Commission regarding separate State of Vidarbha, which is contained in Chapter VIII of the report, is enclosed as (Annexure C). The salient features arei) Vidarbha’s traditional financial surplus continues. It may be crore and half of rupees or possibly more. In view of the satisfactory position of Vidarbha and since Maharashtra without grater Bombay is likely to be a deficit area on revenue account to very much greater extent, there is some reluctance to join Maharashtra. There seems to be prima facie clarification for the suspicion that if Vidarbha joins Maharashtra, it cannot be certain that its resources will be spent within its area on suitable development schemes and projects. ii) There is the fear that Nagpur will be completely over shadowed by the Bombay City, which would be the natural capital of a single Maharashtrian State, if it were created. iii) Communalism, it has been stated, may also be introduced in to the political life of Vidarbha if it joins Maharashtra. iv) That there is deep rooted regional consciousness in Vidarbha is conceded even by the leaders of the movement for Samyukta Maharashtra. v) The arrangements in Akola Pact are not workable. The distributions of development expenditure on an agreed basis as contemplated in Nagpur Agreement are also not workable. If our assessment of public opinion is correct, these pacts are no longer regarded by section of leaders as a satisfactory means of finding out solution. 2.8 The Ministry of Home Affairs after studying the Report stated that “The Government of India has carefully considered the Commission’s recommendation regarding the formation of Bombay and Vidarbha State. This proposal appears to be reasonable . 2.9 However, for political reasons, the recommendations of “Fazal Ali Commission ” were not accepted and on the contrary efforts were made to give legal status to the Nagpur agreement and also assurances to the people of Vidarbha that their interest in one Marathi speaking State of Maharashtra would be safe-guarded. The Constitution of India was amended in November 1956 and a new Article 371(2) was incorporated, enabling the President of India under article 371(2) to provide for special responsibility of Governor of Maharashtra for the establishment of development Boards for Vidarbha , Marathwada and the rest of Maharashtra and for other responsibilities. The special responsibilities entrusted with the Governor of Maharashtra under the Constitution are for (1) Establishment of three development boards for Vidarbha, Marathwada and Rest of Maharashtra (2) Ensuring equitable allocation of funds for development expenditure over the areas subject to the requirement of the State as a whole.(3) Equitable arrangement for providing adequate facilities for technical education and vocational training and also adequate opportunities for employment in the services under the control of the State Govt. in the areas of three development boards.
2.5 In Jaipur Session of AICC in 1948, a Committee of Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Vallabbhai Patel and Dr. Pattabhi Sitaramayya (JVP Committee) was formed. This Committee stated that “We have defined and accepted areas of Maharashtra, if they choose from themselves into separate province to Berar of Vidarbha and Nagpur, as whether this area joins the new Maharashtra or favour the formation of separate State, this should be the choice of Vidarbha and Nagpur”. 2.6 Again, the Marathi speaking leaders discussed the issue of reorganisation of the States and entered into an agreement known as “Nagpur Agreement“on 28th September 1953. (Annexure - B). The signatories agreed to form One State of Marathi speaking people with certain conditions. The conditions were that the allocation of funds for developmental expenditure to different regions will be in proportion to the population of each Region and special attention will also be given to the backward/ undeveloped regions. It was agreed that the report regarding the allocation of funds Region-wise and its implementation would be placed before the State Assembly every year. It was also agreed to give adequate facilities in proportion to the population of these regions for education and employment in the Govt. services. It was further agreed that the Government shall officially shift to Nagpur for a definite period and at least one Session of the State Legislature shall be held every year in Nagpur. It is worthwhile to note that this agreement had no legal status nor it was accepted by any Constitutional Authority. It is also worth noting that some signatories of Nagpur Agreement were also signatories to Akola Pact which envisaged separate Vidarbha State. 2.7 States Reorganization Commission (SRC) under the Chairmanship of Justice Fazal Ali with Shri Hridhyanath Kunjaru and Shri Sardar Panikkar as Members was set up in Dec 1953, known as “Fazal Ali Commission” to examine the reorganisation of the States in the country. The Commission gave its report in 1955 and recommended formation of separate State of Vidarbha on various grounds. The recommendation of the Commission regarding separate State of Vidarbha, which is contained in Chapter VIII of the report, is enclosed as (Annexure C). The salient features arei) Vidarbha’s traditional financial surplus continues. It may be crore and half of rupees or possibly more. In view of the satisfactory position of Vidarbha and since Maharashtra without grater Bombay is likely to be a deficit area on revenue account to very much greater extent, there is some reluctance to join Maharashtra. There seems to be prima facie clarification for the suspicion that if Vidarbha joins Maharashtra, it cannot be certain that its resources will be spent within its area on suitable development schemes and projects. ii) There is the fear that Nagpur will be completely over shadowed by the Bombay City, which would be the natural capital of a single Maharashtrian State, if it were created. iii) Communalism, it has been stated, may also be introduced in to the political life of Vidarbha if it joins Maharashtra. iv) That there is deep rooted regional consciousness in Vidarbha is conceded even by the leaders of the movement for Samyukta Maharashtra. v) The arrangements in Akola Pact are not workable. The distributions of development expenditure on an agreed basis as contemplated in Nagpur Agreement are also not workable. If our assessment of public opinion is correct, these pacts are no longer regarded by section of leaders as a satisfactory means of finding out solution. 2.8 The Ministry of Home Affairs after studying the Report stated that “The Government of India has carefully considered the Commission’s recommendation regarding the formation of Bombay and Vidarbha State. This proposal appears to be reasonable . 2.9 However, for political reasons, the recommendations of “Fazal Ali Commission ” were not accepted and on the contrary efforts were made to give legal status to the Nagpur agreement and also assurances to the people of Vidarbha that their interest in one Marathi speaking State of Maharashtra would be safe-guarded. The Constitution of India was amended in November 1956 and a new Article 371(2) was incorporated, enabling the President of India under article 371(2) to provide for special responsibility of Governor of Maharashtra for the establishment of development Boards for Vidarbha , Marathwada and the rest of Maharashtra and for other responsibilities. The special responsibilities entrusted with the Governor of Maharashtra under the Constitution are for (1) Establishment of three development boards for Vidarbha, Marathwada and Rest of Maharashtra (2) Ensuring equitable allocation of funds for development expenditure over the areas subject to the requirement of the State as a whole.(3) Equitable arrangement for providing adequate facilities for technical education and vocational training and also adequate opportunities for employment in the services under the control of the State Govt. in the areas of three development boards.
