Excess parking fee collection at Mangaluru Airport: Director assures action

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.

Bengaluru, Jan 6: JD(S) leader H D Kumaraswamy on Monday said he would not get involved in any 'wicked act' of bringing down the B S Yediyurappa-led government in Karnataka, amid claims that 15 to 20 BJP MLAs were ready to come out.

Clarifying that he would not disturb the government, the former Chief Minister said for him, the development of the state was important. "With great difficulty, you (Yediyurappa) have become Chief Minister for the fourth time, (I am) happy, I have nowhere said that I will disturb your government. Even now some people come and ask why I'm sitting silent when 15-20 people are ready to come out of BJP and why don't I make an attempt (to poach them), Kumaraswamy said. Speaking to reporters in Hassan, he sought to know why he should get entangled in that 'sludge' and he was not in a hurry.

"I will not get involved in a wicked act of removing a responsible government like Yediyurappa did. For me the development of the state is important," he said.

Though Kumaraswamy had raised questions about the longevity of the BJP government ahead of the December 5 bypolls, he had even then given clear indications that he would not attempt to pull down the administration as it would affect the development of the state.

The ruling BJP had swept the by-elections by winning 12 of the total 15 seats, helping the Yediyurappa government retain the majority in the Assembly.

With BJP winning 12 of the 15 assembly constituencies, it's numbers went up from 105 (including an independent) to 117, which is well ahead of the halfway mark of 111 in a 223-member Assembly (two seats-- Maski and R R Nagar-- are vacant due to pending litigation in the High Court).

The BJP came to power after the Kumaraswamy-led Congress-JD(S) coalition government collapsed as 17 MLAs had rebelled against the alliance leadership and resigned as legislators, to later favour the saffron party.

Bengaluru, Feb 26: Senior Congress leader Siddaramaiah said that Union Home Minister Amit Shah should issue strict orders to the police in Delhi to act in nation's interest and control the ongoing violence.

"Distressing scenes in Delhi!! #DelhiBurning as a result of ulterior motives of divisive forces within our Country. Police have completely failed in their responsibility. People have to remain calm and promote peace in the area for their own benefit," Siddaramaiah tweeted.

"Seven people dead and hundreds are injured, Amit Shah should issue strict orders to police to act in nation's interest and not in the interest of few people. As Gandhiji said, An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Peace and harmony should be our moto," he added.
Siddaramaiah further stated that the "triggering point of the #DelhiViolence seems to be the inciting speech of BJP leader Kapil Mishra."

"This actually qualifies for a sedition case as it was aimed at disturbing national peace and security. Police have to arrest him and bring normalcy in Delhi," he wrote.

Siddaramaiah has further asked Karnataka Chief Minister BS Yediyurappa to be careful "before situation goes out of hand."

"Delhi riots are in front of eyes. There will be tough situation here in state as well if those loose tongue leaders in BJP are not stopped in the state," he wrote.
As many as 18 people have lost their lives and around 190 are injured in the violence that has been raging in parts of North-East Delhi from Monday.