Red flag to green steel

Ex-Maoists forge new destiny in Gadchiroli Gadchiroli: The rugged, forested terrain of Gadchiroli district, long synonymous with the violence and deep-rooted anti-establishment tenets of the ‘Red Ideology’, is now witnessing a remarkable social and industrial transformation. At the Lloyds Metals and Energy Ltd. (LMEL) plant in Konsari, once-feared Maoist operatives are shedding their past lives and embracing a new, respectable existence as skilled workers in a cutting-edge Direct Reduced Iron...

min read

Ex-Maoists forge new destiny in Gadchiroli Gadchiroli: The rugged, forested terrain of Gadchiroli district, long synonymous with the violence and deep-rooted anti-establishment tenets of the ‘Red Ideology’, is now witnessing a remarkable social and industrial transformation. At the Lloyds Metals and Energy Ltd. (LMEL) plant in Konsari, once-feared Maoist operatives are shedding their past lives and embracing a new, respectable existence as skilled workers in a cutting-edge Direct Reduced Iron (DRI) and pellet plant. This ‘green steel’ project, part of LMEL’s push for an integrated steel complex in the region, is functioning not just as an industrial unit but as a crucial pillar in the Maharashtra government’s surrender-cum-rehabilitation policy. So far, LMEL, in coordination with the state government and the Gadchiroli Police, has provided employment and training to 68 surrendered Maoists and 14 members of families affected by Naxal violence, a total of 82 individuals, offering them a definitive pathway back to the mainstream. The Shift The transformation begins at the company’s dedicated Lloyds Skill Development and Training Centre at Konsari. Recognizing that many former cadres had limited formal education, the company implements a structured, skill-based rehabilitation model. They are trained in essential technical and operational skills required for plant administration, civil construction, and mechanical operations. For individuals like Govinda Atala, a former deputy commander, the change is palpable. “After surrendering, I got the right to live a new life,” Atala said. “I am very happy to get this job. I am now living my life on my own; there is no pressure on me now.” Suresh Hichame, who spent over a decade in the movement before surrendering in 2009 too echoed the sentiments. He realized the path of violence offered neither him nor his family any benefit. Moreover, his self-respecct was hurt. He knew several languages and carried out several crucial tasks for the banned organization remaining constantly under the shadow of death. Today, he works in the plant, receiving a steady monthly salary that enables him to care for his family—a basic dignity the ‘Red Ideology’ could never provide. The monthly salaries of the rehabilitated workers, typically ranging from Rs 13,000 to Rs 20,000, are revolutionary in a region long characterized by poverty and lack of opportunities. Trust, Stability The employment of former Maoists is a brave and calculated risk for LMEL, an industry that historically faced stiff opposition and even violence from the left wing extremist groups. LMEL’s management, however, sees it as an investment in inclusive growth and long-term stability for the district. The LMEL has emphasized the company’s commitment to training and facilitating career growth for the local populace, including the surrendered cadres. This commitment to local workforce upskilling is proving to be a highly effective counter-insurgency strategy, chipping away at the foundation of the Maoist movement: the exploitation of local grievances and lack of economic options. The reintegration effort extends beyond the factory floor. By providing stable incomes and a sense of purpose, LMEL helps the former rebels navigate the social transition. They are now homeowners, taxpayers, and active members of the community, replacing the identity of an outlaw with that of a respected employee. This social acceptance, coupled with economic independence, is the true measure of rehabilitation. The successful employment of cadres, some of whom were once high-ranking commanders, also sends a powerful message to those still active in the jungle: the path to a peaceful and prosperous life is open and tangible. It transforms the promise of government rehabilitation into a concrete reality. The plant, with its production of iron ore and steel, is physically transforming the region into an emerging industrial hub, and in doing so, it is symbolically forging the nation’s progress out of the ashes of extremism. The coordinated effort between private industry, the state government, and the Gadchiroli police is establishing a new environment of trust, stability, and economic progress, marking Gadchiroli’s transition from a Maoist hotbed to a model of inclusive and sustainable development.

Gubernatorial Overreach

Correspondent
Apr 9
3 min read

With its landmark decision on Tamil Nadu’s Governor, the Supreme Court has reined in the powers of Governors while reasserting the primacy of elected state governments in a federal democracy.

The Supreme Court has struck a decisive blow against creeping gubernatorial overreach when it ruled that Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi had acted “illegally” and “arbitrarily” by withholding assent and subsequently reserving ten state Bills for the President’s consideration after they had already been re-passed by the state Assembly. In doing so, the court has not merely resolved a Tamil Nadu-centric dispute, but has also fortified the edifice of Indian federalism.

The ruling has far-reaching implications. It reaffirms that Governors, unelected appointees of the Centre, must act within the confines of constitutional morality and in alignment with democratic principles. The Supreme Court’s bench also prescribed strict timelines for gubernatorial action to prevent future constitutional logjams.

At the heart of the verdict lies Article 200 of the Indian Constitution. This provision lays out a Governor’s options when a Bill passed by a state legislature is presented for assent: grant it, withhold it, return it for reconsideration or reserve it for the President. But critically, it also says that if the legislature passes the Bill again, the Governor shall not withhold assent. What was hitherto ambiguous - the timeframe for such assent - has now been clarified. A one-month deadline is now imposed for withholding assent or reserving the Bill with the aid of the Council of Ministers; three months if done without it. Most significantly, once the Assembly re-passes a Bill, the Governor must act within a month. Failure to do so will open the door to judicial scrutiny.

The case is emblematic of an ongoing friction in Indian federalism. Tamil Nadu’s DMK-led government under M.K. Stalin has long accused RN Ravi of acting as a political agent of the BJP-led Union government, not as a neutral constitutional authority. Since his appointment in 2021, Ravi has had testy relations with Fort St. George, frequently stalling legislation and public appointments, and refusing to read sections of his customary Assembly address that reference icons of the Dravidian movement.

In January 2023, Ravi made national headlines by staging a walkout during his address to the Assembly over the sequencing of the national anthem.

A year prior, he skipped sections of a speech that mentioned social reformers like B.R. Ambedkar and Periyar. His ideological divergence from the DMK was no secret. While political disagreement is par for the course in a democracy, the use of constitutional office to wage partisan battles is not. The Supreme Court’s ruling is thus a stern reminder that Governors are not viceroys.

This episode also revives long-standing concerns over the appointment and role of Governors. Appointed by the President (effectively the Centre) under Article 155, and serving at the President’s pleasure (Article 156), Governors have often been accused of political bias, especially in opposition-ruled states. Their discretionary powers are limited; Article 163 clearly states that they must act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, barring a few exceptional circumstances. Yet, the absence of defined timelines and mechanisms to enforce accountability has allowed some to act with impunity, safe in the knowledge that they answer not to the electorate but to New Delhi.

The verdict offers a constitutional course correction. By invoking Article 142, the bench not only set aside the Governor’s actions but effectively granted assent to the Bills themselves. It also lays the groundwork for what may become a broader legal doctrine: that constitutional offices must function within the spirit of parliamentary democracy, and that delay or obstruction can be as unconstitutional as outright defiance.

The court was careful to clarify that it was not undermining the Governor’s constitutional position. Instead, it has sought to rescue that office from political misuse.

The verdict sends a clear message to the Union government that India’s democracy rests on the consent of the governed, not the discretion of appointed officials. And when that consent is subverted, the judiciary will not remain a passive spectator.

Red flag to green steel

Gubernatorial Overreach

Recent Posts

Comments