Soon after independence, there was a rise
of popular movement to create new states based
on language. In this video, we will discuss
various linguistic movements and the formation
of new states.
Let us first see the background of linguistic
reorganization ideology.
The leading Indian nationalists had long been
sensible of the power of the mother tongue
to rouse and move. This was a land of many
languages, each with its distinct script,
grammar, vocabulary and literary traditions.
Rather than deny this diversity, the Congress
sought to give space to it. As early as 1917,
the party had committed itself to the creation
of linguistic provinces in a free India. After
Nagpur Congress of 1920, the principle was
extended and formalized with the creation of Provincial
Congress Committees by linguistic zones.
The linguistic reorganization of states was
supported and encourage by Gandhiji. He thought
that the states of the new nation should be
defined based on language.
Nehru was also appreciative of linguistic
diversity. In an essay of 1937, he discussed
the dynamic nature and rich heritage of Indian
languages.
But by 1947, Nehru’s views changed. Since
country was just partitioned based on religion,
he didn’t want to divide it further based
on languages. His views were supported by
Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and C. Rajgopalachari.
Sardar Patel worked hard within the Constituent
Assembly to reverse the official Congress position.
Nehru also persuaded Gandhiji. He agreed to
postponing the reorganization until a healthy
atmosphere is established.
However large sections of the Assembly were
restive. To calm the clamour, a fresh committee
was formed. It was called JVP committed after
the initials of its members Jawaharlal Nehru,
Vallabhbhai Patel and Pattabhai Sitarammaya.
The committee argued that language was not
only the binding force but also a separating one.
It again rejected the idea of linguistic
reorganization.
Among many linguistic movements, we will discuss
the three notable movements.
Let us first discuss the Punjab movement.
By 1950, Indian Punjab had roughly 62% Hindu
population and 35% Sikh. However, eastern
half of the province was chiefly Hindi-speaking
region with 88% Hindus, while western half
was Punjabi speaking regions with more than
50% Sikhs. Therefore Sikh demanded separate
state in West Punjab.
Since 1920s, interests of politically conscious
Sikhs had been represented by Akali Dal. It
was both religious body and political party.
The separate Punjab movement was led by long-time
leader of Akali Dal, Master Tara Singh.
Before 1947, Tara Singh argued that Sikh sect
was in danger from Muslims and Muslim league.
After 1947, he said it was in danger from
Hindus and the Congress. Tara Singh was arrested
several times between 1948 and 1952, for defying
bans and inflammatory speeches. He deliberately
used term ‘independence’ to put pressure
on government by hinting secession.
Akali Dal was supported by the Sikh peasantry,
particularly upper-caste Jats. The low caste
Sikhs who feared Jats were opposed to Akali
Dal. Some Jats had also joined the congress.
The biggest blow to Tara Singh was the first
general election in 1951-52. In Punjab assembly,
Akali Dal won only 14 seats out of 126 seats.
The movement for separate Punjab went on for
long period compared to other movements. Their
demand was fulfilled in 1966, when Indira
Gandhi led Congress government divided Punjab
province into Punjab with Sikh majority and
Haryana of Hindu majority. Chandigarh city
was declared as a joint capital of both the states.
Let us now discuss the most vigorous linguistic
movement. The Telugu movement for separate
Andhra Pradesh.
Telugu was spoken by more people in India
than any other language besides Hindi. It
had a rich literary history, and was associated
with such symbols of Andhra glory as the Vijayanagara
Empire.
Andhra Mahasabha had worked hard to cultivate
a sense of identity among the Telugu-speaking
peoples of the Madras presidency whom, they
argued, had been discriminated against by
the Tamils. After independence, speaker of
Telugu asked the Congress to implement its
old resolution in favour of linguistic states.
Chief Minister of Madras T. Prakasam even
resigned from the Party on the issue of statehood.
To put more pressure, Congress politician-turned-swami
named Sitaram went on hunger strike. After
five weeks, the fast was given up on the appeal
of respected Gandhian Vinoba Bhave. Congress
also performed poorly in the provincial elections
where bulk of the seats went to the parties
supporting the separation.
On 19th October 1952, a man named Potti Sriramulu
went on fast-unto-death in Madras. He was
supported by Swami Sitaram and thousands of
Telugu speakers.
For five weeks Nehru ignored the fast. Finally
on 12th December, he wrote to Rajaji suggesting
to accept the demand. But it was too late.
On 15th December, Potti Sriramulu died after
58 days into his fast.
The news of the passing away of Sriramulu
engulfed entire Andhra in chaos.’ Government
offices were attacked; trains were halted
and defaced. The damage to state property
ran into millions of rupees. Several protesters
were killed in police firings.
Two days after the death of Sriramulu, Nehru
made a statement that a state of Andhra would
come into being. In next few months, Telugu
districts from Madras province were identified.
