27 new cities including Mangaluru make it to Smart City list

Mangaluru, May 7: The Dakshina Kannada District Muslim Okkoota has strongly condemned permit for opening of textile and footwear shops across the district at a time when the number of Covid-19 positive cases are on the rise.

In a press note here on Thursday, former Mayor and Okoota President Ashraf alleged that the permission to open the shops at a time when Eid-ul-Fitr was nearing would lead to rush in the shops in turn bringing in fear of spread of Covid-19. 

He expressed his resentment over the fact that the administration has neglected the appeal made by the Okkoota as well as the Qazi of Udupi against permitting textile shops during the lockdown period.

He warned that the administration, district in-charge Minister, MLA and MP themselves will be responsible in case of increased infection cases due to this decision.

The district in-charge minister Kota Srinivas Poojary yesterday had announced that textile shops in the district can be opened from May 7.

Bengaluru, Feb 2: The monthlong budget session beginning on Monday, which will mark BS Yediyurappa’s maiden budget in his fourth term as chief minister, is expected to be a fiery one.

The opposition JD(S) and Congress have already threatened to stall proceeding until BJP legislator Basangouda Patil Yatnal apologises for his controversial remarks against freedom fighter and centenarian HS Doreswamy. Yatnal had called him a fake and a Pakistani agent.

Disruptions are also likely to pose a threat to speaker Vishweshwar Hegde Kageri’s novel idea of having a two-day discussion on the Constitution of India to commemorate 70 years of the country’s Independence.

Both opposition parties have scheduled legislature party meetings early on Monday and they could coordinate on issues on the floor of the house to put the BJP — especially Yediyurappa — on the backfoot.

Yatnal is not known as a “hardliner”, but his attack on Doreswamy has garnered support from several ministers including CT Ravi, KS Eshwarappa and V Somanna. Yediyurappa may have a hard time defending his party’s line.

The BJP is yet to schedule its legislature party meeting, but MLAs suggest the party will allow the issue to be raised and debated in the legislature. “Both have expressed their point of view. Let there be a discussion on the matter, but not allowing the house to function will only be a waste of the state’s time and money,” said deputy chief minister CN Ashwath Narayan.

Besides the Doreswamy issue, Yediyurappa will also deliver his reply — postponed from February 20 — to the debate on the governor’s address. The issue of student Amulya Leona Narona’s arrest on a charge of sedition, the Bidar sedition case involving a parent of a school student, pro-Pakistan writings on walls in places in north Karnataka, introduction of NPR and the anti-CAA stir is also likely to feature during the lengthy session.

Shivaji is a great icon in Maharashtra. Different sections of society have given him very high status, though for diverse reasons. Folklores about him abound in the state. His statues, popular songs on him are very prevalent. These folk songs (Powadas) praise his multifarious actions. So it was no surprise that when Jayabhagwan Goyal, released his book, ‘Aaj ka Shivaji: Narendra Modi’, at religious-cultural meet organized by Delhi BJP, there was a strong resentment in Maharashtra. Various leaders from Maharashtra were furious. The Shiv Sena leader Sanjay Raut challenged the Shivaji’s descendent, Sambhaji Raje who is in BJP and is member of Rajya Sabha, to resign on the issue. Sambhaji Raje in turn stated that "We respect Narendra Modi, who was elected as the prime minister of the country for the second time. But neither (Narendra) Modi nor anybody else in the world can be compared with Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj,"

Not to be left behind Jitendra Awhad of NCP felt Modi-BJP are insulting the pride of Maharashtra. It is not the first time that controversy is erupting around the Maharashtra warrior of medieval period. Earlier we had seen Sambhaji Brigrade demanding the ban on James Laine book, Shivaji: ‘A Hindu King in an Islamic Kingdom’, for its objectionable content. Bhandarkar Institute in Pune, which had helped James Laine in his research, was also vandalized. At another level there was a talk that Babasaheb Purandare, a Brahmin, who has written some popular material on Shivaji will be made as the Chairman of the committee for statue of Shivaji. Maratha Mahasangh and Shiv Dharm officials objected to a Brahmin heading the committee for a statue for the Maratha warrior. The caste angel in Shivaji’s case is coming to the fore from quite some time.

