The Linguistic Organisation Of The States

The Linguistic Organisation of The States

The princely states' territories were politically integrated into the Indian Union between 1947 and 1950. The majority were merged into existing provinces; others were organized into new provinces made up of multiple princely states, such as Rajputana, Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Bharat, and Vindhya Pradesh; and a few, such as Mysore, Hyderabad, Bhopal, and Bilaspur, became separate provinces. Until a new Constitution was adopted, India's constitutional law was the Government of India Act 1935. The new Indian Constitution, which took effect on January 26, 1950, established India as a sovereign democratic republic. A "Union of States" was also declared for the new republic. 
 

The 1950 constitution distinguished four different types of states: 

1.    An elected governor and state legislature ruled nine Part A states, which were the former governors' provinces of British India. 
 
2.    The eight Part B states were princely states or groups of princely states that were governed by a raj pramukh and an elected legislature. The President of India appointed the rajpramukh. 
 
3.    The ten Part C states were governed by a chief commissioner appointed by the President of India, and included both former chief commissioners' provinces and some princely states. 
 
4.    The Andaman and Nicobar Islands were the only Part D state, and they were governed by a lieutenant governor appointed by the central government.
 

Movement for linguistic states prior to independence:  

•    The demand for linguistic states arose even before India's independence from British rule. Lokmanya Tilak was perhaps the first national leader to recognize the importance of language diversity and to urge the Congress to begin working in vernacular languages; he also advocated for linguistic reorganization of the provinces.
 
•    The decision of the Indian National Congress's All India Congress Committee on April 8, 1917, to form a separate Congress Province (Andhra Provincial Congress Committee) from the Telugu-speaking districts of the Madras Presidency bolstered the case for linguistic reorganization of British India provinces. 
 
•    Several Indian leaders had already reached an agreement in British India that the language of governance and education should be the dominant language of the people for effective administration, and that provinces should be reorganised along linguistic lines for this purpose. 
 
•    When the proposal to reorganize the provincial committees on linguistic lines came before the AICC in 1917, Gandhi thought otherwise. 
 
•    Gandhi thought the issue could wait until the British-initiated Reforms were implemented, but Lokamanya Tilak saw the point, namely, that Linguistic Provinces were a necessary condition for true Provincial autonomy. 
 
•    When Bengal was partitioned in 1905, the first generation of freedom fighters recognized the importance of linguistic states. The democratic effects of language-based administrative units were well-known in European capitalism. 
 
•    In India, British colonial rule created multilingual administrative territories. H S Risley, the then home secretary, proposed the division of Bengal in a note to the Crown in December 1903, and Lord Curzon did divide Bengal, a linguistically homogeneous unit, into two religiously heterogeneous units, in order to quell the independence movement. 
 
•    This colonial administrative action, on the other hand, assisted Bengali speakers in learning to think in terms of linguistic unity. The movement for the reunification of Bengal also sparked a movement in India's eastern region to reorganized provinces based on language. 
 
•    Finally, the colonial administration was forced to reverse the religious bifurcation of Bengal, while carving out Assam and Bihar as separate provinces on a linguistic basis in 1911. The acceptance of federalism by the Indian National Congress's Lucknow session in 1916, however, sparked demands for several such states. 
 
The Linguistic Organisation of The States
•    The AICC demanded a Telugu-speaking state carved out of the Madras Presidency on April 8, 1917, based on the recommendation of its Lucknow session. The Home Rule movement also emphasized the need for linguistic provinces to be established. This movement was, in fact, a watershed moment in the reorganizations of linguistically homogeneous areas.
 
•    Following that, the Congress accepted the creation of linguistic states in principle at its Nagpur session in 1920. In this spirit, the Congress first took steps to organize their provincial committees according to linguistic criteria. The process that began with the formation of a separate Linguistic Circle of the Indian National Congress for Telugu-speaking territory became a fundamental principle for the recognition of various populations' linguistic identities in order to carve out administrative units in India. 
 
