Wednesday, 15 February 2017

Demonetisation and Non Resident (Gujarati) Indians.

Being a Gujarati, the issues affecting Non Resident Indians affect me particularly because Gujaratis, for being better placed geographically have a long history in foreign soils, trade and travels.  To get an idea of the extent of trade and travels from Gujarat, I quote a paragraph from the book, ‘the shaping of modern Gujarat’, by Achyutbhai Yagnik and Suchitra Sheth as follows:


‘...Gujarat’s strategic location within Asia and its ports along the northern centre of the Indian Ocean placed it at the interaction of a number of trading sections and proved propitious to Gujarati merchants. They profited from the overland interregional trade of Asia across the subcontinent and within the western region. But their greatest wealth came from maritime trade, both along the coast and across the seas in ships propelled eastwards and westwards by the monsoon winds. One quarter of India’s coastline is in Gujarat...Silk from China, horses from Arabia, ivory and slaves from Africa, cloth and indigo from Gujarat itself, opium and grain from the north, spices from southern India  and the Far East, to name just a few commodities passed through these ports for centuries.  Local communities of skilled ship builders, navigators and craftspeople contributed to the prosperity of enterprising merchants and traders. The sweep of this maritime network is summed up by Tome Piers, a fifteenth century Portuguese traveller: ‘Cambay [i.e. Gujarat] chiefly stretches out two arms, with her right arm she reaches out towards Aden and with the other towards Malacca...”...Gujarati Merchants travelled to West Asia, Africa, South India and eastern edges of the Indian Ocean, creating a diaspora consisting of kith and kin networks in the ports of Indian Ocean littoral...Maritime activity goes back almost four millennia to the days of Indus valley civilization...”


The spread of Gujarati community across the globe has been so vast that there is a popular saying in Gujarati- ‘Jya na pohche koi, tya pohche eek Gujarati’. This means, where no one reaches, it is there that a Gujarati will reach! Gujarati business, trade and travels far and wide has also greatly influenced Gujarati literature and some of the famous writers have based many of their novels and poems on such travels across the seas such as, ‘dariyalal, haji kasam tari vijli, dariya na khole, mehraman no mobhi’, and so on. 


The non resident Gujaratis settled all over the world therefore have had far reaching influence and impact on the life and economy of Gujarat for several centuries now. 


Like every Gujarati, Mr. Narendra Modi is well aware of this fact and is also aware of the extent of the spread and clout of the Indian as well as the Gujarati community across the globe. Hence, soon after becoming the Prime Minister of India, while travelling across the world, Mr. Modi when was given overwhelming welcome by NRIs in general and Gujarati NRIs in particular, these events were highly publicized to his great advantage back home.    


Therefore when in November 2016, Mr. Modi announced demonetization, I was sure that proper planning and arrangements must have been made at least for the NRIs to convert the old currency notes unlike the mess the resident Indians had to suffer. However I was in for a rude shock. 


Photo Source: Wikipedia

As per Government rules, NRIs can carry up to Rs 25,000/- in Indian currency out of India. So, soon after demonetization when some of my close relatives living abroad asked me what should they do with their old 500 and 1000 notes, I was confident and advised them that the Indian embassy or the consulate would most certainly have made some arrangement for the exchange of old notes. Besides, most big cities across the world would also have Indian banks and I thought the Indian Embassy would have tied up with them for the exchange of legitimate money in old currency with the NRIs. This seemed to me a logical plan and arrangement because I know of some NRIs who had just left India before the demonetization was announced and were not likely to return in the near future- certainly not before the (revised) deadline of June 31st declared by the Government for the exchange of old notes remaining with NRIs.


However I was reported by my relatives that there is no such arrangement in place! I therefore advised that the next best thing would be to send the old notes with any relative travelling to India during the short window period where the old notes could be exchanges [up to June 31st in case of NRIs]. Here again I was in for a shock! The rules laid down by the RBI are such that only an Indian passport holder can bring in the old currency which has to be declared at the customs at the airport, the customs have to issue a certificate on arrival through red channel which would then have to be submitted at the time of exchange of the notes[1] at the RBI.


This again I think is totally impractical. I know of many NRIs who have retained their Indian Passport but their spouse or children have not. I also know of NRIs who themselves are not travelling to India before 31st June but their spouse or children are.  However even if a spouse of an NRI or his/her children are travelling to India during the short window period till 31st June granted to exchange old notes, they are not authorized to bring in the old notes for exchange, even if the notes are legitimately in possession of an NRI and the person carrying the notes may have a POI card!


