After
independence, the issue of reorganization of States was taken up. The interest of his State was of paramount importance to
this leader who led from the front when the issue of demarcation of the state
boundaries came up at the dawn of independence. This demarcation had become
essential in the backdrop of the partition of the nation that divided the States of
Punjab and Bengal into two – one half of it going to Pakistan while the other
half remaining in India. As a result, the then Bengal Prime minister laid its
State claim on several Bengali speaking regions of Bihar. K. B. Sahay was
vehemently opposed to such re-distribution of the region on a linguistic basis.
He, therefore, opposed the move of the West Bengal Government. At the same
time, K. B. Sahay was a nationalist and a strict disciplinarian. He was willing
to accommodate wherever possible in the larger interest of the nation, provided
the interest of the state of Bihar was not compromised in the
process.
On
26th May 1948, when the issue of demarcation of States on a
linguistic basis came up for discussion in the Bihar Legislative Assembly, K.
B. Sahay put across the State’s viewpoint quite candidly- “Sir, the Government’s
attention has been drawn to a message from the Associated Press of India dated
Calcutta, May 20, 1948, published in a local English daily in its morning
edition of 21st May stating that the West Bengal Government have made a
representation to the Government of India for the inclusion on a linguistic
basis in West Bengal of certain areas of Bihar lying adjacent to that province.
The West Bengal Premier Dr B. C. Roy told pressmen that he had made the
representation in question at the request of his Cabinet. The Provincial
Government has decided to lodge a strong protest against this move of the West
Bengal Government before the proper authorities. If the Government of India
decides to examine the question of redistribution of provincial boundaries of
Bihar and West Bengal, the Provincial Government will put forward their claims
to areas of West Bengal which have not been included in Bihar because of the affinity
of language, culture and race of people inhabiting those areas. The Government
has received representation both from Manbhum and Singhbhum and other areas of
Bihar saying that the people would like to read Hindi. To counteract
effectively the linguistic argument of Bengal, the Government feels that Hindi
is the State language of the people of those areas and other areas should get
full facilities for learning Hindi. The Government shall not yield an
inch of Bihar territories to any other Government of the Indian Union. The
Government is already preparing a memorandum to claim the part of West Bengal
to Bihar which should legitimately form part of Bihar. We think that
every Bengali is a citizen of Bihar. We do not make any distinction
on account of speaking Bengali or Oriya or any other language. I
assure members that though the memorandum submitted by the West Bengal
Government to the Government of India is not in my hands, nevertheless, we
will never allow Purnea to become a part of West Bengal. When the
Government of India decides on redistribution of provinces, we will lodge our
protest and also lay our claim to the areas in Bengal for which the Provincial
Government is preparing a memorandum.”
K. B. Sahay’s deep-rooted love for
Bihar surfaced spectacularly during the linguistic agitation in Bihar and
Bengal. In 1955 Dr B. C. Roy, the then Chief Minister of Bengal succeeded in
obtaining clearance from the Congress High Command in the bifurcation of the
district of Manbhum and Purnea to stake a claim on Purulia and Kishanganj.
Entire Bihar was seething with acute resentment. K.B. Sahay threw in the
gauntlet and did not even care the wrath of the Congress High Command to
stubbornly put up Bihar’s claim, ignoring possible action that the party High
Command could have taken against him for defying its orders. The organizational
skills of K. B. Sahay and his fierce leadership style came to the fore when he
yoked the united efforts of all the political parties of Bihar in one solid
opposition block that forced the Congress High Command to heed to his argument.
When the matter came up for a discussion with the Government of India, K. B.
Sahay vociferously opposed the merger of Singhbhum, Manbhum and Purnea
districts into West Bengal. It was the result of his grit and determination
that these three districts remained in Bihar though a portion of areas from
Purnea comprising of Siliguri and Darjeeling and from Manbhum comprising of
Purulia went to West Bengal. The portion of the Manbhum district that remained
in Bihar became part of the Dhanbad district.
As a leader, K. B. Sahay had a very
broad vision and hence he opposed the idea of reconstitution of States on a
linguistic basis. He believed that such a decision would undermine
nationalistic fervour and result in sub-nationalism. People will pride
themselves in calling a Bengali, Gujarati, Marathi or a Tamil instead of
Indian. His prophecy proved correct in the post-independent India where we are
witness to numerous conflicts on the linguistic ground - those between Marathis
and Dravidians, between Hindi speaking North Indian States and Dravidian
language-based States of South India, between Bihari and Bhaiyas of
Uttar Pradesh on one hand and Shiv Sainiks of Maharashtra on the other.
(Source: Bihar Vidhan Sabha Debates)
No comments:
Post a Comment