Karnataka traffic cops kick triple riding bike; 1 killed, 2 critical

Bengaluru, Feb 19: Playing down the simmering discontent among the disgruntled legislators who missed a cabinet berth again, Karnataka BJP on Tuesday denied any revolt brewing against Chief Minister B.S. Yediyurappa.

"An unsigned letter in Kannada circulating in the social media is bogus, as it was fabricated in the name of Santosh, a private secretary to Yediyurappa. No revolt is brewing against the Chief Minister," party spokesman G. Madhusudhana told news agency here.

In the second cabinet expansion on February 6, only 10 newly-elected legislators, who defected from the Congress and the Janata Dal-Secular (JD-S) in July, were inducted, leaving the party's many aspiring lawmakers miffed.

"The talk of about 20 loyal MLAs ganging up against Yediyurappa is a speculation as rumour mills are working overtime. No rebellion is brewing against the Chief Minister," asserted the official.

On the charge that Yediyurappa's younger son B.Y. Vijayandra was acting like a 'super or de facto CM' and medalling in the state administration, Madhusudhana said the latter was only assisting his father in party activities as he was also a party worker.

"As Yediyurappa is 76 years old and ageing, Vijayandra is helping his father in party affairs so that he (Chief Minister) could be free to attend to administration," Madhusudhana said.

Yediyurappa's elder son B.Y. Raghavendra is a three-time BJP Lok Sabha member from Shimoga in the state's Malnad area.

With six cabinet posts vacant in the 34-member ministry, many legislators, including eight-time MLA Umesh Katti, are upset that they have not been rewarded for their loyalty to the party even six months after the BJP returned to power again in the southern state.

On the purported meeting of about 20 BJP MLAs at the residence of state Industries Minister Jagadish Shettar here on Monday, Madhusudhana said it was a "get-together" as they were all in Bengaluru again to attend the budget session of the state legislature which began on Monday.

"There is no crisis in the party. Our government is stable and will complete the remaining three-year term in office till May 2023," he added.

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.

Mangaluru, Jul 10: A 58-year-old official of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) has died due to the coronavirus infection, taking the death toll in the paramilitary force because of the disease to nine, officials said on Friday.

Assistant Sub Inspector K B Premsha, posted in the CISF unit that guards the Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd (MRPL), passed away at a local hospital on Thursday, they said.

He was admitted to the hospital on July 5 with fever. His COVID-19 test report arrived on July 7 and it was positive. Premsha breathed his last on Thursday, officials said. He was a resident of Kodagu in Karnataka.

This is the ninth COVID-19 death in the force that has recorded 1,137 cases till now, according to an official data.

Of the total cases reported in the force so far, 410 are under treatment across the country, nine have died and the rest have recovered, officials said.

They said that 20 personnel tested COVID-19 positive on Friday while 22 have recovered over the last 24 hours.

The about 1.62-lakh strong CISF is the national aviation security force guarding 63 airports at present and it is also tasked to guard vital installations in the aerospace and nuclear domain.