•    In relation to the demands for Self-Government, language had yet to be given a more serious and detailed examination. The importance of the Indian vernacular for mass-based agitations and mass communication was recognized from the beginning of the Indian National Congress's history, but the demand for its use in administration and education did not begin to be seriously debated until the 1920s, when Gandhi became its supreme leader. 
 
•    The Nehru Committee submitted its own report in 1928 in response to the Simon Commission's observation. This committee, presided over by Motilal Nehru and comprised of Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru, Sir Ali Imam, Subhash Chandra Bose, and others, represented various trends in the freedom movement, and its report for the first time formally incorporated the demand for linguistic reorganizations of the provinces.
 
•    Due to the efforts of Madhusudan Das, Odisha was the first Indian state to be formed on linguistic grounds in 1936, and it became Orissa Province. The linguistic movement in Odisha began in 1895 and grew stronger later with the demand for a separate province from Bihar and Orissa. 
 
•    Meanwhile, on the ground, aspirations for such states within India's borders have piqued people's interest. The Congress later formally adopted this principle and included it in its election manifesto. 
 
•    Prime Minister Nehru accepted the principle underlying the demand for linguistic provinces on behalf of the Indian government in the Constituent Assembly (Legislative) on November 27, 1947. After independence, however, many leaders changed their minds about language-based states, fearing further division on the basis of language.
 

Movement for linguistic states after independence:

•    Following the re-establishment of independence Political movements aimed at establishing new linguistic-based states arose. 
 
•    The Congress-led government was concerned that states formed solely on the basis of linguistic differences would be unsuitable and could even jeopardize national unity. This fear arose primarily as a result of India's partition. During the interim, campaigns for Ayikya Kerala, Samyukta Maharashtra, and Vishalandhra gained traction. 
 
•    The Communist Party of India was at the forefront of forming these movements and popularizing the concept of linguistic states in India, as well as their effectiveness in democratizing independent India. Andhra Pradesh as a separate linguistic state became a contentious issue. 
 
•    The government of India stated in the Constituent Assembly that Andhra Pradesh could be mentioned as a separate unit in the new constitution, prompting the drafting committee to form a separate committee to investigate the demands of linguistic states. 
 
•    The Dhar commission was established with the mission of investigating and reporting on the formation of new provinces in Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, and Maharashtra.
 

Linguistic Commission 

A.    Dar Commission

•    The Linguistic Provinces Commission was established on June 17, 1948, by Rajendra Prasad, the President of the Constituent Assembly, to recommend whether the states should be reorganized on a linguistic basis or not. 
 
•    SK Dar (retired Allahabad High Court Judge), JN Lal (lawyer), and Panna Lal were among the members of the committee (retired Indian Civil Service officer). 
 
•    The Commission recommended in its 10 December 1948 report that “forming provinces solely or even primarily on linguistic considerations is not in the larger interests of the Indian nation.” “Bilingual districts in border areas that have developed an economic and organic life of their own should not be broken up and should be disposed of on the basis of their own special needs,” the commission continued. 
 
•    The commission recommended that India's states be reorganized based on geographical continuity, financial self-sufficiency, administrative convenience, and future development capacity.
 

B.    The JVP committee: 

•    Shortly after the report was released, the Congress established the "JVP committee" to study the Dar Commission's recommendations at its Jaipur session. In addition to Congress president Pattabhi Sitaramayya, the committee included Jawaharlal Nehru and Vallabhbhai Patel. 
 
•    The committee shifted the focus away from language to security, unity, and economic prosperity, reversing the party's own election platform. This may have been influenced by the situation that existed immediately following the partition. Supporting "such federal demands," as Patel put it, would obstruct India's growth as a nation, according to the three-member committee. 
 