Besides, these old notes can be exchanged only in select five RBI branches of the country- Mumbai, Delhi, Kolkata, Chennai and Nagpur. I know of non resident Gujaratis who land only at Ahmedabad international airport these days. No facility is made available to them for the exchange of old notes in the Reserve Bank of India branch located in Ahmedabad.  Therefore a non resident Gujarati travelling for a few days to India has to make a special trip to one of these cities to be able to exchange their old notes of the value of up to Rs 25,000/-!


People in queue at the Reserve Bank of India to exchange old currency notes after demonetization. Photo Source: Hindustan Times.

Considering all of this, I know of a few close relatives both Gujaratis and Non Gujaratis living abroad who are at a complete loss as to what to do with their old notes. It is also very hard for them to dispose of the old currency as after all, this is hard earned money and while it may not be much in terms of economic value, it is after all considered Laxmi by many Indians in general and most certainly by Gujaratis in particular.


While I have personally gone through inconvenience on account of bad planning of demonetization, some among my family and relatives living aboard have actually lost   legitimate-hard earned money for no fault of theirs. 


I wonder how much of the money in old notes not yet recovered still remains with NRIs and how much of it will go down the drain in spite of it being legitimate due to bad planning by the Government? I don’t think the Government cares to know really.  


End

PS: The Government has been changing rules concerning demonetization. Therefore if I have missed any new rule or have not understood the rules clearly and if there is any easy way of exchanging legitimate old currency notes lying with NRIs, kindly share. Thanks.

Tuesday, 14 February 2017

Saga of Sardar Sarovar (Narmada) Dam Oustees and the history of the Narmada Water Dispute Tribunal




Recently, none other than the Supreme Court (SC) of India meted out injustice to the people of Narmada valley to be displaced by the Sardar Sarovar Project (SSP). The SC ruled that the oustees be paid cash compensation and further (as reported in the Telegraph) - “the judges asked the 4,897 families to vacate their land by July 31 this year, failing which the authorities will be free to "forcibly remove them”. This fundamentally violates the provisions of rehabilitation and resettlement laid down by the Narmada Water Dispute Tribunal Award (NWDT) for the dam to be built. The judgement also robs the people of the Narmada valley of their fundamental rights, rights to justice and dignity.


As this recent SC judgement violates the NWDT award I was reminded of the history of the interstate dispute over the dam height between the States of Gujarat, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh, as well as the fascinating history of the ongoing people’s struggle in the Narmada valley. The  formation of the NWDT in the year 1969 under the Inter State River Water Disputes Act, 1956, the declaration of the award in December 1979 and the provisions of resettlement laid down by the NWDT that are binding on all States;  the Nimad Bachao Andolan in the late seventies and the subsequent struggle of the people of the Narmada valley as Narmada Bachao Andolan (NBA) –  it would be difficult to narrate this fascinating history of the project and people’s struggle in the Narmada valley in any detail. However, I thought it would be important to note some of the history of how the Narmada (SSP) project was conceived and the formation of the NWDT as detailed in the autobiography of Late Mr. Morarji Desai titled, ‘Maru Jeevan Vrutant’ (My life account). I translate the relevant portions of the autobiography from Gujarati here:

 
Sardar Sarovar Dam. Photo Source: Wikipedia.





Morarji Desai: "In 1947-48, it was thought to implement several irrigation projects in the State of Mumbai [Which at that time included areas of today’s Gujarat and Maharashtra]. Tapi and Narmada projects were accepted then but since statistical information was not available regarding the Narmada project that the sketch of the Narmada project could not be drawn immediately. It was decided by Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel and many of us to first lay out the sketch and implement the Tapi project and after that take up the Narmada Project. When this project was being planned, I was the Chief Minister of Mumbai State. I had instructed several industrialists of Ahmedabad to set up a ‘Nigam’ to give final outline to the project, to administer it and to raise necessary funds for the project. I had promised them that the management of the project would remain with them so long as the Government does not repay the amount they had invested in the project.  At that time the Narmada Project was the cheapest and yet it was not possible to pay ordinary interest. As there was poor response to this, these negotiations were abandoned. When the Mumbai Government first planned the project, as proper statistical information was not available, the height of the dam was fixed at 300 feet. In the year 1960, it was when Gujarat and Maharashtra were separated, that Shri. Jawaharlal Nehru had laid the foundation stone of the dam.


