Language politics resurges in Karnataka, Maharashtra over border dispute

It presents the opposition in both States a chance to use it against their respective governments.

Pro-Kannada protesters in Hire Bagewadi in Belagavi on December 6. | Photo Credit: By Special Arrangement

On December 14, Union Home Minister Amit Shah met Chief Ministers Basavaraj Bommai and Eknath Shinde in Delhi amid the escalating border row between Karnataka and Maharashtra. Addressing mediapersons after the meeting, Shah, flanked by the duo, sent out a strong message that the border dispute had to be resolved “through constitutional means” and that, till the “Supreme Court gives its verdict, no State will claim or generate demand for any territory as its own”. Shah also stated that a committee led by an Indian Police Service officer would monitor the security situation along the border and that three Ministers from each State would meet and discuss ways in which this message could be conveyed to the people in the two States.

The ongoing fracas between Karnataka and Maharashtra is over the status of Marathi and Kannada-speaking towns and villages along the border. The complex nature of the dispute, which has legal implications for the federal structure of the country, and the fervour of linguistic chauvinists on both sides mean that the issue will continue to simmer and may explode into violence at any time as previous incidents over the decades have shown. The latest bout of wrangling began in November following reports that the Supreme Court was considering a fresh hearing on a 2004 petition filed by Maharashtra. (The hearing by a three-judge bench, which was to happen on November 23, did not take place.)

Bommai took to Twitter to state that “there was no question of giving up any space in the border districts of Karnataka” and demanded the merger of Kannada-speaking areas in Maharashtra in Solapur and Sangli districts. Senior Maharashtra politicians such as Sharad Pawar of the Nationalist Congress Party responded by saying that Karnataka give up the regions of “Belgaum”, Nippani (both in Belagavi district of Karnataka), and Karwar (headquarters of Uttara Kannada district in Karnataka) to Maharashtra. (The Karnataka government had changed the name of Belgaum district and its headquarters bearing the same name to “Belagavi” in 2014 to reflect its pronunciation in Kannada, but Maharashtra politicians continue to refer to it as “Belgaum” emphasising the Marathi pronunciation).

More serious were the instances of violence and vandalism in the border areas by members of linguistic groups. A Belagavi college student was beaten up by his college mates for waving the Karnataka flag. In December, pro-Kannada groups blocked the highway connecting Belagavi to Maharashtra and Goa, while Maharashtra Ministers were prevented from entering Belagavi. Public transport vehicles from both States that regularly cross the border were vandalised. Seen in isolation, these events seem shockingly flagrant, but for long-time observers of this inter-State border dispute, this was not new.

Complicated issue

The origins of this controversy can be traced to 1956, when colonial-era provinces across India were reorganised on linguistic lines after the passage of the States Reorganisation Act. The modern State of Karnataka (which was known as Mysore till 1973) was formed in 1956 by combining Kannada-speaking regions of the erstwhile colonial provinces of Bombay and Madras, the princely state of Hyderabad, and the Chief Commissionerate of Coorg with the princely state of Mysore.

Marathi activists vandalise a KSRTC bus in Dhound village in Maharashtra on November 25. | Photo Credit: By Special Arrangement

Following the recommendations of the States Reorganisation Commission, 865 villages spread across 10 taluks bordering modern Maharashtra and the city of Belgaum (now Belagavi) became part of the newly formed Kannada State of Mysore. Marathi speakers in the region resented this, and their sentiments received a fillip when the State of Maharashtra (newly formed in 1960) supported their claims.

Mahajan Commission

Justice Mehr Chand Mahajan, a former Chief Justice of India, was chosen to lead a commission on October 25, 1966, to look into the Maharashtra government’s demands made in a memo to the Union Home Ministry. The commission interviewed more than 7,000 persons in 1967. While it recommended that some villages of Mysore could be transferred to Maharashtra and vice versa, it maintained that Belgaum city was to remain in Karnataka. With Maharashtra refusing to accept the commission’s recommendations, the Mahajan Commission report was not implemented. The Karnataka side still cites the report as the final word on the dispute.