•    The Committee stated in its report dated 1 April 1949 that the time was not appropriate for the formation of new provinces, but that “if public sentiment is insistent and overwhelming, we, as democrats, must submit to it, subject to certain limitations in regard to the good of India as a whole.”
 

Views of National leaders-

•    B.R. Ambedkar submitted a Memorandum to the Dar Commission on October 14, 1948, supporting the formation of linguistic provinces, specifically the formation of a Marathi-majority Maharashtra state with Bombay as its capital. To address the issue of national unity, he proposed that every province's official language be the same as the central government's official language. “One state, one language” was supported by Ambedkar, but not “One language, one state.” 
 
•    KM Munshi is a Gujarati leader who opposes the proposed Maharashtra state's inclusion of Bombay. He was against the linguistic reorganisation plan, claiming that "a linguistic group's political ambition can only be satisfied by the exclusion and discrimination of other linguistic groups within the area." 
 
•    There are no safeguards or fundamental rights that can protect them from the psychological exclusion that linguism implies.” 
 
•    Nehru saw the dangers of linguistic chauvinism as clearly as he saw the dangers of communalism. Given the Congress's support for linguistic provinces more than 30 years ago, Nehru and Patel fought a last-ditch effort to avoid the inevitable. V.K. Krishna Menon, a close confidant of Nehru, claimed that the demand for a Malayalam-speaking state was a recent and artificial one backed only by parties seeking "conquest of power." 
 
•    Krishna Menon claimed that the States Re-organisation Commission's anticipated recommendation to create separate Kerala and Tamil States was influenced by the personal views of one of the Commission's members (K. M. Panikkar), and that the recommendation was unwise for economic, political, administrative, strategic, and national security reasons. 
 
•    He argued that, because a fascist-oriented sectarian sub-nationalism was emerging in the Tamil country, a separate Tamil province would be anti-national, while Kerala State would almost certainly become Communist after the next general elections, with disastrous domestic and international consequences. 
 

Andhra Pradesh: The first linguistic state

•    The Communist Party of India and the Andhra Mahasabha were mobilising the masses in the princely state of Hyderabad against the Nizam's rule at the time. 
 
•    One of the slogans of the Andhra Mahasabha was the formation of a separate state of Vishalandhra, consisting of all Telugu-speaking people scattered across three regions. This slogan drew the attention of the public as the movement progressed. 
 
•    The majority of landlords and razakars opposed Vishalandhra's formation and backed the Hyderabad commissioner because it would protect their property rights.
 

Potti Sri Ramulu

•    The Telangana struggle, which lasted from 1946 to 1951, reintroduced the key issues of land reform and linguistic states to the national agenda, forcing the federal government to finally address them. The Congress paid a high price for the entire situation. 
 
•    The Telugu people elected those who fought for Vishalandhra with landslide victories in the first general elections, held in 1952. The Congress has a slim chance of winning 43 of the 140 seats available in the Madras legislative assembly. 
 
•    Despite some difficulties, the Congress imposed Rajagopalachari as chief minister on the province, effectively scuttling any chances of a non-Congress government forming in undivided Madras, which would have been the first non-Congress government in independent India. 
 
•    With the overwhelming support of the Telugu people for Vishalandhra, P Sundarayya introduced a private member's bill in parliament on July 16, 1952, calling for the formation of a linguistic Andhra state. 
 
•    “Rather than with this kind of multilingual states, the country will be more united once the linguistic reorganizations of states is done,” Sundarayya said in his speech.
 
•    The situation will become more volatile if these demands are not met. Sundarayya also tried to assuage Nehru's concerns about the newly independent India's security and integrity by saying, "Rather than being a threat to the country's integrity, the linguistic states can support and consolidate national security and integrity in a much more effective way." 
 
•    Nehru and the Congress, on the other hand, were not convinced, and Nehru refused to give in to the demand. 
 
