Redistribution
of Provinces
BY R. R. DIWAKAR
(Member, The Indian Constituent Assembly)
The demand for the redistribution of Provinces in
India, broadly on a linguistic basis, is as old as 1903. It was then taken up
by Lokamanya Tilak. That veteran politician, who was the first mass leader of
India, mentioned it in the Manifesto of the Democratic Swaraj Party published
in 1916. Gandhiji not only appreciated it but incorporated the principle of
Linguistic Provinces in the Congress Constitution in 1920. Since then all
Congress activities have been organized and carried on through Provincial
Congress Committees, which (except Delhi and Bombay) were formed in 1921 on the
basis of common language and culture. The Congress has been consistently
advocating the redistribution of administrative Provinces, and the Nehru
Committee on the Draft Constitution of India, after careful consideration,
recommended the formation of Andhra and Karnataka Provinces. In 1937, when the
Congress came into power and accepted ministries in Bombay and Madras, both the
legislatures passed resolutions recommending the formation of Linguistic
Provinces such as Andhra, Karnataka and so on. The Election Manifesto of the
Congress in 1945 clearly enunciated that Provinces should be constituted, as
far as possible, on a linguistic and cultural basis. As recently as 1947, the
Bombay and Madras Legislatures again passed resolutions recommending to the
Constituent Assembly of India the redistribution of Provinces on a linguistic
basis in the new Constitution.
It is a fact recognised by all alike that, during
their long career of conquest, the British went on adding territory to
territory and forming new Provinces without any principle. Thus historical and
political accidents were responsible for the Provinces of Madras, Bombay,
Bengal, etc., and no administrative principle was followed. It was only later
that Bihar was separated from Bengal. The Simon Commission (1928) recognised
the force of the popular demand for redistribution of Provinces on a linguistic
and cultural basis, and the Government of India Act of 1935 saw the creation of
the two new Provinces of Sindh and Orissa.
Thus in the course of the long and varied
administrative and constitutional history of Indian Provinces, as well as in
the course of popular agitation for redistribution, the case for the formation
of Linguistic Provinces has been stated and restated many a time from different
points of view. Therefore, there is really not much that is new to be stated on
this question.
Still, when freedom has dawned and when the framing
of the new Constitution for India by the sovereign Constituent Assembly is on,
some important considerations bear repetition. There is really an overwhelming
case for redistribution of Provinces mainly on a linguistic and cultural basis.
It goes without saying that the existence of some of the Provinces, for
instance, those of Bombay and Madras cannot be defended on any rational basis.
Unless one is a blind follower of the laissez faire policy, one would
instantly think of redistributing them.
Briefly stated, the rationale of the formation of
Linguistic Provinces is very simple, logical and highly intelligible. It is as
follows: -
The advocates of Linguistic Provinces have never
asked for one Province for each language. They know that there are more than
250 languages and dialects in India, and the formation of 250 Provinces in this
country, or for the matter of that in any country, is inconceivable. The number
of Linguistic Congress Provinces is only eighteen. That number excludes the
Provinces of Delhi and Bombay, which were formed on considerations other than
linguistic. Thus the number of administrative Provinces on a linguistic and
cultural basis is not going to be either staggering or unmanageable. The United
States of America has 49 States with a population of about 130 millions, while
the U. S. S. R. has 17 Republics with a population of about 160 millions. Some
of the States and Republics of the U. S. A. and U. S. S. R. respectively
consist of a few lakhs of people, whereas in India it has not been contemplated
that there should be any Province with less than about four or five millions.
The number Linguistic Provinces would not go beyond fifteen or so.
Nor have these advocates ever dreamt of sovereign or
independent Linguistic States. What they ask for is only administrative
Province within the framework of the single State of India. Adequate
constitutional safeguards can be provided for, so that such Provinces may not
be able to lay claim to any right to cut themselves adrift from the Union. The
movement for Linguistic Provinces should not be mixed up with, or mistaken for,
the Dravidistan movement which is communal in origin and thinks in terms of a
sovereign State in South India. It is anti-Aryan and anti-Sanskrit. It is but
an off-shoot of the Non-Brahmin movement in the South.
The vastness of the country and the big population
point out that there must be handy Provinces, if real good efficient
administration is to established. The present Provinces are adventitious and
are the product of historical factors, and not of planning from the point of
view of developing them fully. The British masters were here obviously to
exploit the country, and they were not interested in anything beyond smooth
administration and keeping law and order. Now that there is freedom and that
there is an opportunity for reorganizing the country, some rational principle
must be adopted for redistributing the Provinces. We must see that the Units of
the Federation are homogeneous and handy, and lend themselves to every kind of
material and cultural development along democratic lines.
