Premchand Aggarwal, a three-time MLA from Rishikesh, Minister for Parliamentary Affairs and Finance in the government of Pushkar Singh Dhami, may never have thought he is stirring a hornet’s nest as he wondered aloud during the state’s Budget session: “Is Uttarakhand just for people in the hills? And, who is in the hills? Some came from Madhya Pradesh while a few others from Rajasthan. You are dividing people into Kumaon, Garhwal, pahari and desi. Will you object only because I am Aggarwal?” His words triggered spontaneous demonstrations against him in multiple districts, including even from some MLAs from his own party; the Speaker expressed reservations about the speech. Soon his effigies were being burnt, angry slogans denouncing him being raised and his resignation being demanded. A few days later, on March 17, Aggarwal resigned tearfully, saying his words were misconstrued.
To those who still remember the three-decade-long history of the birth and growth of the Uttarakhand Kranti Dal in 1979, against the continued exploitation and political indifference of the then UP government to its hill areas, the words rang a bell. The party had begun with a group of respected elders from the hills such as Kashi Singh Airy, Diwakar Bhatt and former vice chancellor of the Kumaon University, D D Pant. It became volatile by the 1990s, when the Mulayam Singh government said since the hills did not have a good presence of SCs and OBCs, he would flood the area with people from the plains. A violent police encounter in Rampur Tiraha area in 1994 followed, killing several demonstrators. Taken aback, the state government hastily put together a proposal for a separate hill state that included eight hill districts (Uttarkashi, Tehri, Pauri, Chamoli, Dehradun, Nainital, Almora, and Pithoragarh) and sent it to the Centre. Subsequent chief ministers from other parties added to the list, with Mayawati adding Rudraprayag, Bageshwar, Champawat and then Udham Singh Nagar, a district from the plains of the Terai region, to it. It was swiftly approved by her Assembly. By the time the state actually came into being in November 2000, the list had Roorkee (in the plains) and Haridwar, the last one added despite protests from farmer leader Mahendra Singh Tikait and locals.
Thus, a weaker than expected Uttarakhand with a visible demographic imbalance caused by demographically bigger Terai maidani areas — Udham Singh Nagar, Dehradun, Roorkee and Haridwar — came into being. It was hailed as the Centre’s gift to the hill people. But the NDA government at the Centre changed the name to Uttaranchal. The name Uttarakhand was later restored but the policies of successive governments have since remained headquartered in Dehradun, not in Gairsain in the hills as proposed. Easier access, better schools and medical facilities saw to it that what industry and corporations cropped up remained in the non-hill areas. This sharpened the economic divide between hill areas and the desi (Terai-based) region. Even IITs, NIITs and AIIMS were built “down below”. The result of this was a major migration of the young from the hills to these areas. Some 2,000 villages in the hills lie derelict today.
In view of this, the recent proposal of the tourism-happy Centre to turn the entire Dev Bhoomi area into a pilgrims’ paradise-cum-tourist hub with hotels, malls, spas and adventure-tourism spots, seems almost on par with US President Donald Trump’s dream of greening the Gaza strip as a vast arcade for the rich and leisure-loving mobs from all over.
A serious reconstruction of the Himalayan zone and a reinvention of its culture was undertaken by governments of various parties in the last 25 years based on templates for vikas created by the sab jannewallahs in Delhi. So, a lopsided growth that raised incomes in Terai districts while draining pahad ka pani aur pahad ki jawani (waters and youth) became its fate. A ham-handed effort at generating income from religious tourism has invited hordes of tourists with little understanding of the local terrain. Their year-long influx in heavy vehicles has destroyed many ecologically sensitive zones, such as Kedarnath and Joshimath.
As they set about building their empire, the British discovered — much earlier than Minister Aggarwal — how the Himalayan area is not just a mine of botanical information, it stands at a crucial juncture where cultures and empires share borders. It, therefore, has a strong sense of regional identity and pride in its unique heritage. But memory, as Herodotus the historian had cautioned, has a treacherous trait. People remember what they want to remember, not what actually happened.
Perhaps the MLA from Rishikesh (who has since been claiming that he was a sympathiser to the Uttarakhand Kranti Dal and had rushed to Mussoorie to help demonstrators on his motorbike) wished in all honesty to promote Dev Bhoomi as a holy land-cum-money-making tourism hub. But crucial questions remain. The area is fast being parcelled out to outsiders — contractors, engineering companies and corporate houses — while the hills lose their forests, water resources and its people live in daily fear of losing the land beneath their feet. Where will entire hill populations migrate to make room for the needs of money spinners and builders coming in from the plains? The poor but proud paharis are not demanding revdis, only a just restoration of Uttarakhand’s original identity as a hill state.
The writer is former chairperson, Prasar Bharati