•    Potti Sri Ramulu, a prominent Congress leader from the Andhra region, died after 58 days of fasting, dissatisfied with Congress inaction on the demand. The death of Sri Ramulu threw Andhra Pradesh into chaos. 
 
•    The central government was forced to give in to the demand as a result of the widespread and intense protests, and on September 2, 1953, a bill was introduced in parliament to that end. The government was careful not to use the term "linguistic state" at the time. 
 
•    In 1953, the 16 northern Telugu-speaking districts of Madras State were united to form the new state of Andhra Pradesh. This sparked riots across the country, with various linguistic groups demanding their own states. 
 
•    Finally, Nehru had to concede to popular sentiments and announce the formation of Andhra Rashtram with undisputed 14 districts on the floor of the Lok Sabha. 
 
•    As a result of the bifurcation of Madras province on October 1, 1953, the new state of Andhra Rashtram was formed. (However, the Hyderabad regions of Telugu-speaking areas, which we refer to as Telangana, were left out.) 
 
•    The establishment of Andhra Rashtram bolstered the fight for Vishalandhra (which would encompass all Telugu-speaking areas), as well as United Kerala and Samyukta Maharashtra. 
 
•    The Nehru government, in response to public pressure and mass mobilisation, established the States Reorganization Commission (SRC), also known as the Fazal Ali Commission.
 

C.    Fazl Ali Commission or State Reorganizations Commission (SRC): 

•    The State Reorganizations Commission (SRC), chaired by Fazl Ali, a former Supreme Court judge, was established by the Indian government to reorganize the states. H. N. Kunzru and K. M. Panikkar were the commission's other two members. Govind Ballabh Pant, the Home Minister from December 1954 to December 1955, was in charge of the commission's efforts. 
 
•    On September 30, 1955, the Commission issued its report, which included the following recommendations: 
1.    The three-tiered state system (Part-A/B/C) should be abolished. 
2.    The Rajapramukh institution should be abolished, as should special agreements with former princely states.
3.    The Article 371 general control vested in the Government of India should be repealed. 
4.    Only Andaman and Nicobar, Delhi, and Manipur should be considered Union Territories.
 

The 1956 States Reorganization Act: 

•    The States Reorganizations Act of 1956 was a landmark law that reorganized India's states and territories along linguistic lines. Despite subsequent changes to India's state boundaries since 1956, the States Reorganizations Act of 1956 remains the single most significant change in state boundaries since India's independence in 1947. 
 
•    The Act was enacted at the same time as the Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956, which restructured the constitutional framework for India's existing states, as well as the requirements to pass the States Reorganizations Act, 1956 under Articles 3 and 4 of the constitution. 
 
•    The distinction between Part A, Part B, Part C, and Part D states was abolished by the Seventh Amendment. The distinction between Part A and Part B states was abolished, and the term "states" was coined. The classification of a Part C or Part D state was replaced by a new type of entity known as a union territory. 
 
•    On November 1, another Act went into effect, transferring certain territories from Bihar to West Bengal. Some of the SRC's recommendations were implemented by the States Reorganization Act of 1956. It also established Laccadive, Minicoy, and Amindivi Islands, Himachal Pradesh, and Tripura as UTs, in addition to the three proposed by the SRC. 
 
•    In addition to these UTs, it established a total of 14 states. Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Bombay, Jammu and Kashmir, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Madras, Mysore, Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, and West Bengal were among the states that were involved.
 
•    The act established five zonal councils, one each for the northern, central, eastern, western, and southern zone states, with the goal of promoting cooperation among them. 
 
•    The president appointed a union minister to each zonal council, which included the chief ministers of states in the zones, two ministers from each state in the zone, one member from each union territory nominated by the president (if such a territory was included in the zone), and the advisor to the Governor of Assam in the case of the eastern zone.
 

From 1956 to Present Division:

A.    Maharashtra and Gujarat: The states of Maharashtra and Gujarat were created by bifurcating the state of Bombay in 1960 as a result of agitation and violence (in the Mahagujarat Movement, Bombay State was reorganised on linguistic lines). 
 
