Social Reform Movement In India and Women Education from 19th Century – UGC seminar held at the Ongole campus of the Sri Acharya Nagarjuna University [2]

Social Reform Movement In India and Women Education from 19^th Century – UGC seminar held at the Ongole campus of the Sri Acharya Nagarjuna University [2]

Mahima Dharma / movement and its misinterpretation suppressing other facts: In the second session headed by Prof Naidu, three papers were presented – Anjaiah, Pareswar Sahu and …..Anjaiah talked about the women education of the local AP areas. Pareswar Sahu dwelt upon the Mahima Dharma that teaches belief in a single God (parambrahma or the supreme-soul who is formless and omnipresent) named Alekha. Mahima Dharma became a powerful force for liberation in India because, as a traditional Indian religion, it stood uncompromising in its rejection of the caste system. Sri Bhima Bhoi, an initiate and ardent disciple of Mahima Swami who collected, disseminated and created bhajans from the teachings of Mahima Swamy, was a Khond from Odisha. The distinct and original teachings of Mahima Dharma are often conveyed using terms that may have an unrelated meaning in other Indian religious traditions. This has led scholars to see similarities between Mahima Dharma and, variously, the traditions of “crypto-Buddhism”, Panchashakas, Jainism and Tantra . Adherents reject idol worship as well as the Advaita tradition of Vaishnavism. Charity through the provision of food for those in need is an essential part of Mahima Dharma.

Why Mahima cult should oppose Idol-worship?: However, when I asked how “Idol worship” could solve the problem or opposed for the purpose, he could not explain, but was repeating general points of the Mahima Dharma. I pointed out that had the idil-worship been so bad or sinned, more and more idols and temples would not have come up in India and as well as in other countries. He was arguing that the Orissa tribals were not idol-worshippers. When I started giving examples, he kept quiet. I do not know why he was presenting details partially, suppressing some and pointing out others. There should be consistency in arguing through the facts presented. One cannot take two or different stands at different occasions, just for argument. In fact, there have been many papers and books published on the subject[1]. Incidentally, he avoided many important points about the movement that worked against the Puri Jagannath temple aiding and abetting the colonial forces and also turning against them, at another stage. Researchers have pointed out that many counter traditions and critiques like the Mahima Dharma did emerge, but ultimately these were absorbed into the broad fold of the Jagannath cult[2].

Pandita Ramabai and the Christian Missionaries: The third session was chaired by Dr Gangaiah and Prof Naidu and Reddy presented their papers. Of course, Gangaiah also presented his paper briefly. He wondered for Europe the modern period starts from 1483, whereas, for India, It starts from 1857. As he is going to attend one international conference at Eluru, he wanted to share some of the points here. In 1852, the Hunter Commission opened education to women. Zenana Missionary played a key role in educating Indian women. Though T. B. Macaulay was blamed for his attempt to create slaves in the form oof clerks by giving English education, he is responsible for opening up an avenue for education in India in 1835.

Prof Naidu presented a paper on “Pandita Ramabai,” claiming based on the rare documents that he found at the United Theological College, Bangalore, but most of the details have already been available in the public domain.  In fact, many research papers are available in the internet sites as could be noted from “Google scholar.” About “why she was not excommunicated while Rajaram Mohan Roy was” and “Inculturation,” he responded with the single word answer “no”. Gangaiah also raised the issue that the Christian missionaries did not do much for education. But, Naidu was differentiating the different denominations. I wanted to talk with Dr Gangaiah, but, he had gone already. The morning I saw him at a house when the car went there to pick up, but, he was not ready. The Orissa researcher had also already left, with whom also, I wanted to discuss about the “Mahima dharma”. I wondered though only 40 registered and there were 14 paper presenters, most of them had been in a hurry in presenting a paper, getting a certificate and leaving immediately. I do not want as to why they could not listen to others, but, expect others to listen to their papers!

The second-day proceedings – 20-02-2020: On 20^th second day, in the first session, headed by Dr B. Ramachandra Reddy, K. V. Ramakrishna Rao, Dr Samba Siva Reddy and Alladi Mahalakshmi, presented their papers. I presented my paper, “The Myth and Reality of Social Reform Movement in India and Women Education from the 19^th Century,” wit PPT. Generally, about the social reformation of colonial India, historians and researchers have been repeating the points that the British banned Sati, child-marriage, etc., introduced the Widow Remarriage Act etc., and so on, without going to the details of the other side.

I concluded with the following points:

• The subject matter has been subjective, though aimed at an objective, however, objectivity also affects historians.
• The “Social Reform Movement in India and Women Education from 19^th Century” cannot be analyzed exclusively based on the colonial documents, as they have been one-sided, biased and prejudiced, and therefore, the other evidences of Indians have to be taken into account to get a balanced, realistic and objective view.
• With the cause and effect and other logical processes, from the results, the facts could be assessed, determined and judged.
• The East India Company and the British Indian rulers, administrators and the British Government may or may not open up with all their documents, so that Indian researchers could come out with 100% perfect factual report about the issue.
• Indian intellectuals had responded to social reform by all means, by changing their pattern. Associations, conferences and meeting were conducted to create awareness among the Indian women[3]. Their immediate response through such activities prove the awareness among them.
• Annie Besant[4] urged Indians should compete with westerners in the aspects of education to women, going to other countries and so on.
• However, in spite of all efforts and modernization, even today, the highly scientific and technical atmosphere, the exploitation of women has reached, different arena.
• As pointed out about the contradictions of worshipping and exploiting womanhood in India[5], the modernism, snobbery, gadgets, IT jobs, luxury life etc., has led to the lopsided social reform leading to new types of exploitations and crimes meted against girl-children and women.
• Among the modernized women themselves, to what extent the “modernism” could be applied when they walk on the roads, mingling with the opposite sex and interact with many exigencies.[6] Therefore, the “Social reform movement,” has to be re-oriented, revamped and recondition to suit the changed conditions.

 

The next session was chaired by Dr Sudharshan with the three paper presenters – Prof Venkateswarara Rao presented a paper on Social movements of Nellore Districts, ….. and a lady on Durgabhai Deshmukh.

Old Guru was honoured: The valedictory function was also carried on as a formality as only 10 delegates were there. As already mentioned, dozen paper presenters had already left. After that, the valedictory function was held. Prof A. R. Rammachandra Reddy gave an emotional talk about his association with many scholars, colleagues and students who became professors and HOD now. Prof A. R. Ramachandra Reddy was honoured by their collogues and students.  Thus, the seminar was over. As my train was at 6.00 pm, I returned to the room, packed up and checked out. Sri Madhusudhana Rao was also there, we caught an auto and went to the railway station, he proceeded to the bus-stand. I went to the platform no.3 and waited for the “Jansathabthi.” Here, for the convenience of the passengers, an elevator and a lift have been provided so that the elders and others who have leg/knee problem can conveniently use them, without climbing steps. This has been an important development by the railways to bring facility to the public. Thus, my visit to Ongole was over and expecting another to come again and meet all the friends!

© K. V. Ramakrishna Rao

23-02-2020

[1] Beltz, Johannes. Contested Authorities, Disputed Centres and Rejected Norms: Situating Mahima Dharma in its Regional Diversity, in Periphery and centre: studies in Orissan history, religion and anthropology, 2002.