Another informant says so:
A resolution for creation of a separate Vidarbha state was first passed , UNANIMOUSLY in C.P.& Berar assembly, at Nagpur way back on 1 st october 1938. Vidarbha region is nationally important, and geographically distant (600 - 1000 KM ) from state capital Mumbai. It is economically disadvantaged, politically distracted, culturally very distinct from rest of Maharashtra. 1)1853: After British conquests from Mughals and Marathas in central India, “Nagpur Province” was formed with Nagpur as capital. It was administered by a commissioner under the central government. 2)1861: Chhattisgarh and Chhindawaraa was added to he province and “Central Province” was formed by britishers with Nagpur as capital. 3)1903: On 1 st October Berar was also placed under the administration of the commissioner of Central Provinces. It was now renamed as “CP and Berar”. 4)1935: Govt. of India Act, passed by British parliament formed provincial assembly, providing for an election. “CP and Berar” was kept a separate state with Nagpur as capital. 5)1950: When constitution of India went into effect in 1950 name of CP and Berar state was changed to “Madhya Pradesh”, with Nagpur as capital.
6)1956: “Vidarbha State” with Nagpur as capital was recommended by Fazal Ali states reorganization commission (SRC). 7)1960: On 1 st May the Vidarbha state, favoured by Fazal Ali SRC, was merged with, a newly formed Maharashtra State, under the “Nagpur Pact”.
Ever since its merger with newly formed Maharashtra state, it has been exploited like a colony of Mumbai city. No chief minister, even if he is from Vidarbha region, can do justice to this region, by sitting in air conditioned office in south Mumbai; because 24 hours he will be busy sorting out problems of builders of Mumbai or industrialists of western Maharashtra.
6)1956: “Vidarbha State” with Nagpur as capital was recommended by Fazal Ali states reorganization commission (SRC). 7)1960: On 1 st May the Vidarbha state, favoured by Fazal Ali SRC, was merged with, a newly formed Maharashtra State, under the “Nagpur Pact”.
Ever since its merger with newly formed Maharashtra state, it has been exploited like a colony of Mumbai city. No chief minister, even if he is from Vidarbha region, can do justice to this region, by sitting in air conditioned office in south Mumbai; because 24 hours he will be busy sorting out problems of builders of Mumbai or industrialists of western Maharashtra.
* * * * *
All this information indicates the following:
1. Separate Vidarbha movement started about 100 years back, much before the Samyukta Maharashtra movement even.
2. As far back as in 1938 the CP & Berar Provincial Assembly passed a unanimous resolution for the formation of a separate Vidarbha State.
3. The Nagpur Pact for Maratha unity was in 1953 much before the Gentlemen's Agreement reg. Telangana in 1956 and persistent allegations from Vidarbha people are that it is violated all along and anyway Vidarbha is in a very backward state compared to Telangana which prospered very much under united Telugu State.
4. The capital city of Maharshtra is very distant more than 600 kilometers from Vidarbha and Vidarbha has a big former capital city Nagpur in its favor.
5. Vidarbha does not demand Bombay to be its capital and so the residual state of Maharashtra if Vidarbha be formed does not lose its capital city. Nagpur is not developed so much as Hyderabad has been developed due to the joint efforts of people from all regions of Andhra Pradesh. Yet it is a sufficiently big and well developed city, historically a capital city of CP & Berar for long years, and either the residual state of Maharashtra or Vidarbha if formed - both do not suffer any problem of capital city and the stakes in the capital city, etc. Even then Shinde and other Maratha leaders who are so eager to divide up Andrha Pradesh do not countenance the formation of Vidarbha! They only want to ruin a prospering neighboring State and chuckle over its ruin but do not want to do justice to a very backward [admitted by all] region in India.
This is not to say that Vidarbha should be formed under any circumstances. This is only to bring out the horrible injustice and illegalities perpetrated on Telugu people by the very people who don't tolerate even the talk of dividing up their own States for more just and valid reasons.
* * * * *
No comments:
Post a Comment