B.    The Indian states gained 15 territories from France and Portugal as a result of this. Following the acquisition of Chandernagore, Mahe, Yaman, and Karikal from France, and Goa, Daman, and Diu from the Portuguese, these territories were either merged with neighboring states or given union territory status. 
 
C.    The Portuguese ruled Dadra and Nagar Haveli until 1954, when it was liberated. Following that, until 1961, the administration was carried out by a person chosen by the people themselves. By the 10th Constitutional Amendment Act of 1961, it was made a union territory of India. 
 
D.    In 1961, India took over the Portuguese territories of Goa, Daman, and Diu through a police action. The 12th Constitutional Amendment Act of 1962 established them as a union territory. Goa was later granted statehood in 1987. As a result, Daman and Diu were designated as a separate union territory. Puducherry is a territory in India that includes the former French settlements of Puducherry, Karaikal, Mahe, and Yanam. 
 
E.    In 1954, the French handed over this territory to India. It was then administered as a "acquired territory" until 1962, when the 14th Constitutional Amendment Act made it a union territory. 
 
F.    Nagaland was established in 1963 to appease the Nagas by separating the Naga Hills and Tuensang area from Assam. However, it was placed under the control of the Governor of Assam in 1961 before being granted the status of a full-fledged state. The strength of the Indian states increased to 16 as a result of this.
 
G.    Haryana, Chandigarh, and Himachal Pradesh were formed as a result of the Shah Commission. -After a campaign for the formation of Punjabi Subah, the Punjab Reorganization Act was passed by Parliament in 1966. The Shah Commission, which was appointed in April 1966, recommended that this action be taken. 
 
•    As a result of this act, the Punjabi-speaking areas were merged with the adjoining Union Territory of Himachal Pradesh to form the state of Haryana, and the hilly areas were merged with the adjoining Union Territory of Himachal Pradesh to form the state of Himachal Pradesh. 
 
•    Chandigarh was designated as a Union Territory with the intention of serving as the joint capital of Punjab and Haryana. A common High Court, a common university, and a joint management arrangement for the major components of the existing irrigation and power system were also planned for the two states. The strength of states increased to 17 after the division of Punjab.
 
H.    Manipur, Tripura, and Meghalaya- The two Union Territories of Manipur and Tripura, as well as the Sub-State of Meghalaya, were granted statehood in 1972, and the two union territories of Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh (originally known as the North-East Frontier Agency—NEFA) were established. 
 
•    With this, the Indian Union's total number of states has risen to 21. (Manipur 19th, Tripura 20th and Meghalaya 21st). Initially, the 22nd Constitutional Amendment Act (1969) established Meghalaya as a "autonomous state" or "sub-state" within Assam, with its own legislature and ministerial council. Assam's territories were also used to create the union territories of Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh.
 
I.    Sikkim was an Indian princely state ruled by Chogyal until 1947. Following the end of British supremacy in 1947, Sikkim became a ‘protectorate' of India, with the Indian government taking responsibility for the state's defense, external affairs, and communications. 
 
•    Sikkim expressed its desire for closer ties with India in 1974. As a result, parliament passed the 35th Constitutional Amendment Act (1974). By designating Sikkim as a "associate state" of the Indian Union, this amendment created a new category of statehood under the constitution.
 
•     A new Article 2A and a new schedule (the Tenth Schedule, which contains the terms and conditions of association) were added to the Constitution for this purpose. In a referendum held in 1975, the people of Sikkim voted for the abolition of the Chogyal institution and for Sikkim's integration into India. 
 
•    To make Sikkim a full member of the Indian Union, the 36th Constitutional Amendment Act (1975) was passed (the 22nd state). The Constitution's First and Fourth Schedules were amended, and a new Article 371-F was added to provide for certain special provisions relating to Sikkim's administration. It also repealed the 35th Amendment Act of 1974's additions of Article 2A and the Tenth Schedule.
 