Even decades later, politics in both States frequently bring up the border dispute. The Belagavi City Corporation (BCC) has a slight majority of Marathi speakers over Kannada speakers, and they have often courted controversy by boycotting the Rajyotsava Day annually on November 1 to mark the formation of Karnataka.

The BCC, in fact, serves as a stage for the language politics to be played out in the city as corporators are identified as belonging to Marathi- or Kannada-speaking camps. Marathi-speaking corporators have often accused the Karnataka government of denying the linguistic minorities their rights.

In 1980, Marathi speakers in Belgaum protested against the implementation of the Karnataka government-appointed V.K. Gokak Committee report, which advocated that Kannada should be made the language of instruction in primary schools. In 2006, the Karnataka government declared Belgaum as the second capital of Karnataka and began work on a grand legislative assembly modelled on the lines of the Vidhana Soudha in Bengaluru. Symbolically, the winter session of the State Legislative Assembly is held in the city.

In 2004, on the eve of a crucial election in Maharashtra, the Maharashtra government filed a suit in the Supreme Court staking its claim for Belgaum (Original Suit No. 4/2004), with the first respondent being the Union of India and the second respondent being the State of Karnataka.

The Maharashtra side argues that the Union of India acted arbitrarily during the 1956 linguistic reorganisation of States. It claims that if the village is taken as a unit, and factors such as linguistic majority and geographical contiguity are taken into consideration, Karnataka should part with the 865 villages that are now spread over the districts of Belagavi, Bidar, Kalaburagi and Uttara Kannada.

Union Home Minister Amit Shah flanked by Karnataka Chief Minister Basavaraj Bommai (to his left) and Maharashtra Chief Minister Eknath Shinde at a press conference after a meeting over the State border dispute, at Parliament Library, in New Delhi, on December 14. | Photo Credit: PTI

Karnataka argues that the village cannot be the basic unit and language cannot be the sole criterion of determining which State a region belongs to. A note prepared by the Karnataka-Maharashtra Border Dispute Special Legal Advisory Committee also refers to the S.K. Dar Commission of 1948, which states that provinces should be formed primarily on the basis of administrative convenience. It also adds a crucial point that linguistic minorities live happily in Karnataka.

Given the heightened emotions surrounding the dispute, a satisfactory resolution will be evasive even if the Supreme Court pronounces a verdict on Maharashtra’s suit. This is also dependent on whether the Maharashtra Ekikaran Samiti (MES), a political party based in Belagavi with the sole agenda of integrating Marathi-speaking parts along the border with Maharashtra, retains popular support in the area.

Commentators say it is now impossible to change the boundaries of the two States as it would open a slew of similar demands from across the country. But the border imbroglio, in which both Marathi and Kannada language chauvinists have a passionate stake, also provides space for politicians in both States to indulge in periodic sabre-rattling to enhance their images in their home States.

In Maharashtra, constituents of the Maha Vikas Aghadi coalition have used the opportunity to target Shinde, while in Karnataka, the Bommai government’s belligerent stance is attributed to claims that it has not been aggressive enough in its disavowal of Hindi. The Union government will attempt to soothe sentiments on both sides as the Bharatiya Janata Party is in power in both States (the party is in alliance with the Shinde-led Balasahebanchi Shiv Sena in Maharashtra).

The Crux

• The Maharashtra-Karnataka border dispute erupted again following reports that the Supreme Court was considering a fresh hearing on a 2004 petition filed by Maharashtra.
• Karnataka wants the merger of Kannada-speaking areas in Maharashtra in Solapur and Sangli districts.
• Maharashtra wants Karnataka to give up the regions of “Belgaum”, Nippani (both in Belagavi district of Karnataka), and Karwar (headquarters of Uttara Kannada district in Karnataka) to Maharashtra.
• Justice Mehr Chand Mahajan, a former Chief Justice of India, was chosen to lead a commission on October 25, 1966, to look into the Maharashtra government’s demands made in a memo to the Union Home Ministry. It recommended that some villages of Mysore could be transferred to Maharashtra and vice versa, but maintained that Belgaum city was to remain in Karnataka.
• With Maharashtra refusing to accept the commission’s recommendations, the Mahajan Commission report was not implemented. The Karnataka side still cites the report as the final word on the dispute.