7.5 lakh Muslims, Christians converted to Hinduism in 10 years: Togadia

Bengaluru, Jun 20: Nine candidates filed their nominations for the June 29 elections to seven seats of the Karnataka legislative council on Thursday.

While the BJP has fielded four candidates, the Congress has given tickets to two and the JD(S) to one candidate respectively for the biennial elections to seven seats of the legislative council to be elected by the MLAs.

One independent and one person claiming to be affiliated to BJP have also filed their nomination papers at the office of Legislative Assembly Secretary MK Vishalakshi, who is also the returning officer for the polls.

"The nominations of two candidates without any proposers is likely to be rejected during scrutiny of the papers on Friday. So seven candidates will be in the fray for as many berths. Hence the election is likely to be unopposed if no one withdraws nominations," official sources said.

While scrutiny will take place, Friday, June 22 is the last date for withdrawal of candidature.

The election is necessitated as the term of seven MLCs — Naseer Ahmed, Jayamma, M C Venugopal, N S Bose Raju, H M Revanna (all Congress), T A Sharavana (JD(S)) and independent D U Mallikarjuna — will end June 30.

Based on their strength in the Assembly, while BJP is in a position to win four out of seven seats, Congress can win two and JD(S) one.

Twenty-eight valid votes of MLAs are required for each candidate to win.

Four BJP candidates MTB Nagaraj, R Shankar, Sunil Vallyapure and Pratap Simha Nayak filed their nominations today, after the party high command announced their names late on Wednesday.

Nagaraj and Shankar had played a key role in the formation of the BJP government after the coup that led to the collapse of Congress-JD(S) coalition.They had subsequently defected to the saffron party.

While Nagaraj lost the bye-elections held later, Shankar did not contest in exchange for a Council berth promise.

Among the other BJP candidates, Vallyapure is a former MLA from Chincholi and had given up his seat abiding by the party decision to field Avinash Jadhav, while Nayak is a senior party worker and had served as Dakshina Kannada district president.

A BJP insider said Shankar and Vallyapure have been given MLC tickets as they had given up their Assembly seats, while Nagraj was considered as he had faced a defeat during the bypolls because party MP B N Bachhe Gowda's son Sharath contested as a rebel.

Nayak's candidature is being seen as BJP high command's choice by party insiders, ignoring the state units recommendation of AH Vishwanath, a former JD(S) MLA who had defected to BJP.

Two Congress candidates, senior party leader BK Hariprasad and incumbent Naseer Ahmed also filed their nominations today.

Hariprasad's name was announced by the party on Wednesday, even as his tenure in Rajya Sabha is to end on June 25.

Naseer Ahmed, who is retiring as MLC on June 30 is seeking another term.

The choice of candidates by the Congress high command is being seen as a mixed bag for CLP leader Siddaramaiah as Naseer Ahmed is said to be close to him, while Hariprasad is considered among his adversaries.

In a surprise move, JD(S) has fielded Govinda Raju from Kolar as the party candidate for the MLC polls.

Incumbent MLC T A Sharavana and outgoing Rajya Sabha member Kupendra Reddy were seen as the prime aspirants for the ticket.

JD(S) leader and former Chief Minister H D Kumaraswamy said Govinda Raju was chosen as it would help organise and strengthen the party in Kolar and Chikkaballapura region.

The independent candidate who has filed his papers today is P C Krishnegowda, and the one who filed his nomination claiming to be associated with BJP is Mandikkal Nagaraja.

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.

Mysuru, Mar 13: A state-of-the-art viral research laboratory in the city has been identified as one of the testing laboratories for the detection of COVID-19, official sources said here on Friday.

The samples of suspected cases could be sent to the lab for analysis and it would take about three hours to get the results.

The Viral Research and Diagnostic Laboratory (VRDL), which was set up from Central grants and functions at the Microbiology Department of K.R. Hospital, has been authorised to carry out the tests. This lab in Mysuru is among the 52-plus laboratories in the country.

Though the VRDL is equipped to carry out the tests, the sole authority of confirming the virus lies with the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR)-National Institute of Virology (NIV) in Pune. VRDL is also the sole agency for collection and transportation of suspected samples of COVID-19 to NIV.

VRDL, which is part of the Mysore Medical College and Research Institute, functions on the advice of NIV.

According to the guidelines issued by ICMR, the results of the tests done here have to be shared with NIV the same day and the labs are not supposed to disclose the results since the NIV is the only authority to declare positive cases. Also, confirmation from the NIV should be awaited in case the samples test negative for COVID-19. The ICMR, in the guidelines made available on its website, has advised clinicians at labs to isolate the patient tested positive for COVID-19 in the identified facility and follow bio-safety precautions.

VRDL is a part of a network of labs established by the Department of Health Research, Government of India. The rise in the number of viral outbreaks and the resultant mortality had been cited as key reasons for the launch of network of such hi-tech labs in the country.

The NIV and the National Centre for Disease Control, Delhi, are the top laboratories for the network, while the National Institute of Epidemiology, Chennai, is the supervising authority for the data generated by the network of labs, sources added.