Tags:
Journalism of Courage
IT IS an issue in which the BJP’s much-vaunted “Double Engine Sarkar” claim falls flat, spectacularly. The decades-old Maharashtra-Karnataka border dispute that has turned into a battle of nerves between the Karnataka Chief Minister Basavaraj S Bommai and the Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis, both of the BJP, is unlikely to be resolved soon. No wonder then, that the BJP government at the Centre has refrained from taking any position, leaving the leaders of two neighbouring states to address the problem within the legal framework in the Supreme Court.
The bone of contention between the neighbouring states is rooted in their carving out along linguistic lines via the State Reorganisation Act, 1956. While the dispute recurs periodically, with political outfits on both sides of the border exploiting parochial sentiments for electoral gain, its impact on the people remains suspect. Both governments maintain a cordial relationship, despite the differences.
This time, the border row hit the headlines quite unexpectedly. On Monday, Maharashtra CM Eknath Shinde convened a meeting to discuss the topic, and appointed two senior ministers Chandrakant Patil of the BJP and Shambhuraj Desai of the Balasahebanchi Shiv Sena to pursue it legally. He also announced pensions for freedom fighters living in areas claimed by Maharashtra on the Karnataka side of the border, and extended to them healthcare cover under the state’s Mahatma Jyotiba Phule Jan Arogya scheme.
It seemed to be routine virtue-signalling, in response to the December 2019 decision by previous CM Uddhav Thackeray, who had deputed Chhagan Bhujbal and Eknath Shinde—then senior ministers in the MVA—to expedite a solution. But the very next day, the Karnataka CM said in Bengaluru that his government was seriously thinking of claiming Jatta taluka in Sangli district of Maharashtra as part of Karnataka, and announced grants to Kannada schools in Maharashtra. A day later, he laid claim to border villages in Solapur district of Maharashtra.
Predictably, it reignited the festering issue. Fadnavis responded by pronouncing he will fight tooth-and-nail to safeguard the state’s territory. “We’ll not let a single village from Maharashtra to go to Karnataka,” he said, acting tough, and added, “We’ll legally fight to get back 865 Marathi-speaking villages along the border, including Carver, Nippani and Belgavi (earlier: Belgaum).”
Such “tu tu main main” is not new. Irrespective of parties in power in the state and the Centre, both sides have often crossed swords on the topic. That has never stopped local opposition party units from taking advantage to stay in the headlines. Predictably, the Congress, NCP and Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray), which constitute the Maharashtra opposition coalition Maha Vikas Aghadi, seized the opportunity, with the Centre, Maharashtra and Karnataka all being ruled by the BJP.
A Congress-NCP coalition government in Maharashtra has, in the past, faced a similar dilemma, after the UPA government at the Centre refused to take Maharashtra’s side in court. In 2010, the Centre, in its affidavit to the Supreme Court, had stated, “The transfer of certain areas to then Mysore (now Karnataka) was neither arbitrary nor wrong,” adding, “Both Parliament and Union government had considered all relevant factors while considering the State Reorganisation Bill, 1956, and the Bombay Reorganisation Bill, 1960.” Calling the Centre’s position as injustice to Maharashtra, the Maharashtra government had then decided to challenge the decision.
With the dispute back on centrestage, Shiv Sena (UBT) chief Uddhav Thackeray has warned, “Anybody trying to claim Maharashtra villages will be dealt with an iron hand. The Marathi manoos will show its power.” Similar sentiments were echoed by leaders of its MVA coalition partners, the Congress and NCP. Maharashtra Pradesh Congress chief Nana Patole said, “The Centre is under BJP. It should intervene and give justice to Maharashtra. Those at the helm in the state should put pressure on the Centre to resolve the issue.”
Each party is taking a hardline stand as part of their tactic of scoring brownie points. But they all know their limitations in the scheme of things. There is no easy solution to the problem, which even violent agitations since the creation of Maharashtra on May 1, 1960 have managed to resolve. But the periodic virtue-signalling continues. After Fadnavis said, “We won’t compromise on our stand of claiming 865 villages, along with Belgavi, Nippani and Carvar,” Bommai responded, “Karnataka has the right to claim Kannada-speaking villages in Solapur and Sangli districts of Maharashtra.”
On October 25, 1966, the Centre constituted the Mahajan Commission, headed by the then Supreme Court Chief Justice Meher Chand Mahajan, at the insistence of Maharashtra. While rejecting Maharashtra’s claim over Belgavi, the Commission recommended 247 villages/places, including Jatt, Akkalkote and Solapur, to be made part of Karnataka. It also declared 264 villages/places, including Nippani, Khanapur and Nandagad, to be made part of Maharashtra. Several attempts were subsequently made to resolve the row, but in vain.
On March 2006, the Maharashtra government filed a petition in the Supreme Court, staking claim over the Marathi-speaking villages in Karnataka, which vehemently contested the case in court, changed the name from the Marathi Belgaum to the Kannada Belgavi, and made it the state’s second capital.
Thankfully, after six decades of intermittent disputes, people on both sides seem to have realised that these disputes will have to be resolved legally. Fadnavis later conceded as much, “There is no enmity between the states. We only want to solve the issue legally and reclaim our rights.”