With the introduction of adult suffrage, real
democracy is ushered in. If democracy is to develop along healthy lines, it is
necessary that the man in the street is able to follow what is going on in the
legislatures and in the administration. Universities which can give all-sided
education in regional languages must be established in every Province. All this
can be facilitated only if there are Linguistic Provinces, that is, Provinces
in which people will have a common medium of intercourse. Otherwise democracy
becomes a farce, and adult suffrage a mockery. Those people who are foremost in
demanding the redistribution of Provinces are not mere doctrinaires, nor do
they want a Province merely as an ornament. They have real inconveniences, and
the bulk of the people are not able to understand what is going on in the
administration and legislatures. For instance, if we look at those portions of
Karnatak which are now in the Union, they are divided over three different
administrations. In Bombay and Madras they are at the tail-end of those
Provinces, and they do not count at all. As a consequence we find that they are
in a comparatively backward and undeveloped condition. Coorg is rotting as a
separate Commissioner’s Province, without resources and without contact with
other parts of Karnatak.
For the last 27 years all the Provinces that are
demanding redistribution have been functioning as Linguistic Provinces, so far
as Congress activities are concerned. To take again the illustration of
Karnatak, the Karnatak man in the remote corners of South Canara in the
Province of Madras has been feeling one with the Karnatakas in the Bombay
Province. They have fought shoulder to shoulder the battle for freedom. They
have suffered together, sung and clung together, gone to prison together, and
thus they have learnt the value and utility of living together and acting
together as linguistic brothers. They have been coming together not only in the
political field but they have been meeting in conferences, planning and working
together for common development in various fields of cultural and other
endeavour. Is it too much for all of them now to say that they should be under
one provincial administration, so that they may fulfil their common aspirations
and ambitions, rise to their full height and thus contribute their highest to
Indian life as a whole? At this time of day, when India has become free and
when she can put her own house in order, is it not legitimate that groups of
people who are bound by links of common language and culture for ages should as
for a common administration and a separate Province, especially when they are
conscious that they can thus serve the ends of humanity better?
Some might ask: “Why should language be deified
into a principle for forming Provinces?” The simple reason is that that is the
best link among men and a mark of homogeneity. After all, language is the best
and the only means of intercourse between man and man. A common language also
means often a common background, a common tradition, a common memory and a
common psychology. We think and feel and dream alike if we have a common
history and a common language. Our joys and sorrows, our loves and hates, our
art and culture, are all reflected in our literary productions. In fact, our
common heritage is stored in our common language. It was the great German
philosopher Fichte who first linked up language with nationality, and said that
the most important mark of common nationality is a common language. It is in
this sense that a common language is one of the most important things that go
to make for homogeneity.
None should make the mistake of thinking that
language is the only factor that should decide the question of the
redistribution of Provinces in India. Every Province ought to be comparatively
big in area and population; it should be compact and contiguous in territory;
it should be capable of running a provincial administration, if not
immediately, at least in time to come; it should have economic resources which
can be developed. All these and such other considerations must be given due
weight when new Provinces are formed.
Ordinarily speaking, the redistribution of
Provinces on a linguistic basis in the present context ought to have been the
most natural and easy thing to happen. When the Congress, which has been
actually acting upon that principle for the last quarter of a century is in an
overwhelming majority in the Constituent Assembly, this ought to have been a
child’s play. But unfortunately, certain circumstances intervened which
postponed the question being taken up.
The Cabinet Mission Plan of May 16 contemplated and
took in account only the then existing Provinces and no other. That was the
first hurdle. When it was argued that the Constituent Assembly was a sovereign
body and that it could, if it would, take up this question, it was pointed out
that the Muslim League would take objection to the formation of new Hindu-majority
Provinces. It was also apprehended that possible different on boundaries would
hold up the work of constitution-making and thus postpone the date for transfer
of power. But all those difficulties have now melted away, and full freedom has
come far sooner than expected and has vested the Constituent Assembly with
sovereign powers. Now, whatever difficulties there might be in the way of the
consummation of Linguistic Provinces, they are of our own making.