While there is no dearth of controversies around Shivaji, it is also true that each political tendency has created Shivaji’s image from their political point of view. Who was the real Shivaji, is the question. One can see two clear streams of projection in this matter. On one hand there is an attempt to present Shivaji as the anti Muslim King, a king who was respecting Cows and Brahmins (Go Brahman pratipalak). This view was brought forward from the times of Lokmanya Tilak and picked up by Hindu nationalists, who have been looking for icons in history to suit their political agenda. Nathram Godse, while criticizing Gandhi says that Gandhi’s nationalism was dwarf in front of the one of Shivaji or Rana Pratap.

In tune with this the Hindu nationalists are promoting both these as icons of Hindu nationalism and giving anti-Muslim slant to the whole discourse. This discourse also hides in this the Brahmanical agenda of Hindu nationalism as Cows and Brahmins are presented as the central object of veneration by Shivaji. This image of Shivaji fits well into the current agenda of Hindu nationalists, being spearheaded by RSS Combine.

It is because of this that for seeking votes in Mumbai Narendra Modi on the eve of 2014 elections stated that Shivaji attacked Surat to plunder the treasury of Aurangzeb. This also presents Shivaji-Aurangzeb, Shivaji-Afzal Khan interactions as battle between Hindus and Muslims. The truth is that Surat was plundered for its wealth as it was a rich port city and Bal Samant’s book on the topic gives in depth description of the same. It is noteworthy that Shivaji began his real career of conquest in 1656 when he conquered Javli from the Maratha Chief Chandra Rao More. He took over the treasures of this kingdom. That it was not a Hindu Muslim battle becomes clear when we know that in confrontation with Aurangzeb it was Mirza Raja Jaisingh who was negotiating and engaging with Shivaji on behalf of Aurangzeb. And Shivaji had Muslim officers like Kazi Haider as confidential secretary and many Muslim Generals in his army.

Darya Sarang was chief of armor division, Daulat Khan was in-charge of his naval division; Ibrahim Khan was another general of significance in his army.  This mixed up administration just shows that the kings were not having Hindu or Muslim administration depending on their religion. In the confrontation between Shivaji and Afzal Khan, Rustam-e-Jaman was Shivaji’s side and Afzal Khan had Krisnaji Bhaskar Kulkarni on his side.

As far as Shivaji’s popularity is concerned it was due to his being a King with welfare of his subjects in his mind. He lightened the burden of taxation on the average peasants, and reduced the domination of landlords over the serfs. This picture of Shivaji is well documents in the booklets by Com. Govind Pansare (Who was Shivaji) and Jayant Gadkari (Shivaji: Ek Lok Kalyankari Raja- Shivaji: King doing People’s Welfare). He did not belong to the warrior caste so Brahmins had refused to coronate him, for which purpose Gaga Bhatt a Brahmin from Kashi was brought in with heavy fees. Teesta Setalvad’s hand book on History for teachers underlined this fact.

Today while BJP-Brahmanical forces want to present Shivaji as worshipper of Brahmins and cows, the non upper caste have seen through the game. As such it was Jotirao Phule who brought forward the caste angel of Shivaji as he wrote Powada (Poem) in his honor and today dalit Bahujan are not toeing Hindu Nationalist projection on the issue.

The likes of Jayabhagwan Goyal of BJP as such are trying to give two messages through such attempts. One hand they want to paint Shivaji in anti Muslim and Brahmanical color, they also want to give the subtle message of similarity of this presentation of Shivaji with what Modi is doing. Non BJP forces have seen this game and want to present the other picture of Shivaji, which was highlighted by the likes of Jotirao Phule and which today many of those standing for rights of dalit-Bahujan are trying to articulate. The criticism of the said, book, since withdrawn is on these twin aspects. One about the picture of Shivaji who was concerned about welfare of the farmers, and two his respect for people of all religions.