On 1st October 1953, Andhra Pradesh state
was inaugurated, though Madras was not allocated
to Andhra Pradesh.
The creation of Andhra led to the intensification
of similar demands by other linguistic groups.
Somewhat against its will, the government
of India appointed a States Reorganization Commission
Members of SRC were Fazal Ali, a historian,
and civil servant K. M. Pannikar, and a social
worker H. N. Kunzru.
Through 1954 and 1955 members of the Commission
travelled across India. They visited 104 towns
and cities, interviewed more than 9,000 people
and received as many as 152,250 written submissions.
After eighteen months of intensive work, the
trio submitted their report in October 1955.
The report suggested that the northern India
Hindi belt can be divided into four states:
Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan.
With respect to the southern states, it seemed
easy enough to redistribute areas according
to the major language zones: Telugu, Kannada,
Tamil and Malayalam.
In the east, the existing provinces would
stay as they were, with minor adjustments.
The SRC did not agree to the creation of a
Sikh state and it refused to allocate Madras
city to Andhra. It did not permit creation
of United Maharashtra. Report suggested to
keep Bombay as a bilingual state, but suggested
the creation of separate Vidarbha.
On 1st November 1956, State Reorganization
Act, 1956 was passed and new states based
on language came into existence.
Let us now discuss another prolonged movement:
Samyukt or United Maharashtra Movement.
From as early as 1946 there was a Samyukta
Maharashtra Parishad in operation presided
by veteran Congress leader Shankarrao Deo,
while secretary was D. R. Gadgil. Their demand
was for Maharashtra with Bombay.
Bombay Citizen Commission was a committee
headed by Purushottam Thakurdas and had within
its ranks prominent industrialists like
J. R. D. Tata. It had a one-point agenda to keep
Bombay city out of the state of Maharashtra.
They submitted a 200 page book to state reorganization
committee stating their case. Gujratis were
backing the movement. Nehru himself was somewhat
sympathetic towards the idea of keeping Bombay
out of the control of a single language group.
Astonishingly his view was shared by Marathi
speaking RSS supremo M. S. Golwalkar. But
cadres of both the leaders didn’t share their views.
To answer the Citizens Committee of the Gujaratis,
the Samyukta Maharashtra Parishad prepared
an impressive 200-page document of its own.
They argued that unified State of Maharashtra
has to be created with Bombay as its capital.
SRC's recommendation of Bombay as capital
of bilingual State was discussed in Parliament
on 15th Nov 1955. There was recommendation
to make Bombay as separate Union Territory.
However D. R. Gadgil defended the claim for
Maharashtra with Bombay.
Prominent communist S. A. Dange thrown his
weight behind movement
and so did Dr. B. R. Ambedkar.They were accompanied by Jana Sangh and Socialist Party.
On 16th Jan 1956, Bombay Police swooped down
leaders and activists of the movement. This
prompted call for general strike on 18th.
Shops, factories were closed. Buses and trains
didn't run. Processions were made through
the streets, burning effigies of Nehru and
of the Gujarati-speaking chief minister of
Bombay state - Morarji Desai. For nearly a
week the city was brought to a complete standstill
and 15,000 policemen were called out to battle
the rioters. When the smoke lifted, there
were more than a dozen people dead, and property
worth of billions destroyed.
On 1st November 1956, bilingual state of Bombay
came into existence as per the State reorganization
committee’s recommendations. The only concession
to the protesters was the replacement of Morarji
Desai as chief minister by the 41-year-old
Marathi speaker Y. B. Chavan.
However, after Congress performed poorly in
1957 elections of Maharashtra, Y. B. Chavan
presented Maharashtra’s case arguing that
Congress can make up its losses by grating
the united Maharashtra state.
Finally, on 1st May 1960, Gujarat and Maharashtra
States came into existence
with Bombay city allotted to Maharashtra.
Let us now briefly see the timeline of creation
of other states.
In 1963, Nagaland was granted statehood after
the long struggle of Naga people also suppressing
their secessionist movement considerably.
In 1972, Meghalay and Mizoram were carved
out of Assam.
In 1975, Sikkim joined Indian union.
In 1987, Arunachal Pradesh state was formed
from North East Frontier Agency.
In 2000, Uttarakhand was created out of Uttar
Pradesh, Chhattisgarh was created out of Madhya
Pradesh and tribal state of Jharkhand was
created out of Bihar.
In 2014, Telangana state was carved out of
Andhra Pradesh. Some of these states were
created because of administrative purpose.
Here is the map of India evolving over years.
In our next video, we will discuss the first
general election of India which some refer
as the biggest gamble in the history. Thank
you for watching this video. Please like,
share and comment, because discussion is solution.
For more discussions, please subscribe our channel