J.    Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh, and Goa- Three new states, Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh, and Goa, were established in 1987 as the 23rd, 24th, and 25th states, respectively. 
 
•    The Mizoram Union Territory was elevated to the status of a full state in 1986, following the signing of a memorandum of understanding (Mizoram Peace Accord) between the Central government and the Mizo National Front, which put an end to the two-decade-long insurgency. 
 
•    Since 1972, Arunachal Pradesh has also been a union territory. 
 
•    The territory of Goa was separated from the Union Territory of Goa, Daman, and Diu to form the State of Goa. Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, and Jharkhand are three states in India. In the year 2000, the states of Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, and Jharkhand were formed from the former states of Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, and Bihar. 
 
•    These became the Indian Union's 26th, 27th, and 28th states, respectively. After the division of Andhra Pradesh, Telangana became India's 29th state.
 
K.    In 1950, the United Provinces was renamed ‘Uttar Pradesh.' Madras was renamed Tamil Nadu in 1969. Mysore was renamed ‘Karnataka' in 1973, and the islands of Laccadive, Minicoy, and Amindivi were renamed ‘Lakshadweep'. The 69th Constitutional Amendment Act of 1991 renamed the Union Territory of Delhi as the National Capital Territory of Delhi (without conferring the status of a full-fledged state) in 1992. Uttaranchal was renamed Uttarakhand in 2006, while Pondicherry was renamed Puducherry. Orissa was renamed ‘Odisha' in 2011.
 
L.    The Indian parliament approved the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014 in early 2014, and Telangana became India's 29th state on June 2, 2014. Violations of this agreement are cited as one of the reasons for Telangana's separation from the rest of the country. 
 

MINORITY LANGUAGES

•    The status of minority languages has been an important aspect of the language problem. Unilingual states were impossible to create, regardless of how their borders were drawn. As a result, in linguistically reorganised states, a large number of linguistic minorities, or those who speak a language other than the state's main or official language, continue to exist. 
 
•    Nearly 18% of India's population does not speak the official language of the states in which they live as their first language. On this point, there is, of course, a great deal of variation among the states. According to the 1971 census, linguistic minorities made up 4 percent of the total population in Kerala, 34 percent in Karnataka, 3.9 percent in Assam, and 44.5 percent in Jammu and Kashmir.
 
•    The status and rights of these minorities in their respective states have been a major point of contention since the beginning. On the one hand, there was the issue of their protection, as there was always the risk that they would be treated unfairly, and on the other, there was the need to promote their integration with a state's major language group.
 
•    A linguistic minority needed assurance that it would not be discriminated against by the majority, and that its language and culture would survive and develop. At the same time, the majority needed assurance that meeting the needs of the linguistic minority would not lead to separatist sentiments or demands, and that the minorities would develop a sense of loyalty to the state.
 
•    In order to address this issue, the Constitution granted linguistic minorities certain fundamental rights. Article 30 states, for example, that “all minorities, whether based on religion or language, shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice” and, more importantly, that “the state shall not, in granting aid to educational institutions, discriminate against any educational institution on the ground that it is managed by a minority, whether based on religion or language.” 
 
•    Article 347 states that if a minority makes a request, the President may order that the minority's language be officially recognized throughout the state or any part of it for the purposes he specifies. Since 1956, when a constitutional amendment was passed, the official policy has been to provide instruction in the mother tongue in primary and secondary schools where there are enough children to form a class. 
 
•    The amendment also establishes a Commissioner for Linguistic Minorities, who will investigate and report on the implementation of these safeguards on a regular basis. Overall, the federal government has tended to play a positive role in defending minorities' rights, but the implementation of minority safeguards falls under the purview of state governments, and thus varies from state to state.
 