[2] A Eschmann, Mahima Dharma: An Autochthonous Hindu Reform Movement’ in A Eschmann et al (eds), The Cult of Jagannath, op cit. Also see Subhakanta Behera (1997): ‘Jagannath and Alekh: A Study in Juxtaposition’, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol XXXII, Nos 33 and 34, August 16-23, pp 2096-97.

[3] Chintamani, Chirravoori Yajneswara, ed. Indian Social Reform: Being a Collection of Essays, Addresses, Speeches, &c., with an Appendix. Minerva Press, 1901

[4] Annie Besant, Wake up India – A Plea for Social Reform, TheosophicalPublishing House, Madras, 1913.

[5] Mazumdar, Vina. Social Reform Movement in India from Ranade to Nehru. Indian Women: From Purdah to Modernity, Vikas, Delhi, t976, pp. 41-66.

[6] What to dress or not to dress, how much they expose or not, the difference between the nudity of the poor and filthy rich and such other issues cannot be discussed or debated in terms rights, freedom of thought, expression and so on.

 

“Quest for Equity”: proceedings of the Dr B.R Ambedkar International conference “Reclaiming Social Justice; Revisiting Ambedkar” held at Bangalore from 21st to 23rd July 2017 – Third day (23-07-2017).

“Quest for Equity”: proceedings of the Dr B.R Ambedkar International conference “Reclaiming Social Justice; Revisiting Ambedkar” held at Bangalore from 21^st to 23^rd July 2017 – Third day (23-07-2017). 

The third day [23-07-2017] proceedings: The keynote-5 session was held between 9.30 and 11.00 am chaired by Akash Singh Rathore with paper presentation by –

1. Neera Chandoke.
2. Rajeev Bharhava.
3. Shashi Tharoor, MP.

Shashi Tharoor delved upon many issues[1]: Dr. Shashi Tharoor, Member of Parliament, stated, “Ours is a constitution clearly written for a plural society and inspired by the spirit of luminaries like Mahatma Gandhi and Dr. Ambedkar. Our constitution recognizes that individual freedoms have to be balanced with group interests without compulsion on social behavior, and that conformity beyond a point is not realistic if you want to preserve a diverse democracy.” Then, he turned towards imposition nof Hindi, “People from Hindi states should learn other languages from South India. Bollywood has brought Hindi to our homes, but the government should understand that states deal with their own mother tongues. English is useful in governance and judiciary as India is a mix of various tongues.”  Then, he touched upon the Chinese issue, “There is no question that when the status quo was disturbed, it was not by us. The Chinese troops attempted to build their road here. They must withdraw their position to what it was before June 16,” he declared, adding that India is not interested in escalation but a peaceful, diplomatic outcome. “It is rather important that if there is an accommodation that is reached, it is one that respects the way things were prior to June 16,” he said[2].

The Agenda of the Ambedkar Conference: Speaking about the agenda of the Dr. Ambedkar International Conference, he said, “A Bengaluru declaration will lay forward the future steps in society and polity, to improve life of marginalised and oppressed people. This will ensure the discussions reach the grassroots, so minorities can demand their rights in a fair way and not feel excluded.” He also briefly touched upon Kashmir, citing that there were no big terror attacks after 26/11 but the region continues to bleed with multiple small attacks in Uri, Nagrota and Pathankot. Responding to a query about the BJP government’s motto of `one-nation-one-culture’ in the context of the flag controversy , he said[3]: “There is no objection to each state having its own flag. It is not anti-national or a substitute to the Indian flag, but merely a celebration. It only has to remain smaller and flown lower than the Indian flag. In fact, Kashmir already has its own flag,” said Congress MP Shashi Tharoor, commenting on the Karnataka flag issue at the Dr Ambedkar International Conference on Sunday[4].

The session on “Caste, Class and Identity”: Parallel sessions were also held. At Hall No.5A changed to B1, under “Caste, Class and Identity”, the following presented papers, chaired by Chandrama Kanagali:

1. Tanweer Fazal.
2. Bhup Singh Gaur,
3. Balakrishna Hegde.

Tanweer Fazal[5] presented his paper in Room No.B1 on 23^rd July [Sunday] morning session held between 9.30 to 11.00 am under the chair of Prof Chandrama Kanagali. The Co-speakers were Bhup Singh Gaur and Balakrishna Hegde. He started his presentation obviously with confusion of “SC” as he started his PPT, without specifically telling as to whether it was “Scheduled Caste” or “Supreme Court” and it was pointed out by me. He corrected himself and proceeded to mention the following cases:

1. Michael vs Venkateswaran, 1951.
2. Ganapat vs Returning Officer, 1974.
3. Anbalagan vs B. Devarajan and Ors, 1983,

Without giving citation of the case laws and quoting from the judgments, he was arguing and interpreting that the courts have been following the “Gharvapasi” concept helping the Hindutwa forces for Christians converting back to Hindu religion to get SC-benefits back.  He could not explain properly about the case laws and the exigencies for the amendment of the Presidential Order in 1956 and 1990 include converted Skihs and Neo-Buddhists under SC category. He also referred to K. P. Manu case, but without giving the case law reference and relevant judgment details. He went on repeating the same point that the Court was acting at the behest of the government giving in such judgments helping the “Gharvapasi” programme. So for convenience, I discuss the points as follows in context.

Christians by converting back to Hindu religion can claim back SC status: Then, he pointed out as to how in the case of K. P. Manu, the Court held that he could be back to Ezhawa community, provided they accepted him their community-member[6]. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are that one Shri S. Sreekumar Menon invoked the jurisdiction of the Scrutiny Committee under Section 11(3) of the Act challenging the grant of caste certificate, namely, Hindu Pulaya to the appellant on the ground that the said certificate had been obtained by him on misrepresentation, and that apart the concerned authority had issued the caste certificate in total transgression of law. The Committee conducted an enquiry and eventually by its order dated 4th February, 2006 had returned a finding that the appellant was erroneously issued a caste certificate inasmuch as he was not of Hindu origin and hence, could not have been conferred the benefit of the caste status. It is not in dispute that the great grandfather of the appellant belonged to Hindu Pulaya Community. His son Chothi embraced Christianity and accepted a new name, that is, Varghese who married Mariam who originally belonged to Hindu Ezhava community and later on converted to Christianity. In the wedlock three sons, namely, Varghese, Yohannan and Paulose were born. The father of the appellant, Paulose, got married to Kunjamma who was a Christian. The appellant who was born on 03.01.1960 sometime in the year 1984 at the age of 24 converted himself to Hindu religion and changed his name to that of K.P. Manu. On the basis of the conversion he applied for a caste certificate to Akhila Bharata Ayyappa Seva Sangham. Be it stated, the appellant after conversion had obtained a certificate from the concerned community on 5th February, 1984. Eventually, the Tehsildar who was authorised to issue the caste certificate had issued the necessary caste certificate. The Court had dealt with the three important questions.

• whether on conversion and at what stage a person born to Christian parents can, after reconversion to the Hindu religion, be eligible to claim the benefit of his original caste;
• whether after his eligibility is accepted and his original community on a collective basis takes him within its fold, he still can be denied the benefit; and
• that who should be the authority to opine that he has been following the traditions and customs of a particular caste or not.

As the Pulaya Community accepted him as their member, he is Hindu only: The Court decided as follows – “In the instant case, the appellant got married to a Christian lady and that has been held against him. It has also been opined that he could not produce any evidence to show that he has been accepted by the community for leading the life of a Hindu. As far as the marriage and leading of Hindu life are concerned, we are of the convinced opinion that, in the instant case, it really cannot be allowed to make any difference. The community which is a recognised organisation by the State Government, has granted the certificate in categorical terms in favour of the appellant. It is the community which has the final say as far as acceptance is concerned, for it accepts the person, on reconversion, and takes him within its fold. Therefore, we are inclined to hold that the appellant after reconversion had come within the fold of the community and thereby became a member of the scheduled caste. Had the community expelled him the matter would have been different. The acceptance is in continuum. Ergo, the reasonings ascribed by the Scrutiny Committee which have been concurred with by the High Court are wholly unsustainable. Consequently, the appeal is allowed and the judgment and order of the High Court, findings of the Scrutiny Committee and the orders passed by the State Government and the second respondent are set aside. The appellant shall be reinstated in service forthwith with all the benefits relating to seniority and his caste, and shall also be paid backwages…..”

Why Tanweer Fazal was suppressing the “Soosai v. Union of India, AIR 1986 SC 733 judgment”?: During his presentation, there were many factual mistakes in interpreting the court cases. First, he was not mentioning the court case references, but, when I insisted him to mention the case specifically in the context, he was evidently evading and started making general remarks. He coolly and purposely avoided mentioning “Soosai v. Union of India, AIR 1986 SC 733 judgment”, where, the Court held that SC under the Constitution (SC) Order, 1950 means only Hindu. This has been practice of many writers and researchers not to mention this judgment, as it is not favourable to them. He was obviously mumbled and fumbled without giving any answer. The Chair person also  pointed out and advised him to be specific. Incidentally, a similar paper is already published in EPW and available in the internet[7]. Now, let us discuss the case laws for understanding.

Michael vs Venkateswaran, 1951 – AIR 1952 Mad 474, (1952) 1 MLJ 239: The first case[8], where a SC was converted to Christian, thus losing his Hindu status, he was barred from contesting reserved constituency, is as follows: “The petitioner alleges that he is a member of the Paraiyan caste which is item 64 in Part V of the Schedule to the Scheduled Castes Order. Admittedly, he is a convert to Christianity. He therefore would be a person professing a religion different from Hinduism and therefore under paragraph 3 of the Scheduled Castes Order would be deemed not to be a member of a scheduled caste. He desires to stand as a candidate for a seat reserved for the Scheduled Castes and he can do so only If he is deemed to be a member of a Scheduled Caste. As the aforesaid provision prevents him from so standing, he has filed the above application for adequate relief from this Court.” But the Court held that “the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order is valid and within the powers of the President, the petition is therefore dismissed”.

Ganpat vs Returning Officer & Ors on 4 December, 1974 – 1975 AIR 420: The second case[9] is about contesting for a seat in Nagpur by a SC candidate after converting to Buddhism, thus, losing their Hindu status. The Court held that, “We would, therefore, in agreement with the High Court hold that the respondents-2, 6 and 9 are not Buddhists but continue to be members of the Scheduled Castes”, but also pointing out, “The attempt of persons who have changed their religion from Hinduism to Buddhism, who still claim the concessions and facilities intended for Hindus only shows that otherwise these persons might get a vested interest in continuing to be members of the Scheduled Castes. In course of time vested interests are created in continuing to be members of Schduled Castes as in continuing to be members of Backward Classes. It is from the point of view of discouraging that tendency that the provision of the Scheduled Castes Order seems to be a proper one.”

Anbalagan vs B. Devarajan & Ors on 5 December, 1983 – 1984 AIR 411: In the third case[10][7], one Devarajan was challenged that he was Christian and therefore, he could not claim SC status, but, it was proved that he “……………had long since reverted to Hinduism and to the Adi Dravida caste. There is not a scrap of acceptable evidence to show that he ever professed Christianity after he came of age. On the other hand, every bit of evidence in the case shows that from his childhood, he was always practising Hindism and was treated by everyone concerned as an Adi Dravidh. There is then the outstanding circumstance that the voters of the Rasipuram Parliamentary Constituency reserved for the Scheduled Castes accepted his candidature for the reserved seat and elected him to the Lok Sabha twice. We have no doubt whatsoever that at all relevant times, he was a Hindu Adi Dravida and professed no religion other than Hinduism. The case was rightly decided by the Election Tribunal and the appeal is accordingly dismissed with costs.”

What Soosai vs UOI judgment says: Castes of Hindu religion identified on ‘untouchability’ related parameters were already scheduled under the 1936 Order. The validity of the order was considered by the Supreme Court in Writ Petition No. 9596/83 in the case of Soosai Vs The Union of India and Others (AIR 1986 SC 733). In para 7 of the judgment the Court had observed that “Now it cannot be disputed that the Caste system is a feature of the Hindu social structure. It is a social phenomenon peculiar to Hindu society. The Apex Court in para 8 of the judgment thus, observed that, “it is therefore, not possible to say that President acted arbitrarily in the exercise of his judgment in enacting paragraph 3 of the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950.” This is also sustained by the debate in Constituent Assembly which recognised “That the Scheduled Castes were a backward section of the society who were handicapped by the practice of untouchability” and that “This evil practice of untouchability was not recognised by any other religion” i.e. other than Hindu. It is apparent that the Constitution (SC) Order, 1950 relates to castes of Hindu religion. It only relates to the Castes discriminated within the Hindu religious system. The Constitution (SC) Order, 1950 is thus not discriminatory or violative of Articles 14, 15, 16 & 25 of the Constitution nor is it ultra vires of the Constitution as it provides for a special category i.e. the Scheduled Castes who have been given a special status under the Constitution. The Constitution (SC) Order, 1950 is thus neither unconstitutional nor ultra-vires of the Constitution nor it is violative of any fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution. Here, the Christians never appealed or filed any revision petition against this order, but kept quite. At Vatican level, they had many issues and problems, as the Bishops and Cardinals have been following race or caste hierarchical structure. So far, no Black has been elected for the post of Pope, in spite of their claims.

Ironically, all quoted judgments were delivered during the Congress regime: The Soosai vs UOI judgment was delivered and reported in 1986, i.e, when the Congress was in power. Had the Congress party or the ideologists and other associated felt that the judgment was against their interests, they could have gone on revision and appeal to a larger bench.  In other words, Congress should have been blamed, accused or attacked for following such communal, anti-social justice and saffron agenda some 30 years ago. Even the other case laws, he mentioned are also dated to 1950, 1974 ad 1983,  clearly pointing to congress regime. Therefore, it is evident that  Congress was responsible for such condition, whereas, he tried to interpret differently. Coming to the Soosai vs UOI, ironically, the affected party, the Christians themselves did not appeal against and kept quiet, evidently understanding the legal position and also fearing that they might lose hold on SCs in future. In fact, it is open secret and well-known fact that the SC, converted to Christianity have been advised not to reveal their conversion, religious identity as otherwise, they would lose their SC status. In other words, legally, they have been living as Hindus, in spite of getting converted to Christianity. Thus, they have been cheating the Gods of both Christian and Hindu religions. Yet, the Christian missionaries, groups and organizations have been demanding for SC status. Thus, the researchers like Tanweer Fazal could very well argue that Congress was the culprit by aiding and abetting the SC judgments.

 

Whether Muslims can get SC status by converting back to Hindu religion?: A Muslim from audience asked, “I wanted to convert back to Hindu religion and whether I could get SC status, as the Supreme Court pronounced in some cases, that a converted SC-Christian could get back, SC-status, when their SC members accepted him back as his member again. In the same way, if a SC-Muslim wanted to convert back to Hindu religion, whether he could get back SC-status”. Actually, these cases pertain to election candidates, where Christians converts contested elections at reserved constituencies, claiming that they were SCs. When, this was challenged at the courts, the Christians got certificates to the effect that they were Hindu SCs. So the courts pronounced that, as candidate converted back to Hindu religion and got a certificate, documentary evidence to that effect, he was considered as “Hindu”. It is not known as to how the present-day Muslims, who want to claim back their SC-status by converting back, would prove their caste identity.  Ironically, most of them or some of them would also claim that they were not the converted categories from India, but, directly descended from the forefathers, who were of Arabic tribal origins [Ansaris, Mujahideen, and others]. If they were really interested in converting back, why then criticize “Gharwapasi”?

Origin of Caste – the Chairman spoke and wound up the session: Bhup Singh Gaur presented his paper on the approach of Harijans / SCs by Gandhi and Ambedkar. He interpreted that both leaders worked for the upliftment and welfare of the people in their own way. He pointed out that Amedkar was the only leader who attended all the three RTCs and consistently fighting for the rights of Depressed Castes. The third paper, “Dalit – A legal Perspective” was presented by S. Balakrishna Hedge.  His paper was almost answering the issue raised by Tanweer Fazal. Finally, the chair of Prof Chandrama Kanagali presented her paper about the origin of caste in India. She pointed out that the origins of the term ‘caste’ are attributed to the Spanish and Portuguese casta, which, according to the John Minsheu’‘s Spanish dictionary (1599), means “race, lineage, or breed”. When the Spanish colonized the New World, they used the word to mean a “clan or lineage.” However, it was the Portuguese who employed casta in the primary modern sense when they applied it to the thousands of endogamous, hereditary Indian social groups they encountered upon their arrival in India in 1498. The use of the spelling “caste,” with this latter meaning, is first attested to in English in 1613.

The word “Dalit” is neither constitutional nor legal: Incidentally, it has to be pointed out in the context that the usage of word “dalit” in the context. The National Commission for Scheduled Castes has asked the state governments not to use the word ‘Dalit” in official documents, saying the term was “unconstitutional”. The commission has stated that sometimes the word ‘Dalit” is used as a substitute for Scheduled Caste in official documents, sources in State Tribal Department said in Raipur. After consultation with the legal department, the commission said the ‘Dalit” word is neither constitutional nor the word has been mentioned in the current laws. Rather ‘Scheduled Caste” is the appropriate and notified word as per the Article 341 of the Constitution, it said in a letter sent to all states. The writers and researchers do not care even about this and continue to mention the word for ulterior motive. The State governments also have been issuing orders in the context[11].

Jairam Ramesh……….

Aruna Roy

Kevin Brown was responding to querries

The three day Conference was over with academic and professional fulfilment: The keynote-6 session was held between 11.15 am and 12.45 pm chaired by Kalpana Kannabiran with paper presentation by –

1. Jairam Ramesh, MP.
2. Kevin Brown, Prof. Indiana University Maurer School of Law.
3. Aruna Roy.

Why Congress did not confer Bhrat Ratna?:  Congress MP Jairam Ramesh on Sunday said he is for abolishing Bharat Ratna and Padma awards. His remarks came in response to the objection from the audience at the Dr Ambedkar International Conference that the Congress opposed Ambedkar all along and the party did not confer Bharat Ratna on the maker of the Constitution when it was in power[12]. Taking part in a key-note session, Ramesh said: “When Bharat Ratna was instituted, it was decided that it should never be given away posthumously. And that’s the reason why the Centre did not confer it on Ambedkar. But the policy was revised subsequently and the government started conferring the award posthumously.” Dr B R Ambedkar was given the award in 1990 when V P Singh was the prime minister[13]. Commenting on political influences in awarding these recognitions, Ramesh said the awards had lost their sanctity and he would abolish them within 24 hours if he is made the prime minister. He also blamed the BJP and RSS for trying to “appropriate Ambedkar and his legacy.”

Jairam Ramesh attack – Modi murderer of democracy[14]: Former Union Minister Jairam Ramesh lashed out at the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) on 23-07-2017 (Sunday), accusing it of trying to “hijack” B.R. Ambedkar just as it had done with Mahatma Gandhi. “Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been consistently making efforts to shrink the space for parliamentary debate. At the same time, he himself is hijacking Dr. Ambedkar. So there is complete hypocrisy on the part of the PM and the RSS,” the Congress leader told The Hindu when asked about Dr. Ambedkar’s relevance in the current political scene. “BJP and RSS leaders have hijacked Ambedkar though they did not believe in the Constitution. The NDA government has systematically undermined Parliament by bringing all Bills through the Money Bill route,” Mr. Ramesh said on the sidelines of the international summit on Dr. Ambedkar. “Dr. Ambedkar would had not approved of whatever the Modi government has done in the past two years. Even the Aadhaar Bill was declared as a Money Bill.” He maintained that there was political competition for the Dalit vote and said the Congress has been holding programmes to reach out to Dalits, women and weaker sections of society[15].

Kevin Brown comparison

Prabhat Patnaik, Bronislaw and And Tetumbde spoke……

Some objected to their speech asserting that Congress was cornering “Dalits”, just for coming elections.

Japhet clarified to the objections.

 

After lunch, The keynote-6 session was held between 2.00 and 3.30 pm chaired by G. Hargopal with paper presentation by –

1. Prabhat Patnaik.
2. Bronislaw Czarnocha, CUNY, CUNY/Hostos CC.
3. Anand Teltumbde.

Between 3.45 and 5.15 pm, “A conversation with Sri Siddaramaiah”, CM was held moderated by Rajendta Chenni. The entire exercise appeared pre-planned, as the way, the panelists asked questions and the responses came out. Anyway, the three day International conference was over and the arrangements made had been highly professional, the sessions academic and everyone would be benefited by listening to so many professors, scholars and experts. Thus, I returned to Chennai with new ideas generated for future research. I recall what Sri P. Manivannan recorded about the conference is 100% appreciable, as perhaps hundreds of workers would have been involved in all such arrangements and we should thank them[16]. Without their hard work, the conference could not have been materialized[17].

© K. V. Ramakrishna Rao

24-10-2017

[1] Deccan Chronicle, What’s wrong in a state flag: Shashi Tharoor, Published Jul 24, 2017, 2:40 am IST; Updated Jul 24, 2017, 2:40 am IST

[2] http://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/politics/240717/whats-wrong-in-a-state-flag-shashi-tharoor.html

[3] Times of India, Nothing wrong in states having individual flags: Shashi Tharoor, BV Shivashankar| TNN | Updated: Jul 24, 2017, 06:23 IST

[4] https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bengaluru/nothing-wrong-in-states-having-individual-flags-shashi-tharoor/articleshow/59730786.cms

[5] Dr. Tanweer Fazal is Associate Professor at the Nelson Mandela Centre, JMI, New Delhi, Email: fazaltanweer@yahoo.co.in, Phone: 91-9968822925 (M); http://www.jnu.ac.in/sss/csss/images/Tanwer-Fazal/CV Tanweer Fazal.pdf

[6] Supreme Court of India – K.P. Manu,Malabar Cements Ltd vs Chairman,Scrutiny Commt … on 26 February, 2015 arising out of CIVIL APPEAL No. 7065 OF 2008; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/98912765/

[7] https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Padmanabh_Samarendra/publication/302899845_Religion_Caste_and_Conversion_Membership_of_a_Scheduled_Caste_and_Judicial_Deliberations%27_Economic_and_Political_Weekly_li4_2016_pp_38-48/links/5732d20f08ae9f741b2362c4/Religion-Caste-and-Conversion-Membership-of-a-Scheduled-Caste-and-Judicial-Deliberations-Economic-and-Political-Weekly-li4-2016-pp-38-48.pdf?origin=publication_detail

[8] Madras High Court – G. Michael vs Mr. S. Venkateswaran, Additional … on 6 November, 1951

Equivalent citations: AIR 1952 Mad 474, (1952) 1 MLJ 239; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/496218/

[9] Supreme Court of India – Ganpat vs Returning Officer & Ors on 4 December, 1974; Equivalent citations: 1975 AIR 420, 1975 SCR (2) 923; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/83094/

[10] Supreme Court of India – S. Anbalagan vs B. Devarajan & Ors on 5 December, 1983; Equivalent citations: 1984 AIR 411, 1984 SCR (1) 973;   https://indiankanoon.org/doc/254650/

[11] The Kerala Information and Public Relations Department’s internal circular states that all official communication from now on needs to avoid the use of “Dalit” and “Harijan”.The order has been passed on the directions of Kerala State Commission for Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) Chairman Justice PN Vijayakumar.

https://www.indiatimes.com/news/india/kerala-denounces-the-terms-dalit-and-harijan-bans-their-use-in-official-communications-331924.html

 

[12] Times of India, Jairam Ramesh wants abolition of Bharat Ratna, Padma awards, B V Shiva Shankar| TNN | Jul 24, 2017, 12:21 IST.

[13] https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bengaluru/jairam-ramesh-wants-abolition-of-bharat-ratna-padma-awards/articleshow/59728744.cms

[14] The Hindu, RSS trying to hijack Ambedkar, says Jairam Ramesh, Nagesh Prabhu, BENGALURU, JULY 23, 2017 23:38 IST, UPDATED: JULY 23, 2017 23:38 IST.

[15] http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/bangalore/rss-trying-to-hijack-ambedkar-says-jairam-ramesh/article19337966.ece

[16] P Manivannan, What went into organising the Ambedkar Conference
QUEST FOR EQUITY: RECLAIMING SOCIAL JUSTICE, REVISITING AMBEDKAR, August 7, 2017.

 P Manivannan, Chief Project Officer at Karnataka State Highways Improvement Project, was also Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Government of Karnataka till recently.

[17] http://bengaluru.citizenmatters.in/ambedkar-international-conference-2017-organising-bangalore-20649

The Proceedings of the 39th session of Andhrapradesh History Congress held at Sree Potti Sriramulu Telugu University, Srisailam campus on January 31st and February 1st 2015

The Proceedings of the 39^th session of Andhrapradesh History Congress held at Sree Potti Sriramulu Telugu University, Srisailam campus on January 31^st and February 1^st 2015

1. Srisailam location, map at APSRTC bus-stand, Srisailam

The Campus of Sree Potti Sriramulu Telugu University is situated opposite to Shivaji Spoorty Kendra: For the delegates who were coming from other states or from Chennai, Pondicherry, Chittoor and other places, reaching Srisailam had been a tedious journey involving more than 12 to 16 hours road journey, unlike for those who were coming from Hyderabad, Warangal, Kambam, Ongole etc. Most of the people at Srisailam did not know the location of the Campus of Sree Potti Sriramulu Telugu University (hereinafter mentioned as PSTU). Had the organizers mentioned that it was situated just opposite to Shivaji Spoorty Kendra, it would have been easier for the delegates to reach. From temple side, the hilly areas were leveled by Boukline machines on 30^th, when I was walking up to locate the venue of the 39^th session of APHC. When I reached after enquiring from many people, the place looked like deserted one. As there were two wheelers and three cars, I assumed that there were people inside the building. Of course, the Dean Sri Appa Rao, the local secretary, Pasala Sudhakar Rao, General Secretary of APHC and other staff members were there. I could meet Drs Chandrasekara Reddy, Babu Rao and others also. I was informed that the proceedings would be held there only.

1. Ganga sadan where I stayed on 30th and 31st January 2015

Ganga Sadan is the central Reception office of the Srisailam Devasthanams, where rooms are allotted for the devotees coming to Srisailam. Rooms can be booked online also.

2. The junction – temple LHS- APSRTC RHS

This the junction, from where we can go to the Temple on LHS road, APSRTC bus-stand on RHS and Patalaganga straight.

3.The street leading to the temple

The road on LHS leads to the main temple and it is dotted with many shops on either side. Of course the Chatrams / Pilgrimage staying Houses are there behind.

3. Temple dwajastambam

The Dwajastambam / flag-mast at the entrance of the temple can be seen.

4. Dwajastambam and nandi

The Dwajasthambam and Nandi – closer view. For PSTU, we have to go on the RHS road.

5. srisailam temple entrance

The temple entrance, photography is prohibited thereafter.

6. Going to University campus-the temple gopuram and wall can be seen

The RHS road leads to PSTU and I started walking slowly enquiring. The road is rocky and it is levelled.

7. Going through the road-getting levelled on that day

How the road is levelled.

8. Gangabhawani vapaharanamu- on the way to PSTU

“Gangabhawani Vapaharanamu”, Siddharameswaram Sawmy Paddalu, Koneru, Mallannapada Darshana place, and many guest houses could be seen on the way. There have been many gust houses built by the private and government companies, individuals etc on either side of the road, but looked deserted.

9. PSTU board – Shivaji Memorial can be seen on LHS

At last, I reached the road, where the name board of PSTU is there, but in Telugu. It is just opposite to the Shivaji Memorial and it can be seen on LHS.

2. view of PSTU from distance

View of PSTU from distance.

10. At last reached PSTU- on 30-01-2015

This the front side of the PSTU at Srisailam.

1. A. Appa Rao Local Secretary and P. Sudhakar General Secretary of APHC inside -30-01-2015

When I went inside, I could meet Prof / Dr A. Appa Rao Local Secretary and P. Sudhakar General Secretary of APHC in their room. They confirmed that the conference would held there only and preparations might start from the evening. After some time, I returned to Ganga sadan.

The Campus of Sree Potti Sriramulu Telugu University getting ready for the 31^st session of APHC: The place can be reached from the right-hand side of the temple through a rough road. This route has been tedious for aged people above 60 or those who have problems with legs. “Gangabhawani Vapaharanamu”, Siddharameswaram Sawmy Paddalu, Koneru, Mallannapada Darshana place, and many guest houses could be seen on the way. Besides the accommodation provided by the Devasthanam , there have been many Choultries, guest houses etc., built and maintained by the Caste organizations. The delegates were accommodated in the Reddy Choultry opposite to Ganga Sadan, the Central Reception office of the Devasthanam and the APSRTC Bus-stand on the backside. As usual others were accommodated in different nearby and convenient locations, according to their choice or other modalities. On 30^th night, the samiana / tent were put up and other arrangements were slowly made. Four rooms were marked for the ancient, medieval, historiography and local histories and the main podium samiana space for modern.

Inauguration on 31-01-2015 (Saturday): On the 31^st, the registration counters were ready for the job as usual. The breakfast was delayed and the delegates could have it by 10 am and there were none to inform about anything. It was served upstairs on the backside of the building. The registration was also done. The inaugural invocatory recitals were rendered by the Pundit and students of the Virasaiva Gurukulam situated next to Shivaji Memorial and opposite to the campus. The inaugural session went on as usual with routine formalities of lighting the lamp (it was mentioned as “lamping the light” and then corrected[1]), handing over of charges, reading reports, garlanding the guests etc.

16. PSTU dedicated to – by NTR on 10-04-1986

The PSTU was dedicated …..by the former CM, N. T. Rama Rao on 10-04-1986, a Ugadhi day!

15. PSTU -dept.of history, culture-inaugurated on 8-2-1989

The School of History, Culture and archaeology was established in 1987, the building completed and inaugurated on 08-02-1989. At that time, the 13th session of APHC was hosted.

13. registration started on 31-02-2015

Registration of the delegates started on 31-01-2015 in the rooms situated on  LHS after entering the campus.

14. Delegate fees collected -31

The delegate fees payment – Dr Chandrasekara Reddy can be seen.

17. Breakfast on 31-01-2015-10 am APHC

Breakfast served by the volunteers, Pongal and Vadai!

18. Breakfast on 31-01-2015-10 am -volunteers, APHC.

More volunteers…………………..

19. APHC office bearers relaxing before inauguration-31

APHC office bearers relaxing before inauguration, perhaps discussing also!

20.Inaguration-APHC

Inaguration function – K. Srinivasulu, B. P. Sahu, Adapa Satyanarayana, E. Siva Reddy, Tomas Ayya, G. V. Ramakrishna Rao, M. Venkateswara Rao.

21. Prayer by the Pundit and students of Veerasaiva Gurukulam-31st

Prayer by the Pundit and students of Veerasaiva Gurukulam, situated on RHS of the Shivaji Memorial.

22. Audience on 31st -inaugural session

Section of the audience on 31st -inaugural session RHS from the dais.

23. Audience on 31st -inagural session.LHS

Section of the audience on 31st -inaugural session LHS from the dais.

 

As per the printed invitation, Professors / Drs Adapa Satyanarayana would preside over, Pasala Sudhakar deliver and Elluri Sivareddy grace as chief guest and the guests of honours would be Sri / Prof / Dr Buddha Rajasekhar Reddy, MLA, Srisailam Constituency; P. Vidhyaprakash, VC in-chrge Rayalaseema university; K. Venkatachalam, Vice-charman, Telengana State Council of higher Education; K. Sagarababu, Executive Officer, Srisaila Devasthanam;  and N. Narashimham, Dy Commissioner of commercial tax, Kadapa, but except Vijayaprakash none turned up and he also attended late.

Some delay for inauguration: Initially the inaugural function was held up, as the organizers were expecting the local MLA. Later, as there was power cut, it was delayed further. A. Appa Rao, K. Srinivasulu, B. K. Sahu, Satyanarayana, P. Sudhakar, E. Siva Reddy, Thomas Ayya, G. V. Ramakrishna Rao, M. Venkateswara Rao and A. Gurumurthy were on the dias and later Vijayaprakash joined. P. Sudhakar, in his report expressed his anxious that the organization should be protected to continue, as it was facing a crucial time. The local people or the people from Andhra might have understood what he was talking about, but, for the persons coming from other state, it was intriguing and perplexing.

11. Siva Reddy[2] (11.36-12.48 pm): He pointed out that APHC session was hosted by the University for the second time. He would oppose to those who objected to the conduct of the conference there in Srisailam. Pointing out several lacunae in history writing, he said that Mahabharata could be story, but not Kakatiyas; origins of Satavahanas, Ikshvahus were stil in mystery; there were many gaps in history; culturally and traditionally all Telugu speaking people are one, but now divided; He asked as to whether history was to unite or divide people. Historians have to decide as to whether they are going to write Telengana history or Andhra history. History cannot be biased and historians should not entangled with the webs of ideology. “If we talk about Samprahaya, can we dubbed as RSS or VHP?”, he asked. Jains wrote their own Ramayana only to denigrate Rama, writing that Rama married his sister Sita. There should be academic honesty and not academic dishonesty. Many historians are writing histories without mentioning the sources or acknowledging the work done by others knowingly. Very often “Karnataka Sangeetham” is mentioned, but why “Karnataka” is mentioned is not explained.

Vijayprakash (12.00-12.48 pm: By that time as Vijayaprakash came, he was called to the dais. Excusing himself for coming delay, he also expressed himself that he had not come prepared with any paper. As history subject became redundant in the present-day context, historians should do something for it. As because of construction work  and other infrastructure development works have been taking place, 6-track roads laid, the earth surface is continuously disturbed and many archaeological treasures are disappearing. As such activities would go on more and more I coming days, historians should pass an resolution and submit to the government that they should take concern about the archaeological evidences, in their digging activities, so that the evidences are not destroyed or vanished. Mentioning about the credit system introduced, he pointed out how Smriti Irani has made that even engineering and other professional students should taken subjects like history as optional subject[3].

Adapa Satyanarayana (12.49-12.22 pm)[4]: As a General presidential address, he started talking about conversion and activities carried on by the Christian missionaries. They used the Vemana’s writings against the Brahmanical Hinduism. He declared that his paper becomes relevance in the context of “Garvapasi” conversions talking place at the behest of the Hindutva forces under the present BJP government. He held that Mahatma Gandhi view about conversion exactly matches with the present-day Hindutva forces. However, Ambedkar differed from Gandhi. Ambedkar perspective reflects certain aspects of Marxian characterization of lower class religion as a potential vehicle for protest consciousness. He appreciated the excellent conversion work done by the Christian missionaries. He claimed that 80% dalits preferred to get converted to Christianity. In the Nizam dominion, there was never a communal riot, whereas, after that there communal riots, because of the Hindutva forces. According to Christian ideology, he declared that, “The Hindu way of life for caste and exclusiveness, the Christian way of life for catholicity and inclusiveness”. He deviated from his submitted paper (printed and circulated) and delved upon politicized controversial issues. It seems he has been in the habit of involved in such controversies[5].

Discussion with Adapa Sathyanarahyana: After his “reading of his paper”, I went to him and pointed out that the word “Dalit is neither legal nor Constitutional”[6], as the National commission for scheduled Caste pointed out and issued a Circular to that effect directing the states not use such expression[7]. The Soosai v. Union of India, AIR 1986 SC 733 judgment delivered by the Supreme Court[8], clearly pointing out the legal position that the SC benefit would not be available to the SCs, if they get converted to other religions other than Hindu, as per the Constitution. When we were discussing, suddenly V. Ramakrishna came and took him away, evidently to stop our discussion.

12.22 to 1.04 pm: The proceedings volume of 38^th session was released by Sivareddy, followed by the “vote of thanks” as a matter of routine. Actually, it was announced that all should assemble back after a tea-break, but suddenly, when tea was taking, again it was announced that all go on for lunch. After lunch, the sessions were held as mentioned in the respective rooms.

Sl. No	Sectional President	Prof / Dr
1	Ancient India	G. V. Ramakrishna Rao
2	Medieval Andhra history	K. Srinivasulu
3	Modern Andhra history	M. Venkateswara Rao
4	Historiography	B. P. Sahu
5	Local History	A. Gurumurthy

The Mamidipudi Venkata Rangaiah Memorial lecture was delivered by Prof B. P. Sahu, New Delhi during the evening. This would be included in the proceedings volume to be released next year[9].

Valedictory function on 01-02-2015 (Sunday): Morning, the paper reading sessions continued. There were lively discussion about the papers presented. After lunch, the valedictory function was held. As per the printed invitation, the Valedictory function, Prof / Dr / Sri P. Apparao would preside over the function; Mandali Buddha Prasad grace as Chief Guest; and guests of honour G. Tatireddy, General Secretary, Ahhila Bharatiya Redla Sankshema Samakya; Immadisetti. Koteswara, All India Arya Vysya Anna satra Sangham; T. Rameshchandrabose, Kakatiya Kamma Sangham; and former deans – K. Thimma Reddy, D. Bhaskara Murthy, A. Gurumurthy, D. R. Raju, P. Chenna Reddy, R. Chandrasekara Reddy. After the function, the delegates started disbursing and going to bus-stand to reach t heir destinations.

“The Hindu” gives the politics behind the dilemma of the existence of “Sree Potti Sriramulu Telugu University” campus at Srisailam: Interestingly, “The Hindu” has given some details about the politics behind the dilemma of the existence of “Sree Potti Sriramulu Telugu University” campus at Srisailam. They are appended in the following paragraphs without changing any word. Only suitable captions have been given, that too, taking words and expressions from the news paper reports.

Widing up, watering down of and waging war for Srisailam centre[10]: The fate of Telugu University branch in History and Archaeology at Srisailam has been hanging in balance with the proposal to shift the Telugu University to Rajahmundry. According to reports, a high-level meeting of the Potti Sriramulu Telugu University at Hyderabad on 12-04-2014 (Wednesday) explored the possibility of shifting the University and its branches to Rajahmundry. The litterateurs and educationists who have been closely following the activities of the History Peetham at Srisailam sharply reacted to the development saying the spirit of the university was watered down by the bureaucratic professors of the university from time to time. Former Chief Minister N.T. Rama Rao envisaged the Telugu university to be located at Srisailam to offer courses in ancient studies in 1987. However, the bureaucrats changed it into three centres devoting the folk arts to Warangal, Telugu Peetham at Rajahmundry and history at Srisailam. But the head quarters of the University was located at Hyderabad. The university authorities were in dilemma with the bifurcation of the State. The head quarters and the Warangal centre might go the way of Telangana State, who would also rename the university deleting the prefix “Potti Sriramulu”.

The bureaucratic professors, professionally biased historians and others crearing problems:  Several attempts were made in the past to shift the Srisailam centre to Hyderabad but the opposition from the local politicians forced the officers to drop the idea[11]. Another move was made to shift the centre to Kurnool on the ground that more courses could be introduced. Shifting of the centre to Kurnool had no much opposition. Educationist and socialite K.C. Kalkura who opposed the idea of winding up the centre said the Peetham should be shifted to Kurnool to be developed as university of Environmental and Ethnic studies while the existing facility at Srisailam should be used for accommodating the visiting students who need to stay at Srisailam as part of study of diversity of Nallamala forest. He said the policy makers should be careful in taking any decision in future knowing the fact the unequal development and unilateral way of functioning led to division of the state and such mistakes should not be done in future.

The responses appearing in “The Hindu” have been interesting: Venkat commented, “What a tragedy we are in. Splitting the place, splitting the people, splitting the culture and splitting the education system… What reasons are our so called leaders quoting? for better future!!! A future without unity can never be a role model. God forgive these interventionists or so called revolutionists for their historical  blunder.”; raghu ram, “As major number of colleges and universities are there in and around Rajahmundry and Kakinada, it should be better to move Telugu University to West godavari district”;  Ramadatta, “Not only Potti Sriramulu University but all those educational institutions started from 1956 onwards should be shifted to suitable
places in the residuary Andhra Pradesh urgently so that Telangana state can impart its rich history and cultural heritage like ‘bonalu, bathukamma’ the rule of Nizam and his ancestors under the guidance great academicians like Kodandaram. For Telangana people OU is sufficient to cater their needs in resorting to all types of hooliganism and pressure tactics and for academicians spending their teaching time for achieving their personal agenda.”:

Renaming of the University in the political game[12]: The Telangana government might soon issue orders changing the name of the Potti Sreeramulu Telugu University, in the aftermath of the State bifurcation. The names of Suravaram Prathap Reddy and Bammera Pothana are in the reckoning for renaming of the university soon after the division of assets and staff. Sources from the university seeking anonymity inform that the government is mulling the two names, with more emphasis on Suravaram Prathap Reddy, the renowned social historian, writer and father of the CPI’s National General Secretary, Suravaram Sudhakar Reddy. The name of Pothana, a much celebrated classical poet from Telangana, has surfaced to match with the spirit of Adikavi Nannaya University in Rajahmundry. The rechristening, if it happens, will be the second such for the university since its establishment in 1985. It was first named merely as Telugu University which was changed to Potti Sreeramulu Telugu University in 1998. The Vice-Chancellor of the university, E. Siva Reddy, however, said he was unaware of the name change proposals.

Bifurcation of the Andhra State or of Telugu people without caring for culture, tradition and heritage?: Nevertheless, division of the university is imminent, and clarity in this regard may be expected in a couple of months, he said. “It is as yet unclear how the division would be done, or how the assets would be distributed[13]. It may be done based on the geographical location of the respective schools associated with the university,” Dr. Reddy surmised. The university has 40 acres each in two locations of Andhra Pradesh, namely Rajahmundry and Srisailam, where the new headquarters for A.P. might come up after bifurcation. The university’s premises housing School of Classical Dance at Kuchipudi, School of History, Culture and Archaeology at Srisailam, and the School of Telugu Literary Studies at Rajahmundry might be allotted to Andhra Pradesh, while the School of Language Development, School of Fine Arts, and School of Social and Other Sciences, which are being run at the headquarters in Nampally, and the School of Folk and Tribal Lore in Warangal, may be retained by Telangana.