“However due to lack of funds, the construction work could not be started. Keeping in mind the States of Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra and Rajasthan, in order to study the Narmada Project in-depth, the Government appointed the Khosla commission in the year 1963-64. The head of the commission Shri. Khosla was a well known engineer and an able administrator. He or any of the members of Khosla commission had nothing to do with Gujarat. The commission collected all kinds of data, kept in mind the interests of all the four concerned States[1], and seeing that the rights of none of the concerned States were affected, it took into account the utmost way in which waters of the Narmada could be utilised. While giving its final report in the year 1965-66[2], the commission recommended the height of the dam at Navagam[3] should be minimum 500 or 530 feet. Gujarat gave its consent and Rajasthan[4] also accepted this. Madhya Pradesh opposed this and did not accept this. Due to this height approximately 99,000 acres of agricultural land in Madhya Pradesh would drown in the water. Besides, Gujarat would be deprived from the future use of Narmada waters for only 150 miles where as Madhya Pradesh approximately 700 long miles. It was on these grounds that it had opposed [the height of the dam proposed by the Khosla commission]. Maharashtra where Narmada flowed only over 30 miles, joined common cause with Madhya Pradesh and demanded more share in the electricity to be generated. As Madhya Pradesh opposed with fury, it was not possible to implement the project in Gujarat.


“After the fourth general elections, I rejoined the central cabinet ministers. I was not in the Government from 1963 March to 1967. As per the provisions of the constitution, in case of inter State river disputes and decisions by the States there in, the central Government did not have the rights to impose its decision on the concerned States. However the central Government had the rights to appoint a legal tribunal that would hear the petition/ appeal/request of the States and give a reasonable judgement. In order to overcome the deadlock created by Madhya Pradesh, as per the provisions of the tribunal, I requested the Prime Minister to refer this dispute to a tribunal. Smt. Gandhi had agreed to my suggestion and this question was handed over to the legal tribunal in the year 1968-69. Unfortunately Madhya Pradesh by employing several good and bad measures delayed the matter.


“In the election of 1972, Smt. Gandhi had promised the people of Gujarat to bring an early resolution of the Narmada controversy. The people of Gujarat believed that Smt. Gandhi would intervene and give her decision in August 1972...


“...the height of the dam could be kept at 530 or 500 feet but it was also that Madhya Pradesh could construct as many projects in the future as it wished. If Madhya Pradesh utilised all the Narmada waters and as a result if Gujarat did not get any water, Gujarat would not complain is what I am sure of. Yet, Madhya Pradesh was not satisfied because even if its interest were not to be compromised, it did not like that Gujarat got benefits from the Narmada project[5]. More importantly, due to the terrible floods in the Narmada, many areas like Baroda and Bharuch in Gujarat have to suffer excessive loss/damage. This can be stopped only if the height of the dam is kept at 500 feet. When more than fifty lakh acres is to be irrigated, it is not possible to ignore the voices of the 99,000 acres of submergence lands. The landowners of whose lands are to be submerged can be given other land either in Gujarat or Madhya Pradesh and they can be better placed also...

 
Waters of the SSP enter the villages of Madhya Pradesh submerging homes and fields in 2013. Photo Source: Rajesh Khanna (Bacchu).

“Prime Minister promised the people to bring about a quick solution to this issue, as a result the people were lured and out of 160 seats in the legislative assembly of Gujarat, they gave 140 seats to Smt. Indira Gandhi...Though the Prime Minister had promised to bring about a speedy solution, there was no solution till the year 1974. As opposed to this, she withdrew this issue from the tribunal and kept it unresolved and submitted this issue once again to the tribunal in the end of the year 1974. This is how the judgement was delayed for no reason at all. That one of the two states will have to be displeased and so decision is not being taken is what she had said. But she should have understood this from the very beginning. She should not have promised the people of Gujarat an early decision in the matter. If the Prime minister had not withdrawn this dispute for arbitration, then the tribunal may have announced its decision in the year 1974 itself...”
 
Rally in Baroda by the Sardar Sarovar Dam affected oustees of Gujarat. Photo Source: Not known.

It would have been interesting to know Mr. Desai’s thoughts on the events that unfolded after the year 1977 in the case of the Sardar Sarovar Dam and the NWDT award as Mr. Morarji Desai became the Prime Minister of India from 1977- 1979. Unfortunately his autobiography – “Maru Jeevan Vrutant”, covers the events only up to the year 1975. It is therefore difficult to know in the words of Mr. Morarji Desai himself from his autobiography what transpired while he was the PM in the case of the Narmada/SPP and the NWDT. However the people of the Narmada Valley in the submergence zone of SSP firmly believe that it was only after Mr. Desai became the Prime Minister that the NWDT gave its award in favor of Gujarat allowing large scale submergence of fertile lands and rich forests in Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh. While this is a matter of different history, a people’s history, it is equally an important history.  


I also take this opportunity to express my faith that the people’s movement in the Narmada valley will continue as it has continued against all odds over several decades now.  Long live the struggle.


End





[1] It is important to note here that Rajasthan is not a riparian State as far as the river Narmada is concerned and yet it was made a party State in the dispute.
[2] Note that the report for such a mega project was given within one year of the formation of the Khosla commission.
[3] Navagam, a tribal village on the banks of the river Narmada, currently in the Narmada District of Gujarat was then the site of the Sardar Sarovar Dam. In fact, the Sardar Sarovar Project was also popularly called the Navagam dam.
[4] There was no land area, villages submerging due to this dam in Rajasthan.
[5] Mr. Morarji Desai belonged to Gujarat. One wonders therefore if this statement exhibits bias because Madhya Pradesh indeed had its valid reasons to oppose the 530 feet dam that was to submerge thousands of acres of agricultural land, forests and displace large number of people.

Monday, 7 November 2016

Bihar Government Seeks Suggetions from People on Prohibition and Excise Act 2016




Government of Bihar, as a result of public criticism has invited through an advertisement constructive suggestions on its Prohibition and Excise Act 2016. The suggestions have to be sent by 12th of November 2016 to the following email id:
feedbackprohibitionbihar@gmail.com

 It is in response to this advertisement that I have sent some suggestions to the Government of Bihar as follows: [Readers may recall that earlier I had written a blog post examining the Act: http://nandinioza.blogspot.in/2016/10/bihars-prohibition-and-excise-act-2016.html ]



To,                                                                                         

The Secretary,                                                                        
Registration, Excise and Prohibition Department,     
Government of Bihar.                                                
                                                                               
                                                                                               



Subject: Invitation of public opinion/suggestions by the Excise and Prohibition Department, Government of Bihar on the Prohibition and Excise Act 2016.

Dear Sir,

I appreciate the initiative of the Government of Bihar to seek public opinion and constructive suggestions on the provisions of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act 2016 as reported in several newspapers http://www.dailypioneer.com/nation/bihar-govt-seeks-public-opinion-on-prohibition-law.html   and
http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-bihar-government-rethinking-harsh-provisions-of-new-prohibition-law-seeks-suggestions-from-common-public-2269580

In response to the Government of Bihar’s initiative, I wish to make the following suggestions as a practicing social worker and a student of social science for the past thirty years.

1.     Review of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act 2016: It is important that the Act[1] is reviewed fully because this Act criminalises those who turn substance dependent due to social, economic, as well as psychological problems. The punishments for possession, consumption, storage or transportation of even a small quantity of alcohol or such substance under the Act are draconian in nature towards the individual, his/her family and community. This Act leaves no scope whatsoever for warning, correction, mitigation, reformation, rehabilitation and probation of a person who is substance/alcohol dependent or a person in possession of alcohol or other intoxicating substances. Along with the substance dependents, it criminalizes social/moderate users as well. Besides, it has the scope of considering the family of substance dependent, criminal too, with strict punishments. It has severe provisions like arrest without warrant, confiscation of premises, sealing of premises, etc. where any crime under this act is said to have been committed. Furthermore it has the provision of collective fine for the “wrong doing” of individual/individuals in an area and the whole community living there could be held responsible for repeat offenses under the Act. Besides, a lot of powers are given to the collector and even the police that could be misused. 
  
2.  Formation of a Review Committee: In order to review the Act, it is important that the Government of Bihar forms an independent review committee. The review committee should have members of standing from different fields and different walks of life such as lawyers, representatives of women’s organizations and other NGOs, doctors, as well as members of organizations working on the issues of substance dependence, de-addiction, treatment and rehabilitation of drug/alcohol dependents. Sufficient time and resources should be made available to this committee to be able to work effectively and independently. The working of the review committee should be time bound. There are many examples of formation of such review commissions/ committees that examine issues, laws, projects, etc. affecting the lives of the people. Lessons from such review committees could be taken for the effective formation and functioning of a committee to review the Act. 
 
  3.   Public hearings: As part of the review process, the review committee as well as the Government of Bihar should organise public hearings to seek suggestions on the Act from different stake holders, particularly women. Public hearings among those communities and castes for whom alcohol brewing and use is also a part of social, cultural and religious practice/rite should be organised. Public hearings are important as large number of people may not be able to respond to the provisions of this Act and give suggestions in writing. For effective consultations, the Act should be made available to all stake holders in simple language and sufficient time given to the people to respond.

 4. Consultations: The review committee apart from public hearings should also consult people of repute who have been working in the field of treatment and rehabilitation of those dependent on substance/drugs and alcohol. One such organisation of standing that has been working on this issue for the past thirty years in Maharashtra is Muktangan http://www.muktangan.org/ . There are many such organisations spread across the country and it is important that their experience and knowledge is taken on board. 

    5. Study of material and laws: Studies, other material as well as laws pertaining to prohibition and provisions for rehabilitation of those dependent on drugs existing in different States across the country should be studied both by the Government and the review committee.  

6.  Substance dependence not a criminal offence: While the process of in-depth study, analysis and consultation on the Act is being undertaken by the independent review committee, and till such time as the review committee submits its report, I request that the Government of Bihar considers substance dependence a social-economic issue/problem and not a criminal offence. 
 
   7.  Social awareness, economic support and reform: I request the Government of Bihar to undertake social awareness, social support and social as well as economic reform measures to check drug/alcohol dependence, rather than severe punitive actions aimed at the victim/dependent and his/her family. 

    8.  Suspension of punitive measures under the Act: Substance dependence requires counselling, social and medical support, de-addiction and rehabilitation centres and not jails/imprisonment. I therefore request the Government of Bihar to put on hold the punitive measures under the Act till an independent review of the Act is completed. 

    9.  Release from jails: Till such time as the review of the Act is completed, I request the Government of Bihar to release all substance dependents, etc. incarcerated under this Act so far and focus on their treatment and rehabilitation as well as economic support to their families.
   
10. Broader Plan: I request the Government of Bihar to have a broader plan that could be implemented over the next five years for social and economic advancement of the masses to check the problem of substance dependence.The government should also establish more counselling, treatment and rehabilitation centers as well as family support systems to address this issue.   

Thanking you,
Nandini Oza
7-Nov-2016



[1] Act here means the Bihar’s Prohibition and Excise Act 2016 unless specified otherwise.

Wednesday, 26 October 2016

Aye Dil Hai Mushkil, truly!





When the Chief Minister of a State one is residing in presides over an extortion deal and that too in the CM’s official residence, the song that comes to my lips often these days is, “Aye Dil Hey Mushkil Jina Yaha, Jara Bachke, Jara Hatke Yeh Hey Bombay Meri Jaan!” The deplorable act of Mr. Devendra Fadnavis of having brokered the ransom deal between the filmmakers of Aye Dil Hai Mushkil and the chief of Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) for the film to be screened in theaters is being criticized strongly.

Among the many critiques of this incidence, one very strong piece of analysis that I came across was by a senior Gujarati journalist Mr. Ajay Umat whose article has been published in a Gujarati daily NavGujarat Samay, of the Times Group.  



I translate some excerpts from the article to the best of my ability for a wider readership here.
[For those who wish to read the piece in original Gujarati could go to the link http://epaper.navgujaratsamay.com/paper/11-9@9-23@10@2016-1001.html ]


Navgujaratsamay.com
Sunday Navgujaratsamay                                                             Ahmedabad 23 Oct 2016


“Aye Dil Hey Mushkil”: Tax/Impost in the name of Army Martyrdom?  
 Point of order
[By] Ajay Umat

“The saying that ‘the world bows down, if there is someone who can make it bend ’, has been proved correct by the Supremo of MNS Raj Thackeray. Can you imagine the terrible picture of raw bullying in Mumbai by Raj Thackeray who in the last election won only three percentages of votes and just one seat in the 288 member legislative assembly? At the residence of the Chief Minister of Maharashtra ,on one side, cutting a sorry figure are sitting Karan Johar, the producer of the film ‘Aye Dil Hey Mushkil’ and the president of film and television guild of India, Mukesh Bhatt. While on the other side is the Chief Minister of Maharashtra Devendra Fadnavis in the role of an expert mediator. While Raj Thackeray, indulging in raw bullying, in the pose of a judge, announces his judgement and orders that from today I will not allow in Indian films Pakistani artists, singers and musicians. If the film ‘Aye Dil Hey Mushkil’ is to be released, pay five crores to the Indian army welfare fund and also give in writing that from today, no Pakistani artist will have any place in Bollywood films. 

