Woman techie jumps off 5th floor as boyfriend delays marriage

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, Apr 22: The Karnataka government has announced partial relaxation of COVID-19 lockdown norms in the state allowing certain construction activities, manufacturing of packaging materials, courier services, among others, from April 23.

The activities will be permitted only outside the COVID-19 containment zones identified by the government.

Service provided by self-employed people like electrician, IT repair, plumbers, motor mechanics, and carpenters in local areas have also been given exemption.

Tea, coffee and rubber plantation have been allowed to work with 50 per cent workforce, and a similar exemption have been given to processing, packaging, sale and marketing of these produce.

“To mitigate hardship to the public, select additional activities have been allowed,which will come into effect from 00.00 hours of April 23,” Chief Secretary TM Vijay Bhaskar said in an order on Wednesday.

However, these additional activities will be operationalised by District Administrations and BBMP (city corporation in the case of Bengaluru city) based on strict compliance to the guidelines on lockdown measures, it said.

Before operating these relaxations, district administrations and BBMP (city corporation) shall ensure that all the preparatory arrangements on social distancing in offices, work place establishments as also sectoral requirements are in place, it said, adding that relaxations will not apply in containment zones.

Facing a financial crunch, the state government has been eager to kick-start economic activities in the state that had come to halt due to the coronavirus lockdown.

While hospitality services, bars, malls, theatres, shopping complexes, religious and places of worship among others will continue to remain shut, relaxation of norms has been for activities that are linked to essential services such as health, infrastructure and agriculture.

As per the order, while, public transportation will continue to remain suspended till May 3,private vehicles with passes for emergency services and personnel commuting with passes to places of work and back will be allowed.

Activities permitted include construction of roads, irrigation projects, buildings and all kinds of industrial projects, including MSMEs, in rural areas and all kinds of projects in industrial estates, where workers are available on site and no one is required to be brought in from outside.

Also permitted to function are manufacturing units of essential goods – drugs, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, their raw materials and intermediates;

food processing industries in rural areas, coal production (mines and mineral production and activities incidental to mining) besides manufacturing units of packaging materials.

Ernakulam, May 25: Miscreants belonging to self-proclaimed Hindutva outfits have demolished a church set erected for the shoot of a Malayalam film at Kalady in Kerala’s Ernakulam district.

The set was erected to shoot the climax scene of the super hero film Minnal Murali, directed by Basil Joseph and starring Tovino Thomas and newcomer actor Femina.

The incident took place on Sunday. Members of the Antharashtra Hindu Parishad claimed that with the help of their sister outfit Antarashtra Bajrang Dal, they demolished the church set, erected on an island on the Periyar river in Kalady.

Hari Palode, the General Secretary of AHP, an organisation founded by Praveen Togadia, boasted on Facebook that they were not used to pleading to anyone, and decided to demolish the church set that was constructed near the Adi Sankaracharya mutt. 

“When they built such a structure in front of the Mahadeva shrine in Kalady, we said no. We had also submitted several complaints. We do not have the habit of pleading. We decided to demolish it. Our self respect must be protected at all cost,” AHP’s General Secretary Hari Palode wrote on his Facebook post along with pictures of members demolishing the set. 

The post also credited members of the Anrarashtra Bajrang Dal and its Ernakulam Division President Malayatoor Ratheesh for participating in the ‘service work’ of razing the church set. 

Mini Biju, member of Kalady Town panchayat confirmed that the film unit had indeed secured permission from the department before going ahead with the construction of the set.

“They had submitted a letter seeking permission to raise a temporary set. This was back in February before construction began. The panchayat committee had approved this request,” Mini said.