After plaint against CM, Cong high command issues fiat over tickets

Bengaluru, Mar 9: The political crisis faced by Kamal Nath government in Madhya Pradesh appears to have accentuated with 13 party MLAs and six ministers reported to be in Bengaluru.

The developments have come amid factional differences in the party unit and at a time the party has to finalise its Rajya Sabha candidates from the state.

Sources said the number of Congress MLAs who were in Bengaluru had gone up to 19 and one more MLA expected to reach Bengaluru by Monday night. They said the MLAs have come in batches and include six ministers from Madhya Pradesh.

The developments came on a day state chief Chief Minister Kamal Nath met party chief Sonia Gandhi and discussed the political situation in the state.

The sources said that MLAs are likely to be shifted to a resort on the outskirts of Bengaluru.

According to the sources, BJP Mahadevpura MLA Arvind Limbavali has been in touch with the Congress MLAs. They said 16 MLAs were brought at HAL airport Bengaluru by a special flight and were staying in a hotel at present.

The session of Madhya Pradesh assembly will begin on March 16 and the BJP may bring no-confidence motion against the Kamal Nath government.

Kamal Nath had said after his meeting with Gandhi that Congress MLAs who were reportedly missing have returned and had informed him that they were on 'tirth yatra'.

"Congress MLAs came back and said to me that they went on' tirth yatra (pilgrimage)".

The Congress has accused the BJP of trying to topple the party government. Party leader Digvijaya Singh had earlier alleged that BJP leaders Shivraj Singh Chouhan and Narottam Mishra were offering bribes of Rs 25-35 crore to Congress MLAs in order to bring down the Congress government in the state. The BJP had refuted the allegations.

In 2018 assembly elections, Congress won 114 seats in the 230-member Assembly and formed the government with the support of four Independent MLAs and two BSP MLAs and a legislator from the Samajwadi Party (SP). The BJP had secured 109 seats in the state assembly.

Last week,Madhya Pradesh Labour Minister Mahendra Singh Sisodia had warned that the state government will face a crisis if it "ignores or disrespects" party leader Jyotiraditya Scindia.

Scindia had said last month that he will not hesitate to hit the roads if promises made in a manifesto by Kamal Nath-led government in Madhya Pradesh were not fulfilled.

Kamal Nath had responded to the remarks saying, "To utar jayein" (Let him hit the streets if he wants to).

Congress MLA Bisahulal Singh, who was "missing" for the past few days, returned to Bhopal on Sunday and said he had gone on a pilgrimage.

Independent MLA Surendra Singh said on Monday that he was hoping to become a minister in Madhya Pradesh government soon.

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.

Lucknow, Jul 20: Dr Azizuddin Sheikh, who was fighting COVID-19 as a front line worker, passed away after contracting coronavirus in Uttar Pradesh. He is survived by a wife and three small children. 

40-year-old Dr Azizuddin, who hailed from Rajasthan, was serving as a paediatrician at Avanti Bai Hospital and Duffein Hospital, Lucknow for past few years. He had also worked in the Middle Eastern countries. 

When a large number of doctors preferred to stay home following the covid-19 outbreak, Dr Azizudin was working 16 to 17 hours battling the pandemic. 

According to sources, he tested positive for the covid-19 last month. “After the reports came positive, he had to call the concerned authorities many times to take him to the hospital,” recalled his family members.

He was first admitted to Lok Bandhu Hospital and was later shifted to KGMU after his condition deteriorated. Later he was taken to SGPGIMS.
 
“Despite following all the guidelines and taking every precaution while treating coronavirus patients, he tested positive for the covid-19. It’s a shock for all of us,” he said.

He used to console his family members and instill confidence among them, said one of his relatives. 

A local newspaper quoted his friends as saying that he was very dedicated in serving people that he used to take minimal possible fees from his patients. When the family asked him to increase consultation fees his reply would be, “They are poor people, how will they afford”?

After his death, one of his patients Alok Singh wrote about an incident. “When I asked doctor Sahib why he charges so less, his answer was I have to answer Allah. The truth that he has left us will always be the reason for our grief.”