•    Despite some progress in a few states, the situation of linguistic minorities in the majority of them remains unsatisfactory. The constitutional safeguards have frequently been disregarded. In his reports, the Commissioner for Linguistic Minorities has noted numerous cases of discrimination against linguistic minorities in matters of schooling, admission to technical and medical institutions, and employment in the state public sector due to a lack of proficiency in the state's official language. 
 
•    However, one redeeming feature is that primary education in the minority's mother tongue is frequently provided, albeit with insufficient resources in terms of qualified teachers and textbooks. However, there is a notable exception in the case of tribal minority languages, which has been a complete failure.
 

Position of Urdu

The Linguistic Organisation of The States
•    Urdu is a unique case among minority languages. It is India's most widely spoken minority language. In 1951, Urdu was spoken by nearly 23.3 million people. Urdu speakers made up significant percentages of the population in Uttar Pradesh (10.5 percent), Bihar (8.8%), Maharashtra (7.2 percent), Andhra Pradesh (7.5 percent), and Karnataka (7.5 percent) (9). Furthermore, Urdu was claimed as the mother tongue by an overwhelming majority of Muslims, India's largest religious minority. Urdu is also recognized as one of India's national languages, and it is listed in the Constitution's Eighth Schedule.
 
•    While nearly all of India's major languages were also the official languages of one or more states, Urdu was not one of them, with the exception of Jammu and Kashmir, where the mother tongues were Kashmiri, Dogri, and Ladakhi in any case. As a result, there was no official support for Urdu in any part of the country.
 
•    On the contrary, it was met with official hostility and discrimination in both Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. We can briefly discuss the case of Uttar Pradesh, though the situation in Bihar was similar. The government of Uttar Pradesh decided early on to make Hindi the state's only official language; the ruse was that Hindi and Urdu were not two distinct languages, so there was no need to make Urdu a second official language! 
 
•    In practice, Urdu has been phased out of many primary schools. Its use as a teaching tool was also becoming increasingly limited. For example, only 3.69 percent of primary school students received Urdu instruction in 1979-80, whereas 10.5 percent of primary school students spoke Urdu in 1981. In addition, the Hindi protagonists began to remove Urdu words from written Hindi.
 
•    Urdu speakers were adamant in their demand that Urdu be recognized as the second official language in states where it was widely spoken, particularly in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. The Uttar Pradesh government was equally consistent and successful in opposing the demand, citing the States Reorganization Commission's recommendation that a language be spoken by at least 30% of the population in a state before it could be designated as a second official or regional language. 
 
•    Jawaharlal Nehru, in particular, was a strong supporter of Urdu and a harsh critic of the anti-Urdu thinking and activities of a large number of people in northern India, including Congressmen. 
 
•    He requested that the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh declare Urdu as a second official language in districts where it was widely spoken and to provide it with all the benefits of a minority language in other areas. Even when Nehru was successful in persuading the U.P. government to agree to take certain steps in this regard, their implementation was lax. 
 
•    On the grounds that such a step might lead to communal riots, the Uttar Pradesh government refused to pass legislation giving legal sanctity to the rights granted to Urdu. 
 
•    Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka governments were more supportive of Urdu. Urdu has been recognized as an additional language for the Telengana region in Andhra Pradesh since 1968. In both states, adequate facilities are provided for Urdu instruction at the primary school level and for Urdu instruction at the secondary school level.
 
•    There are two other aspects of Urdu's position worth mentioning. 
a.    The Urdu issue has become entangled with the communal issue. Many Hindu communalists are hostile to it because of their anti-Muslim ideological position, while many Muslims regard it as the language of their community. 
 
b.    Despite widespread hostility and official neglect, Urdu continues to thrive in terms of literary output, journals, and newspapers, as well as the language of films and television, owing to its inherent vigor and cultural roots among Indians.

Any suggestions or correction in this article - please click here

Share this Post:

Related Posts: