top of page

By:

Abhiram Ghadyalpatil

10 May 2026 at 12:01:04 pm

Can Muslims Reimagine the BJP?

As the BJP expands its political dominance, Indian Muslims need to rethink old electoral assumptions in engaging with the BJP. It is fascinating to read Arvind Singh’s ‘India’s Rogue Historians: How They Fought Hindus at Ayodhya & Lost’ (Redux Publications) in the context of the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s recent Bhojshala judgment. Singh, in his 830-page tome, explains how India’s Muslims, persuaded by the cohort of Marxist historians, squandered every opportunity to reconcile with the Hindu...

Can Muslims Reimagine the BJP?

As the BJP expands its political dominance, Indian Muslims need to rethink old electoral assumptions in engaging with the BJP. It is fascinating to read Arvind Singh’s ‘India’s Rogue Historians: How They Fought Hindus at Ayodhya & Lost’ (Redux Publications) in the context of the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s recent Bhojshala judgment. Singh, in his 830-page tome, explains how India’s Muslims, persuaded by the cohort of Marxist historians, squandered every opportunity to reconcile with the Hindu side’s religious, historical, and legal claim over Ram Mandir in Ayodhya. In November 2019, when the Supreme Court (SC) awarded the entire site to the Hindus to build the temple to Lord Ram, it only built on a series of legal interventions including the 1994 SC judgment which ruled that “a mosque is not an essential part of the practice of the religion of Islam”. Singh writes that right from 1858 when the then caretaker of the mosque filed the first complaint seeking an order restraining Hindus from praying inside the ‘mosque’ which the Muslim complainant himself mentioned as ‘janmasthan’, Ayodhya presented innumerable opportunities to the Muslims to accept the religious, historical, archaeological, and legal superiority of the Hindu claim over the site. Throughout the legal trajectory of the Ayodhya case post-independence, India’s ‘eminent historians’ took it upon themselves to represent the Muslim side and effectively stopped them from reaching any legal or out-of-court settlement, reconciliation, or just a pragmatic acknowledgement of the merit in the Hindu side’s claim which the SC upheld in 2019. Rogue Historians Singh’s account is an instructive read about the Hindu side’s nearly 500-year old struggle to reclaim Ayodhya, particularly the post-independence era, against all odds including the narrative war that “India’s rogue historians” fought on behalf of the Muslims but lost eventually, in the context of two recent developments- one, the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) victory in West Bengal and Assam elections that has triggered a curiously cynical response that Muslims do not matter any longer to the BJP. Two—and a more direct outcome of the 2019 Ayodhya verdict itself—the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s judgment declaring the Bhojshala complex in MP’s Dhar district a “temple to goddess Saraswati”. The MP HC based its judgment on the 10-points emanating from the Ayodhya verdict. It also ruled that the 1991 Places of Worship Act, widely cited by the entire spectrum of Muslim petitioners to politicians to “secular” parties to the “eminent historians”, did not apply to the Bhojshala temple as it was a “protected monument” under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act of 1958, a set of monuments the Places of Worship Act does not apply to. The argument that the Muslims do not matter to the BJP has not been made for the first time nor are we likely to see this reductionist tendency to interpret India die down anytime soon. The BJP has won Bengal and retained Assam with even higher numbers despite the unfavourable demographics in many constituencies in these states. It indeed is a paradigm electoral shift in the sense that the BJP has finally denied the Muslim vote bank, if not the Muslims, the exercise of its veto power. In several state and national elections, the Muslim vote bank, and the fantastically self-styled secular parties who court this vote bank, have exercised this veto power to either deny the BJP a majority or even a shot at power. Assam and West Bengal have changed this and hence the cynical argument that the Muslims (not just Muslim voters) do not matter to the BJP any longer. Cynical Template Why always use this reductionist template which gives just one task to the Muslims - defeat the BJP in elections? Why not ask Muslims to take a chance on the BJP and vote for it? Given the viscerally polarised political atmosphere it probably is a big ask of the Muslims. But in that shines a political opportunity that has the potential to change this very cynical ‘BJP versus Muslims’ template of Indian politics. A suggestion has been made that all non-BJP parties build a coalition of Hindu voters and Muslims to take on the BJP. But in order to build that Hindu-Muslim coalition, won’t these non-BJP parties have to give up at least some, if not all, of their nauseatingly Muslim-appeasing politics? There is absolutely no sign that the non-BJP parties are even thinking on these lines. But the Muslims already have an electoral choice in the BJP. Like any other successful political party in a democracy, the BJP caters to its constituency, which effectively is the Hindu constituency. With West Bengal and Assam, the BJP’s Hindu consolidation is at its peak. So, there is no electoral incentive for the BJP at least in near future to change this Hindu maximisation matrix. But there is an incentive for the Muslims to consider the BJP as an option- it has the potential to make them stakeholders in BJP’s reign and perhaps incentivise the BJP to speak to the Muslims without appeasement. Can the Indian Muslims be politically bold and creative to take a bet on the BJP? A large part of the answer lies in the Bhojshala judgment. A court has just pronounced the structure as a temple to Saraswati based on the solid archaeological, historical, and religious evidence. The Muslim clergy and politicians have reacted exactly in the same manner they did to the Ayodhya ruling. Seven years after the epic Ayodhya judgment, a splendid Ram Mandir stands on the site taking nothing away from the Indian Muslims. Can the Indian Muslims distinguish themselves from their clergy and political leadership this time around and revisit some of their positions in an India that looks vastly different from what it did in 1992 or even 2019? (The author is a senior journalist and Executive Director of Rambhau Mhalgi Prabodhini. Views personal.)