Some are found arguing that there is no necessity
for redistribution, and that the present Provinces are working quite
satisfactorily. These people do not exactly know how deep is the
dissatisfaction in Provinces like Andhra and Karnataka, for instance. If not
for anything else, even for the simple reason of removing the major cause of
dissatisfaction, Linguistic Provinces may have to be formed. What I mean is
that it has already assumed the proportion of a major problem. Some argue that
new memories have been built up in the composite Provinces. These people do not
know what they are speaking about. Quite the contrary is the case. The
different linguistic groups in the composite Provinces have become more
language-conscious than before, and the problem is keener today than at any
other time and will grow far keener tomorrow than it is today. Some others try
to brand the tendency to Linguistic Provinces as a ‘fissiparous one’. It could
have been called so only if it either aimed at, envisaged or encouraged the
formation of independent States. It is quite the other way. The tendency is to
make the Centre stronger while making the Units more homogeneous and
autonomous. Some feel that Linguistic Provinces will weaken the Centre. There
is absolutely no basis for this fear. What makes the Centre stronger are not
language or difference of it, but the subjects that the Units voluntarily
surrender to it. That Centre which requires the suppression or disintegration
of homogeneous groups is not worth becoming, nor can become, a strong Centre.
Democracy is not an imposed order but a willed order; it does not
rest and prosper on ‘divide and rule’ but on voluntary union and co-ordinated
advance.
To sum up, on the occasion of drawing up a new
Constitution for India, the present haphazard arrangements as regards some Provinces
must be recast, and the most natural and rational principle of lingual and
cultural affinities should be adopted in rearranging the same. Such a
re-arrangement alone can ensure the progress of all peoples inhabiting this
vast land, and can ensure also the development of ordered democracy in the
Units and the Centre. A new enthusiasm is sure to spring up when the destinies
of homogeneous groups are entrusted to them, and they will then be far more
willing and abler partners in the great task of building anew an ancient
Nation. That way lies not only the interest and progress of those groups, but
also the harmonious and synthetic blending and common advance of the totality
of the Indian people.
If an analogy may be permitted here, Russia, on the
eve of drawing up a new Constitution in 1918, was faced with what was called
‘the problem of nationalities’. Stalin’s masterly handling of that question is
memorable. Ultimately, the arrangements arrived at assured to every language
and culture group not only mere protection but steady advance, and thus secured
the highest loyalty of all concerned to the Union Republic. The experience of
the last twenty-five years and more shows that even the most backward of the
groups in the Russian Republic have progressed far beyond expectation, and
their industries and agriculture have developed on a far more respectable scale
than was expected.
Let us now see how the problem stands and what
stage it has reached in constitution- making. It could have been taken up
straightway by the Constituent Assembly and the necessary Committee or
Committees appointed for going thoroughly into the question. That would have
solved the problem, once for all, by now. If knotty problems like the division
of India and partition of Provinces on communal lines could be achieved within
the space of less than three months, I do not see why the redistribution of a
few Provinces should occupy more than a few months. Moreover, in this case, the
parties are willing, the policy has already been accepted long long ago, and
many activities, political as well as cultural, in the respective areas–of
course excepting administrative ones–are already being carried on as if
Linguistic Provinces existed.
But somehow that was not to be, and it was only
after division and partition schemes had been agreed to by the major political
parties in India that this question was taken up by the Union Constitution and
Provincial Constitution Committees appointed by the Constituent Assembly. Those
Committees appointed in their turn a Sub-Committee to go into the matter That
Sub-Committee recommended that the Dominion Government of India do appoint a
Commission to go into the question of the formation of Andhra, Karnataka,
Maharashtra and Kerala Provinces, and make a report with a view to the
enumeration of the new Provinces in the new Constitution Act, on the lines of
Section 46 of the Government of India Act of 1935 and Section 289 of the same
Act.
This recommendation has been accepted by the joint
session of the Union Constitution and Provincial Constitution Committees, and
now it awaits being considered by the Constituent Assembly in the form of a
resolution. Immediately after its acceptance by the Constituent Assembly, the
Dominion Government of India will have to appoint a Commission charged with the
duty of redistributing the Provinces mentioned above.
It is expected that, once the Commission is
appointed, it can take up the question immediately and make its
recommendations, so that the new Provinces can be enumerated in the new
Constitution Act which is expected to emerge by the end of November 1947. The
appointment of a Boundary Commission and such other auxiliary bodies has to
follow, and, before the new elections take place by about the beginning of
1949, the new Provinces should be in a position to hold those elections and
operate as full-fledged new Provinces by the middle of 1949.
This is quite a rosy picture that I have drawn,
and, if all goes well, this is the course that events should take in this
particular respect. But it is always safer to be alert about such matters.
‘Eternal vigilance’ is a sound maxim, and it surely pays. Those who stand for
real democracy, for homogeneous Provinces, for a harmonious development of all
linguistic and cultural groups of people constituting the Indian Nation, and
for the highest contribution from each group in the Nation, ought to be up and
doing, so that linguistic and cultural homogeneous Provinces become a reality
within the next few months, thus paving the way for a new set-up calculated to
usher a new era.