Copyright infringement not intended

Picture Courtesy:  INDIAN EXPRESS

Context

Tamil Nadu Governor has criticised the linguistic division of states, claiming it has turned a large section of the population into "second-class citizens."

Linguistic Reorganization of States

After gaining independence, the country faced the task of consolidating hundreds of princely states and provinces into a unified nation. The existing administrative map, largely a legacy of British rule, did not align with the linguistic realities on the ground.  

Dhar Commission (1948) 

In 1948, the Government established the Linguistic Provinces Commission, known as the Dhar Commission, under the chairmanship of Justice S.K. Dhar. 

• Its mandate was to examine the feasibility of organising states along linguistic lines. 

The Commission rejected language as the primary basis for state reorganisation. Instead, it recommended administrative convenience, geographical contiguity, financial self-reliance, and potential for development as the key criteria for state formation. 

JVP Committee (1949)

The Dhar Commission's report generated public dissatisfaction, especially in regions with strong linguistic movements like Madras. In response, the Indian National Congress formed the JVP Committee in December 1948, comprising Jawaharlal Nehru, Vallabhbhai Patel, and Pattabhi Sitaramayya.

This committee also rejected the linguistic basis for state reorganisation, prioritising national security, unity, and economic prosperity.

Potti Sriramulu's Fast & Andhra State (1953)

Potti Sriramulu, a devoted Gandhian, became a pivotal figure in this movement. He undertook a fast-unto-death, demanding a separate Telugu-speaking state, Andhra, to be carved out of the Madras Presidency. 

• He began his fast in October 1952, in Madras. Sriramulu's fast continued for 56 days, and he died in December 1952. 
• His death sparked widespread riots and protests across the Telugu-speaking regions, compelling Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru to announce the formation of Andhra State on December 19, 1952.
• On October 1, 1953, Andhra State officially formed with Kurnool as its capital, becoming India's first state created on a linguistic basis.

This event influenced the government's approach to state reorganisation.

States Reorganisation Commission (1953)

The government appointed the States Reorganisation Commission (SRC) to examine the issue of state boundaries. This three-member commission included Justice Fazl Ali (Chairman), K.M. Panikkar, and H.N. Kunzru.

• The SRC submitted its report in 1955. It accepted language as a factor in state reorganisation but unequivocally rejected the strict "one language, one state" principle.
• The Commission also considered other vital factors like national unity and security, administrative efficiency, and financial viability. They proposed the creation of 16 states and 3 centrally administered territories.

States Reorganisation Act, 1956

The Parliament passed the States Reorganisation Act in August 1956, based on the SRC's recommendations, with some modifications. This Act came into effect on November 1, 1956. 

• The Act led to the creation of 14 states and 6 Union Territories.  
• The Act also added a new Article 350A to the Constitution, which addressed safeguards for linguistic minorities, mandating primary education in the mother tongue.

Consequences of linguistic reorganisation 

Positive Impacts

• Enhanced Democracy & Administration => Language-based states brought administrative convenience, enable governments to communicate and implement policies more effectively with citizens in their native tongues. 
• This deepened democratic participation and promoted good governance.
• Cultural Preservation & Development => New states provided a platform for the growth and development of regional languages and cultures. 
• Governments promoted vernacular literature, arts, and education, leading to a cultural renaissance in many regions.
• Initial Reduction of Separatism => By accommodating linguistic aspirations, the reorganisation initially defused several separatist movements, strengthening the bond between regions and the Indian Union.

Negative Impacts

• Rise of Regionalism & "Son-of-the-Soil" Doctrine => Claiming the preferential rights of a region's indigenous or long-term residents, particularly for jobs and resources.
• Leads to discrimination against "outsiders" or migrants from other states, sparking conflicts over employment and identity. Examples include movements by Shiv Sena in Maharashtra against non-Marathis, conflicts in Assam against Bengali migrants, and in Karnataka regarding employment for locals. 
• Persistent Border Disputes => Drawing of new state boundaries left certain linguistic groups on the "wrong" side of the border, leading to ongoing inter-state border disputes.
  • Karnataka assert Belagavi's historical and administrative connection to Karnataka. 
  • The Mahajan Commission (1966) recommended that Belagavi remain with Karnataka while proposing exchanges of other villages, but Maharashtra rejected. The dispute has been pending before the Supreme Court since 2004.
• Example: Maharashtra-Karnataka (Belagavi) Border Dispute has its roots in the 1956 State Reorganisation Act. Maharashtra claims 865 villages, including Belagavi, Carvar, and Nipani, arguing they have a Marathi-speaking majority. 
• Linguistic Minority Issues => Many linguistic minorities found themselves within states dominated by another language group.
  • Article 350A mandates that every state must provide adequate facilities for instruction in the mother tongue at the primary stage of education for children belonging to linguistic minority groups.
  • Article 350B provides for a Special Officer for Linguistic Minorities, appointed by the President. The officer's duty is to investigate matters related to the safeguards for linguistic minorities and report to the President.
  • Article 29 protects the right of any section of citizens to conserve their distinct language, script, or culture.
  • Article 30 grants religious and linguistic minorities the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.
• Constitution provides specific safeguards for linguistic minorities:

• Intensified Inter-State Water Disputes => Formation of states with distinct identities has heightened existing inter-state disputes over shared resources, particularly river waters.  
• The Cauvery Water Dispute involves Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and Puducherry over the sharing of Cauvery River waters. Its origins trace back to agreements from 1892 and 1924 between Mysore and Madras Presidency.  

Demands for New States: Developmental Basis

The creation of newer states like Jharkhand, Uttarakhand, Chhattisgarh (2000) and Telangana (2014) emphasises a transition from purely linguistic demands to those based on developmental disparities, cultural distinctiveness, administrative efficiency, and historical grievances. 

Demands for states like Vidarbha (Maharashtra), Gorkhaland (West Bengal), Bodoland (Assam), and Poorvanchal (Uttar Pradesh) continue, quoting economic backwardness, distinct cultural identities, or administrative neglect as reasons.

Parliament holds the sole constitutional power to create new states or alter boundaries under Article 3.

Conclusion

The linguistic reorganisation of states achieved a balance between a strong, united nation and the democratic aspirations of linguistic communities, which allowed various linguistic groups to flourish while remaining a part of the larger Union. 

Must Read Articles: 

Three-language Policy Controversy

Source: INDIAN EXPRESS