Annasaheb Patil: A Lifelong Advocate for Workers’ Rights

Updated: Oct 21, 2024

Annasaheb Patil

Annasaheb Pandurang Patil, a member of the Maharashtra Legislative Council, made significant contributions to the uplifting of scattered workers in Mumbai. For this reason, he is regarded as the architect of the progress of the Maratha and Mathadi workers in Maharashtra. Annasaheb Patil proposed a simple yet broad definition of a `Maratha,’ stating that every person residing in Maharashtra and standing for its defence is a Maratha. With this ideology, he established the Mathadi Workers Union and the All India Maratha Federation.

When Annasaheb Patil arrived in Mumbai from his native village, Mandrulkole in Patan Taluka, he began his career as a worker. At that time, workers in Mumbai were facing dire conditions, and a majority of them were Marathas. Annasaheb Patil believed that workers needed to experience both economic and social progress. He deeply studied their issues and began organising them, forming the Mathadi Workers Union, formally known as the Maharashtra State Mathadi Transport and General Workers Union. This became one of the largest labour unions in the state.

At the time, most labour unions were led by communists, but Annasaheb Patil rejected their ideologies, instead building a union based on Indigenous principles. He organised protests and movements, putting forward workers’ demands for better wages, healthcare, and basic rights for workers before the government. His relentless work eventually bore fruit, and he became the guiding force for workers.

Annasaheb Patil’s efforts resonated with the government. The then-Chief Minister, Yashwantrao Chavan, addressed the demands put forth by Patil, and on June 5, 1969, the Mathadi Workers Act was enacted in Maharashtra. This legislation brought joy and relief to the workers, improving their quality of life. Due to this act, facilities such as hospitals, consumer societies, housing through CIDCO, and educational and medical services were made available to Mathadi workers. Patil’s contribution to their welfare was pivotal.

Today, the issue of Maratha reservation is a significant topic in Maharashtra. Annasaheb Patil, the father of the Maratha reservation movement, made sure that his demands were reasonable and did not disturb social unity. His image is revered across Maharashtra for this reason.

Annasaheb Patil worked tirelessly for the welfare of Mathadi workers, most of whom were Marathas. He united the 12 Balutedars and 18 Pagadi communities, forming various organisations under the All India Maratha Federation. His leadership earned him widespread respect, and on July 8, 1980, he became a member of the Legislative Council.

During this time, the demand for Maratha reservations based on economic criteria was gaining traction. Annasaheb Patil toured Maharashtra while advocating for this cause. He resolved to lead a protest march to the Legislative Assembly. As an MLA in the Congress government, Patil, along with Advocate Shashikant Pawar, led a massive procession from Azad Maidan, Mumbai, on March 22, 1982. The sight of the marchers carrying Shivaji Maharaj’s saffron flag caught the attention of the citizens of Mumbai.

Annasaheb Patil submitted a list of nine demands to the then Chief Minister, Babasaheb Bhosale. Realising that the demand for reservation would not be considered, he declared that if justice were not served to the Maratha community, he would not live to see the next sunrise. True to his word, he ended his life on March 23, 1982, leaving an indelible mark on the state.

Annasaheb Patil devoted his life to the progress of Mathadi workers, raising their issues before the government and improving their living conditions. His efforts for the Maratha reservation and social justice brought attention to the problems faced by the community. His life was a testament to the struggle for the welfare of society. Rightfully, he is remembered as the father of the Maratha reservation movement and the architect of Maratha upliftment.

On his birth anniversary, we humbly pay tribute to the sacred memory of Annasaheb Patil.

(The writer is a BJP member of Maharashtra Legislative Council. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page