Cops mercilessly drag, detain missing JNU student Najeeb's mother

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, Jun 26: The National Restaurant Association of India (NRAI) on Thursday came up with a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for restaurants whereby among other physical distancing norms, it has suggested a 2-metre gap between tables.

Formulated in partnership with Releski, a Bengaluru based skill-tech company, the SoP suggests that in case of back-to-back seating, people sitting with their backs towards each other will have their seats divided by 'Plexiglass' divider raised up to 2 meters from the ground.

"In a typical restaurant, the improvised seating plan should have a minimum distance of 2 metres between tables. The distance of 2 metres (6 feet) between tables should measure from one edge of the table to the other table's edge," it said.

In case of loose or free seating such as in banquet style or food court style seating, a minimum 2 meters of distance should be maintained between tables.

The guidelines noted that, to encourage physical distancing, restaurants have to sacrifice their seating capacity, to promote health and safety, and also to gain trust from their patrons.

"In order to perform this, divide your restaurants under different sectors. Pull out your restaurant's floor plan and colour code different sections red and yellow. Red sections are potential areas where maximum footfall or traffic is observed. Yellow sections are areas where the footfalls are average," it said.

All the red sections are encircled or bordered by placing barricades or Q manager and will open at specific points to access the yellow section and all the opening points will have hand sanitisers and sprays, and every guest who walks from red zones to yellow zones will sanitise himself/herself to reduce the chances of contamination.

For air conditioning, the guidelines of CPWD shall be followed which inter alia emphasises that the temperature setting of all air conditioning devices should be in the range of 24-30 degree Celsius, relative humidity should be in the range of 40- 65 per cent, intake of fresh air should be as much as possible and cross ventilation should be adequate, the guidelines suggested.

The industry body has also suggested appointment of a COVID-free Ambassador who would operate as the Chief Health Officer within the restaurant team, preferably from the management team in each shift.

The ambassador's would put the new daily work routines into practice, to monitor compliance with good practice and to lead the preventative measures, adapt to health & safety recommendations and requirements of the restaurant and oversee the implementation of the norms.

Anurag Katriar, President of NRAI and CEO & Executive Director of deGustibus Hospitality, said: "Every restaurant cutting across formats is facing the harsh reality of subdued to shut business volumes in the present and the uncertainty of business environment in the future. One thing is certain that hygiene and safety will be a key differentiator in the post-pandemic restaurant operations."

Jun 6: Private sector lender Karnataka Bank has reported to the RBI that it has been defrauded of over Rs 285 crore consequent to loans gone bad to four entities including DHFL.

A total of Rs 285.52 crore has been reported as fraud wherein the bank was one of the consortium lenders during 2009 to 2014 to Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Ltd (DHFL), Religare Finvest, Fedders Electric and Engineering Ltd and Leel Electricals Ltd, Karnataka Bank said in a regulatory filing on Friday.

The maximum is owed by DHFL at Rs 180.13 crore, followed by Religare Finvest Rs 43.44 crore, Fedders Electric Rs 41.30 crore and Leel Electricals Rs 20.65 crore.

"DHFL (defaulted entity) dealing with us since 2014 had availed various credit facilities under consortium arrangement wherein, we were one of the member banks. In view of Early Warning Signals (EWS) in the conduct of the account and other developments, the account was red flagged on November 11, 2019.

"The borrowing account was classified as Non-Performing Asset on October 30, 2019 and now, for misappropriation & criminal breach of trust & diversion of funds in the credit facilities extended earlier to the company, a fraud amounting Rs 180.13 crore has been reported to RBI," Karnataka Bank said.

Likewise, Religare Finvest Ltd (RFL) was dealing with the bank since 2014, availing various credit facilities.

Following classification of this account as non-performing in October 2019 by a consortium member, Karnataka Bank reported to RBI a fraud amounting to Rs 43.44 crore in the credit facilities extended earlier, on account of diversion of funds.

Leel Electricals was classified as NPA account in March 2019 and it reported to RBI a fraud amounting to Rs 20.65 crore in the credit facilities to the company on account of diversion of funds.

"In all the referred three non-performing accounts, necessary provisions have been made in full to be spread across four quarters," it said.

Fedders Electric and Engineering Limited was reported as NPA in July 2018 by a member bank in consortium, subsequent to which Karnataka Bank reported fraud of Rs 41.30 crore on account of fund diversion.

The account has already been fully provided for, it added.