top of page

By:

Abhijit Mulye

21 August 2024 at 11:29:11 am

Shinde dilutes demand

Likely to be content with Deputy Mayor’s post in Mumbai Mumbai: In a decisive shift that redraws the power dynamics of Maharashtra’s urban politics, the standoff over the prestigious Mumbai Mayor’s post has ended with a strategic compromise. Following days of resort politics and intense backroom negotiations, the Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena has reportedly diluted its demand for the top job in the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), settling instead for the Deputy Mayor’s post. This...

Shinde dilutes demand

Likely to be content with Deputy Mayor’s post in Mumbai Mumbai: In a decisive shift that redraws the power dynamics of Maharashtra’s urban politics, the standoff over the prestigious Mumbai Mayor’s post has ended with a strategic compromise. Following days of resort politics and intense backroom negotiations, the Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena has reportedly diluted its demand for the top job in the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), settling instead for the Deputy Mayor’s post. This development, confirmed by high-ranking party insiders, follows the realization that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) effectively ceded its claims on the Kalyan-Dombivali Municipal Corporation (KDMC) to protect the alliance, facilitating a “Mumbai for BJP, Kalyan for Shinde” power-sharing formula. The compromise marks a complete role reversal between the BJP and the Shiv Sena. Both the political parties were in alliance with each other for over 25 years before 2017 civic polls. Back then the BJP used to get the post of Deputy Mayor while the Shiv Sena always enjoyed the mayor’s position. In 2017 a surging BJP (82 seats) had paused its aggression to support the undivided Shiv Sena (84 seats), preferring to be out of power in the Corporation to keep the saffron alliance intact. Today, the numbers dictate a different reality. In the recently concluded elections BJP emerged as the single largest party in Mumbai with 89 seats, while the Shinde faction secured 29. Although the Shinde faction acted as the “kingmaker”—pushing the alliance past the majority mark of 114—the sheer numerical gap made their claim to the mayor’s post untenable in the long run. KDMC Factor The catalyst for this truce lies 40 kilometers north of Mumbai in Kalyan-Dombivali, a region considered the impregnable fortress of Eknath Shinde and his son, MP Shrikant Shinde. While the BJP performed exceptionally well in KDMC, winning 50 seats compared to the Shinde faction’s 53, the lotter for the reservation of mayor’s post in KDMC turned the tables decisively in favor of Shiv Sena there. In the lottery, the KDMC mayor’ post went to be reserved for the Scheduled Tribe candidate. The BJP doesn’t have any such candidate among elected corporatros in KDMC. This cleared the way for Shiv Sena. Also, the Shiv Sena tied hands with the MNS in the corporation effectively weakening the Shiv Sena (UBT)’s alliance with them. Party insiders suggest that once it became clear the BJP would not pursue the KDMC Mayor’s chair—effectively acknowledging it as Shinde’s fiefdom—he agreed to scale down his demands in the capital. “We have practically no hope of installing a BJP Mayor in Kalyan-Dombivali without shattering the alliance locally,” a Mumbai BJP secretary admitted and added, “Letting the KDMC become Shinde’s home turf is the price for securing the Mumbai Mayor’s bungalow for a BJP corporator for the first time in history.” The formal elections for the Mayoral posts are scheduled for later this month. While the opposition Maharashtra Vikas Aghadi (MVA)—led by the Shiv Sena (UBT)—has vowed to field candidates, the arithmetic heavily favors the ruling alliance. For Eknath Shinde, accepting the Deputy Mayor’s post in Mumbai is a tactical retreat. It allows him to consolidate his power in the MMR belt (Thane and Kalyan) while remaining a partner in Mumbai’s governance. For the BJP, this is a crowning moment; after playing second fiddle in the BMC for decades, they are poised to finally install their own “First Citizen” of Mumbai.

Conversion Conundrum

Updated: Dec 2, 2024

The Supreme Court has delivered a landmark judgment that underscores the complexities surrounding caste-based reservations and the integrity of religious identity in a secular state. By upholding the denial of a Scheduled Caste certificate to a woman born Christian but claiming Hindu identity for employment benefits, the Court has drawn a decisive line between genuine faith and opportunistic conversions.


By denying a SC certificate to C. Selvarani—a woman born Christian who claimed Hindu identity for employment benefits—the Court has underscored the principle that faith must be genuine, not a matter of convenience.


At the crux of the case was Selvarani’s assertion that, despite being baptized as a Christian shortly after birth and actively practicing Christianity, she was entitled to SC reservation benefits under the Adi Dravida quota. She argued that her family belonged to the Valluvan caste and claimed to have consistently professed Hinduism. However, the Court, citing detailed field verification, found her claim untenable. Evidence of her consistent adherence to Christian practices, including regular church attendance and her baptism records, contradicted her professed Hindu identity.


The Court ruled that extending reservation benefits to those who manipulate religious identities for personal gain undermined the social ethos of the policy of reservation and constituted a “fraud on Constitution.”


The Court also provided guidelines on what constitutes genuine reconversion, such as adopting procedures like those of the Arya Samaj or making public declarations of faith.


This ruling arrives amid a broader debate on whether SC reservations should extend to Dalit Christians and Muslims. The 1950 Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order confines SC status to Hindus, later expanded to include Sikhs and Buddhists. Critics argue that this exclusion perpetuates discrimination within Christian and Muslim communities, where caste-based inequities still persist. Proponents of the current framework contend that extending reservations would dilute the benefits intended for historically marginalized Hindu castes. The 2007 Ranganath Mishra Commission report recommended extending SC quotas to Dalit Christians and Muslims, but the issue remains in controversy.


The Court’s decision reinforces a foundational principle: caste-based reservations are meant to redress historical and systemic injustices, not to be exploited through opportunistic claims. This judgment highlights the importance of authentic faith practices and sets a precedent for scrutinizing dubious claims of conversion or reconversion. While the debate over the intersection of caste, religion and affirmative action is far from over, the Court’s judgment reflects the fine balance India must maintain as a secular state committed to social justice. Faith must be a matter of conviction, not convenience. At a time when identity politics frequently intersects with constitutional rights, this decision serves as a reminder of the need for integrity in both personal claims and public policies.

Comments

bottom of page