top of page

By:

Quaid Najmi

4 January 2025 at 3:26:24 pm

Rohit Pawar's SOS to PM, Amit Shah, Rahul Gandhi

Mumbai : Nationalist Congress Party (SP) MLA Rohit R. Pawar alleged that the VSR Ventures Pvt. Ltd. had high political and business connections, some linked with state governments or aligned with the ruling party at the centre who were attempting to divert the probe into the Jan. 28 Baramati air-crash ostensibly to protect the company. In another hard-hitting media-presentation, Rohit Pawar spoke of a “high-level political and commercial conspiracy” behind the air tragedy that killed five...

Rohit Pawar's SOS to PM, Amit Shah, Rahul Gandhi

Mumbai : Nationalist Congress Party (SP) MLA Rohit R. Pawar alleged that the VSR Ventures Pvt. Ltd. had high political and business connections, some linked with state governments or aligned with the ruling party at the centre who were attempting to divert the probe into the Jan. 28 Baramati air-crash ostensibly to protect the company. In another hard-hitting media-presentation, Rohit Pawar spoke of a “high-level political and commercial conspiracy” behind the air tragedy that killed five persons, including his uncle, Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) President and Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Ajit A. Pawar last month.   The Karjat-Jamkhed lawmaker claimed that conducting deep study after his earlier presentation in Mumbai, his team found “the threats of VSRVPL led to very influential people”.   “Moreover, the company is backed by some big leaders in power and prominent industrialists, among its lenders are persons with direct connections to the Telugu Desam Party and others,” alleged Rohit Pawar.   Pointing fingers at the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), he said that many of its former officials could also be involved and such a scale of hold by the VSRVPL suggested the possibility of “an international-level of political or commercial plot”.   “The people involved seem to be extremely big… Only Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah can take personal charge to ensure justice for Ajit Pawar. I plan to meet and submit a letter to them on this,” said Rohit Pawar.   Simultaneously, he urged Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi to intervene in the matter, plus support the demand for the resignation of Minister of Civil Aviation K. Rammohan Naidu, at least till the probe is completed, asking why the Minister allegedly cleared the operator of any culpability soon after the disaster.   Rohit Pawar reiterated his suspicions on other irregularities surrounding the crash of the Bombardier Learjet 45, registered as VT-SSK, on the Black Box which was retrieved earlier this week.   “When the DGCA rules mandate a two-hour recording capability, why did this aircraft’s Cockpit Voice Recorder have a capacity of only 30 minutes recording? If the aircraft was worth some Rs 35 cr. how come it was insured for Rs 210 cr. and the pilot was covered for Rs 50 cr.,” demanded Rohit Pawar.   He raised the possibility of the pilot suffering from mental and financial stress as he had been jobless for four years after leaving the defunct Jet Airways where he earned around Rs 10-12 lakhs per month, but at VSRVPL, his pay was barely 25-30 percent.   Rohit Pawar asked whether the concerned flight safety manager had been probed or booked as the Learjet 45 was being operated ‘illegally’ without a proper license and it was earlier banned in Europe.   Rohit Pawar roasts political trolls Taking strong umbrage to the social media trolling of his exposes on the Baramati air-crash, NCP (SP) MLA Rohit Pawar pointedly alleged: “Though we know they represent the BJP, who is paying them?” - during his New Delhi presentation, vowing not to rest till justice is done.   “If the BJP trolls oppose our demand for a thorough probe, is the party involved in it? We seek information through RTI and get nothing, but the trolls seem to get it from the authorities. Is it an attempt to scare us,” he wondered.

Lingua Pragmatica

Updated: Mar 20, 2025

As Southern leaders like M.K. Stalin rage against Hindi, Andhra Pradesh’s Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu offers a model of pragmatism over parochialism.

Chandrababu Naidu
Andhra Pradesh

Amid the cacophony of opposition in southern states to Hindi, Andhra Pradesh CM N. Chandrababu Naidu has taken a markedly pragmatic stance by remarking recently in the state Assembly that there was no harm in learning other languages. Hindi, Naidu noted, was useful for communication across India, particularly in political and commercial hubs like Delhi. His remarks, though avoiding explicit mention of the NEP, were widely seen as an endorsement of multilingualism and a rebuke to the linguistic chauvinism that has gripped parts of the South.


Few issues in India stir political passions quite like language. It is not merely a means of communication but a marker of identity, a relic of colonial resistance, and a source of political mobilization. In the southern states, where anti-Hindi sentiment has long been entrenched, the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 and its three-language formula have reignited old tensions. No state embodies this defiance more than Tamil Nadu, where the ruling Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) led by M.K. Stalin has framed the policy as an assault on its linguistic autonomy.


Naidu’s words, welcomed by his ally and Deputy Chief Minister Pawan Kalyan, mark a sharp contrast with the DMK’s position. Tamil Nadu’s hostility towards Hindi dates back to the 1930s, when C. Rajagopalachari’s attempt to introduce it in schools met with fierce resistance. The anti-Hindi agitations of the 1960s cemented the DMK’s ideological stance, with its first Chief Minister, C.N. Annadurai, famously warning that Hindi imposition could push Tamil Nadu towards secession.


The question, however, is whether this rigid opposition serves Tamil Nadu’s interests. While Stalin, with an eye to the upcoming Tamil Nadu Assembly polls, has been relentlessly portraying Hindi as a threat to his state’s regional identity, Naidu, a partner of the BJP-led Centre, is framing it as a tool for economic mobility. His argument is not that Hindi should replace Telugu or English but that it offers a competitive advantage.


The economic case for multilingualism is compelling. Indians who speak multiple languages tend to have better job prospects, higher earnings and greater geographic mobility. Andhra Pradesh’s Telugu-speaking diaspora is a case in point. Telugus make up a significant proportion of Indian-origin professionals in the United States, the Gulf, and Southeast Asia as Naidu pointed out, hinting that this success story was built not on linguistic rigidity but on adaptability.


In a country where inter-state migration is rising and where Hindi remains the most widely spoken language, refusing to learn it amounts to self-imposed isolation. Tamil Nadu’s approach, by contrast, risks limiting its youth. The DMK government has refused to implement the three-language policy, keeping schools strictly bilingual with Tamil and English. Its justification that Hindi is not necessary for global success could be true in a narrow sense but ignores the domestic context. If Tamil filmmakers can dub their movies into Hindi to expand their audience, why should Tamil students be denied access to the language that could open more doors for them within India?


The DMK has accused successive central governments, particularly under the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), of pushing Hindi at the expense of regional languages. Yet, rejecting Hindi outright is an overcorrection. The reality is that Hindi is an important language in India’s economic and political landscape. Naidu’s position, one of accommodation rather than confrontation, offers a middle ground that other Southern leaders would do well to consider.


Some states already recognize this. Karnataka, despite its own history of linguistic pride, has allowed Hindi to be taught as an optional language. Kerala, whose migrants work in Hindi-speaking regions and the Gulf, has been less hostile to Hindi education. Naidu’s model, balancing regional identity with practical necessity, offers a way forward. Languages should be embraced, not politicized. Southern leaders would do well to listen to him.

Comments

bottom of page