LINGUISTIC REORGANIZATION IN INDIA

 

LINGUISTIC REORGANISATION:

The reorganization of the states on the basis of language, a major aspect of national consolidation and integration, came to the fore almost immediately after independence. The British Rule did not pay much attention to linguistic and cultural cohesion. The interspersed princely states had added a further element of heterogeneity.

Language is closely related to culture and therefore to the customs of people. Besides, the massive spread of education and growth of mass literacy can only occur through the medium of the mother tongue. Democracy can become real to the common people only when politics and administration are conducted through the language they can understand. But this language, the mother tongue, cannot be the medium of education or administration or judicial activity unless a state is formed on the basis of such a predominant language.

It is for this reason that, with the involvement of the masses in the national movement after 1919, Congress undertook political mobilization in the mother tongue and in 1921 amended its constitution and reorganized its regional branches on a linguistic basis. Gandhi also mentions that ‘the redistribution of provinces on a linguistic basis was necessary if provincial languages were to grow to their full height’.

But after the independence there were many problems created by the partitioning of the country like the Kashmir problems and a war-like situation vis-à-vis Pakistan. Speaking on the linguistic question, Nehru clearly stated on 27 November 1947: ‘First things must come first and the first thing is the security and stability of India’. Thus, Nehru government did not give much priority to redrawing the boundary of India’s administrative maps. The task, they felt, could wait for some years.

The question of the linguistic reorganization of India was, however, raised quite early in the Constituent Assembly. It appointed in 1948 the Linguistic Provinces Commission, headed by Justice S.K. Dar, to enquire into the desirability of linguistic provinces. However, Dar Commission was though that it might threaten national unity and the Constituent Assembly decided not to incorporate the linguistic principle in the constitution. But public opinion was not satisfied, especially in the South. Therefore, the Congress appointed a committee (JVP) in December 1948 consisting of Jawaharlal Nehru, Sardar Patel and Pattabhi Sitaramayya, president of the Congress, this committee advised against the creation of linguistic states for the time being, emphasizing on unity, national security and economic development as the needs of the hour.

In the JVP report, the Congress leadership laid down that where the demand for a linguistic state was insistent a new state could be created. Thus, there was a movement for reorganization of state till 1960. The demand had been popular for nearly half a century and had the support of all political parties. The demand and formation of the Andhra state was an example. The success of the Andhra struggle encouraged other linguistic groups to agitate for their own state or for rectification of their boundaries on a linguistic basis. Nehru was not in favour at that time of continuing with the redrawing of India’s internal administrative boundaries, but he was too much of a democrat to sternly and consistently oppose the demands.

To deal with the matters, Nehru appointed in August 1953 the States Reorganization Commission (SRC), with Justice Fazl Ali, K.M. Panikkar and Hriday nath Kunzru as members, to examine the entire question of the reorganization of the states of the Union. The SRC submitted its report in October 1955. It recognized for the most part the linguistic principle and recommended redrawing of state boundaries on that basis. The Commission, however, opposed the splitting of Bombay and Punjab.

The States Reorganization Act was passed by parliament in November 1956. It provided for fourteen states and six centrally administered territories. The Telangana area of Hyderabad state was transferred to Andhra; Kerala was created by merging the Malabar district of the old Madras Presidency with Travancore-Cochin. Certain Kannada-speaking areas of the states of Bombay, Madras, Hyderabad and Coorg were added to the Mysore state. Bombay state was enlarged by merging the states of Kutch and Saurashtra and the Marathi-speaking areas of Hyderabad with it.

The strongest reaction against the SRC’s report and the States Reorganization Act came from Maharashtra in January 1956. In view of the disagreement over Bombay city, the government stuck to its decision and passed the States Reorganization Act in November 1956. But the matter could not rest there. In the 1957 elections the Bombay Congress scraped through with a slender majority. The government finally agreed in May 1960 to bifurcate the state of Bombay into Maharashtra and Gujarat, with Bombay city being included in Maharashtra, and Ahmedabad being made the capital of Gujarat.

The other state where an exception was made to the linguistic principle was Punjab. In 1956, the states of PEPSU had been merged with Punjab, which, however, remained a trilingual state having three language speakers—Punjabi, Hindi and Pahari—within its borders.  This created many problems between Punjabi Suba, Sikh Communalist and Hindu Communalist. Thus, communal politics arose in the region. Nehru and the Congress leadership were clear that they would not accept any demand for the creation of a state on religious or communal grounds. Finally, in 1966, Indira Gandhi agreed to the division of Punjab into two Punjabiand Hindi-speaking states of Punjab and Haryana.

Thus, after more than ten years of continuous strife and popular struggles the linguistic reorganization of India was largely completed, making room for greater political participation by the people. By reorganizing the states on linguistic lines, the national leadership removed a major grievance which could have led to fissiparous tendencies. Thus, states’ reorganization has not only not weakened the unity of the country but as a whole strengthened it. States’ reorganization did not, of course, resolve all the problems relating to linguistic conflicts. But the reorganization has removed a major factor affecting cohesion of the country.

Minority Languages

An important aspect of the language problem has been the status of minority languages. Overall nearly 18 per cent of India’s population does not speak the official language of the states where they live as their mother tongue. From the beginning, the important point to be decided upon was the status and rights of these minorities in their state. A linguistic minority had to be given the confidence that it would not be discriminated against by the majority and that its language and culture would continue to exist and develop. At the same time, the majority had to be assured that meeting the needs of the linguistic minority would not generate separatist sentiments or demands and that the minorities would develop a degree of state loyalty.

To confront this problem certain Fundamental Rights were provided to the linguistic minorities in the constitution. The central government has tended to play a very positive role in defense of the rights of the minorities, but the implementation of the minority safeguards is within the purview of the state governments and therefore differs from state to state. The Commissioner for Linguistic Minorities has in his reports the various records of the minorities.

Among the minority languages, Urdu is a special case. Majority of Muslims, India’s largest religious minority, claimed Urdu as their mother tongue. Urdu is also recognized as one of India’s national languages and is listed in the Eighth Schedule of the constitution. Urdu did not get official support in any part of the country. Urdu began to be abolished in many primary schools. Its use as a medium of instruction was also increasingly limited. The Hindi protagonists also began to eliminate Urdu words from written Hindi.

Urdu speakers, therefore, were persistent in demanding that Urdu should be recognized as the second official language in the states where it had a large presence, especially in U.P. and Bihar. However, it was opposed in U.P. Jawaharlal Nehru, in particular, was very supportive of Urdu and critical of the anti-Urdu thinking and activities and even asked the Chief Minister of U.P. to make it the second language. The Uttar Pradesh government refused to pass legislation giving legal sanctity to the rights granted to Urdu on the ground that such a step might lead to communal riots.

The governments of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka were more supportive of Urdu. In Andhra, Urdu has been recognized since 1968 as an additional language for the Telangana region. Two other aspects of Urdu’s position may be noted. First, unfortunately the question of Urdu has got entangled with the communal question. While many Muslims regard it as the language of their community as such, many Hindu communalists are hostile to it because of their anti-Muslim ideological position. Second, despite active hostility of many and official neglect, Urdu continues not only to exist but even grow in terms of literary output, journals and newspapers and especially as the language of films and television because of its inherent vigor and cultural roots among the Indian people.