The responses appearing for this report in “The Hindu” have been interesting[14]. Jararam Jararam from POMPANO BEACH noted, “We now have two Telugu kingdoms!”; Helen   from CARLISLE commented, “Renaming is not the solution. They need to work on the inferiority complex of the human mind before all these external ways of boosting their ego. These are just cheap tactics to show the power. One will not be surprised if the leaders of Telangana change their language from Telugu to some other name if they could. They could change whatever externally; let us see how they can change themselves internally. These cheap tactics will only alienate the others who are major contributors for the development of the region. Slowly, the whole area will come down….even if they call themselves living in Heaven.”; a.t.b.t.prasad  from BANGALORE,”  ‘bammera Pothana” is good for telugu university, hyd”; Gautham  from AUDUBON, “The Hyderabad airport also must be renamed – to ‘Rani Rudrama Devi’ International Airport or ‘Kakatiya’ International Airport. All these years the name ‘Kakatiya’ got relegated to things related only to Warangal, while it was Kakatiyas who originally unified Telugu speaking kingdoms to give the identity we have today.”; JKM Rao  from FREDERICK, “Though he passed away after fasting for the creation of the Andhra state, Potti Sriramulu was a freedom fighter, an ardent follower of the Mahatma. The Mahatma himself liked him immensely and is said to have made a remark that if there were more like Potti Sriramulu, he would have obtained freedom from the British in no time. Just because the state is bifurcated, is it necessary to show disrespect to the memory of a nonviolent freedom fighter by unceremoniously casting his name aside?”.

Andhra, Telengana and Seemandhra: It is evident that the politics of bifurcate ion of Andhrapradesh and the subsequent developments have been affecting the academic institutions with vested interests operating at various levels. The teaching and non-teaching staff of Universities, colleges, schools and connected establishments have been polarized politically and ideologically too, as revealed through the speeches and actions of the concerned persons. Such bias has already disturbing the Telugu speaking people. The 40^th session of APHC might settle the issues.

[1] Of course, that is also correct in a way, as Candle lamp is used to light the wicks of the traditional lamp. As the lamp has limited wicks, many times, the VIPs would lamp the wick, i.e, burning wick again and again posing for videos and cameras and sometimes for second time also, if the videographers and photographers miss the occasion of a particular VIP. In other words, “the lighting the lamp” has been so ritualized in inaugural sessions. With the secular or communal twist, nowadays, it is avoided also either by some VIPs or the organizers themselves!

[2] Former head of department of Telugu at University College of Arts and Social Sciences at Osmania University, Professor Elluri Siva Reddy has been appointed the vice-chancellor of Potti Sriramulu Telugu University, Hyderabad. He has a rich academic experience spanning over three decades. He has also served as a member of the civil services syllabus committee for UPSC. He won the Andhra Pradesh Sahitya Academy award for his book ‘Suravaram Pratapa Reddy Jeevitam – Sahityam’ in 1972. He is a poet, writer, critic and commentator of Telugu literature and is considered an authority on Indian mythological text, Mahabharata.

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/siva-reddy-is-new-vc-of-telugu-university/250403-60-114.html

[3] http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/new-national-education-policy-hrd-to-start-consulting-states-stakeholders-from-next-month-2/

[4] When checked with his printed version of his paper, “Religious conversion and social justice: Dalit Christians in Seemandhra and Telengana”, there was no such political overtones. Therefore, it is not understood why he had such outbursts against the present government and his grudge against the so-called “Hindutva forces”, by being a responsible historian.

[5] The Hindu, Speakers for beef in hostel menu, Hyderabad, April.2, 2012, A seminar on ‘Democracy and Food Culture’, organised by different student organisations on the English and Foreign Languages University (EFLU) campus strongly argued for introducing beef in the hostel menu given its nutritious value and the cultural aspects attached to beef consumption. Speakers including Professors Kancha Ilaiah, Bangya Bhukya, Mutaiah, Adapa Satyanarayana, Simhadri and Gali Vinod expressed views that beef eating was part of the Indian culture and it should reflect in the campus hostels. Not including beef was a violation of basic human rights was the other argument. Prof. Simhadri said that not allowing beef in educational campuses was legitimising untouchability. Prof. Bangya Bhukya said that there were many references to beef eating in Manu Smruthi and quoted several shlokas to support his argument. Prof. Veena Shatrugna from the National Institute of Nutrition said beef had more nutritive values than any other food. Gogu Shyamala, Dalit writer, said beef was the richest source of developing milk in women and it was still practiced in villages. Student leaders Sandeep Patil, Satish, Shankar, Seetaram, Mohan, Shetty, Ashok and Sudharshan took the initiative.

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-andhrapradesh/speakers-for-beef-in-hostel-menu/article3271441.ece

[6] Times of India, Dalit word is unconstitutional: Scheduled Caste Commission,  PTI | Jan 18, 2008, 03.46PM IST ; The National Commission for Scheduled Castes has asked the state governments not to use the word ‘Dalit’ in official documents, saying the term was “unconstitutional”. The Commission has stated that sometimes the word ‘Dalit’ is used as a substitute for Scheduled Caste in official documents, sources in State Tribal Department said on 17-01-2008 (Friday). After consultation with the legal department, the Commission said that the word is neither constitutional nor the word has been mentioned in the current laws.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Dalit-word-is-unconstitutional-Scheduled-Caste-Commission/articleshow/2710993.cms

[7] Rather ‘Scheduled Caste’ is the appropriate and notified word as per the Article 341 of the Constitution, it said in a letter sent to all states. Acting upon the order, the Chhattisgarh government has directed district collectors and its departments not to use ‘Dalit’ word in their documents, they said. Acting upon the order, the Chhattisgarh government has directed District Collectors and its departments not to use ‘Dalit’ word in their documents, they said.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/dalit-word-unconstitutional-sc-commission/article1-270230.aspx

[8] Supreme Court of India – Soosai Etc vs Union Of India And Others on 30 September, 1985; Equivalent citations: 1986 AIR 733, 1985 SCR Supl. (3) 242; Author: R Pathak; Bench: Pathak, R.S.;            PETITIONER: SOOSAI ETC.       Vs. RESPONDENT: UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS; DATE OF JUDGMENT30/09/1985; http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1724190/

[9] The venue of the 40^th session has not been decided because of the bifurcation of the state and other related issues.

[10] Special Correspondent, Fate of Telugu University branch hangs in balance,  The Hindu, Kurnool, March 13, 2014.

[11] http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/andhra-pradesh/fate-of-telugu-university-branch-hangs-in-balance/article5780159.ece

[12] V. Swati, Telugu University may be renamed after Suravaram,  The Hindu, Kurnool, August, 28 2014.

[13] http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/telangana/telugu-university-may-be-renamed-after-suravaram/article6357194.ece

[14] http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/telangana/telugu-university-may-be-renamed-after-suravaram/article6357194.ece#comments