top of page

By:

Abhijit Mulye

21 August 2024 at 4:59:11 pm

BJP expels Amravati rebels

Mumbai: The Bharatiya Janata Party expelled three leaders from Amravati for six years and issued show-cause notices to over 100 corporators in Pune this week for defying party directives during the Maharashtra legislative council elections. The party took these disciplinary actions to neutralize internal rebellion against Mahayuti alliance candidates and enforce organizational rules by mandating written explanations from the Pune representatives within five days. The disciplinary action in...

BJP expels Amravati rebels

Mumbai: The Bharatiya Janata Party expelled three leaders from Amravati for six years and issued show-cause notices to over 100 corporators in Pune this week for defying party directives during the Maharashtra legislative council elections. The party took these disciplinary actions to neutralize internal rebellion against Mahayuti alliance candidates and enforce organizational rules by mandating written explanations from the Pune representatives within five days. The disciplinary action in Amravati stems from the seat-sharing arrangement of the ruling Mahayuti alliance. The Amravati Teachers constituency was allocated to the Chief Minister Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena, which fielded sitting legislator Kiran Sarnaik. Defying this arrangement, BJP leaders Sangita Shinde, Chandrashekhar Bhoyar, and Sumit Pawar filed independent nominations. This rebellion reportedly upset Chief Minister Shinde, prompting his faction to initiate maneuvers to support independent candidate Sachin Sanap against the BJP’s official nominee, Kaustubh Gawde, in the Pune Teachers constituency. Under pressure to salvage alliance unity, the BJP expelled its three Amravati rebels for a period of six years, thereby sending a message of solidarity to the Shiv Sena and attempting to halt retaliatory political moves in Pune. Simultaneously, the BJP faced mass absenteeism in its Pune stronghold. Over 100 corporators skipped the official campaign launch event for the party’s Pune division graduates and teacher’s constituency candidates. The gathering was presided over by BJP state president Ravindra Chavan and attended by Union Minister of State Murlidhar Mohol, state minister Chandrakant Patil, and Mayor Manjusha Nagpure. Noting the empty chairs, house leader Ganesh Bidkar personally verified the attendance in the hall. The party immediately served show-cause notices to the absent corporators, instructing them to submit a formal clarification within five days. The BJP has 119 elected and seven nominated corporators in the Pune Municipal Corporation, bringing its total strength to 126. A final decision on disciplinary measures will be taken after senior leaders review the submitted explanations. Beyond party discipline, the Amravati Teachers constituency election has drawn attention for a stark shift in campaign methods. Traditionally focused on direct communication with educators regarding their grievances, the election is now characterized by large vehicle convoys, modern campaign mechanisms, and widespread allegations of cash and Paithani saree distribution among voters. A formal complaint has already been registered in Achalpur regarding voter inducement. Despite the influx of money and political muscle, the core demands of the teaching community remain centered on the old pension scheme, grants for unaided schools, and pending salary issues.

Lingua Pragmatica

Correspondent
Mar 19, 2025
3 min read

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