The command of Raj Thackeray is received wholeheartedly by the Bollywood producers Karan Johar as well as Mukesh Bhatt and the Chief Minister of Maharashtra announces this compromise happily through his twitter handle.


Is this not a shameful incident? What is Raj Thackeray’s status? The Chief Minister of Maharashtra who is running the coalition Government of BJP and Shiv Sena falls on his knees before Raj Thackeray and accepts his terrorism so that the people of Maharashtra can be entertained. At the residence of the Chief Minister, Karan Johar and his group ... are agreeable to pay a tribute of rupees five crores because Karan Johar, Mukesh Bhatt and the entire Bollywood is convinced that the Chief Minister of Maharashtra is without any spine. Raj Thackeray wanted that Fadnavis bows, instead the Government of Maharashtra prostrated. The producers of Bollywood [films] are aware that the tribute of five crores is reasonable as against the price of the glass panels of multiplex film screens as well as the expenditure incurred in making the film. Albeit, Raj Thackeray considers this as penitence and a penalty for the justice delivered. 


 It seems as if Gandhi’s principles of truth, non-violence and peace have been exiled. Probably the weapon of indefinite fast in the struggle by Anna Hazare, Maharashtra’s dutiful son has been blunted. This is because the Chief Minister of Maharashtra who had pledged to abide by the constitution of India has surrendered to Raj Thackeray and has accepted his fast and furious style of justice.  It is probable that in the coming days Raj Thackeray will change the preface of the constitution from ‘we the people’ to ‘we the bullies’. Besides, it may be proved that in this country, those who can twist the wrist can bring in jungle raj in Bharat. 


The puzzling question is- who is Raj Thackeray? In this country the authority to decide which film should be screened or not dwells with the Modi Government and the censor board. It does not dwell with Raj Thackeray. Where has Raj Thackeray got the authority to impose a fine of five crores? The tragedy is, helpless before the bullying of Raj Thackeray; Fadnavis uses the Chief Minister’s bungalow to arrive at a compromise. Should the citizens of this country tolerate such type of bulling and intimidation? In the coming days how many goons, plunderers, bandits, rogues will Fadnavis submit and give legitimacy to? 

 
Raj Thackeray and Pakistan Cricketer Wasim Akram Photo Source: epaper timesofIndia.com
Severely rebuking the above incident, the [ex] commissioner of Mumbai police and a BJP parliamentarian himself, Mr. Satyapal Singh has said that the policy and conduct of Fadnavis is totally wrong. How can any person extract surety form film producers and compel them to pay five crores? The Chief Minister should have considered this a question of law and order and should have acted sternly. Satyapla Singh has expressed fear that in the coming days, this kind of a compromise may set a wrong precedent. Indian Army has declared this obstruction by Raj Thackeray impure. [Former] Lieutenant General B.S. Jaswal has said that Indian Army and its retired jawans are not begging for alms. The Indian Army is above politics and political parties.  Please stop such disruptions by twisting wrists in the name of the Army. Stop blackmailing Bollywood in the name of the Army. We cannot digest forceful charity imposed on Bollywood. The retired officers of the Indian Army are questioning - who is Raj Thackeray to measure the martyrdom of jawans? ...Kindly stop deriving political gains in the name of Army. Air force’s retired Air Marshall Manohar Bahadur says that we have been trying to serve the country for the past forty years. Will the jawans now have to take for welfare money collected as tax? Hey Ram! What is happening in my country? Through his twitter handle Manohar Bahadur has warned Raj Thackeray to not to cash on the sentiments and sympathies of the nation... Without naming Raj Thackeray, the Defense Ministry has declared that the donations given to the army welfare fund should be given willingly and not by force.  Congress and NCP have asked - what is the theoretical difference between today’s situation and the imposition of tax on Bollywood by Dawood Ibrahim and Chota Rajan? 


The fundamental problem is that the leaders of this country do not adopt a clear stand when required because of the politics of vote...When Raj Thackeray agitated on the streets of Mumbai on the issue of Mharashtrians against Biharies, the other political parties remained silent because they were scared to adopt a clear stand. When Shiv Sena dug up the cricket pitch of Wankhede stadium in Mumbai and Feroz Shah Kotla grounds in Delhi, the concerned Government had not declared it as treason. Instead the venue of cricket was changed. Raj Thackeray in the name of ‘Marathi Manus’ promoted parochialism.  He formed Maharashtra Navnirman Sena, built muscle power and is aiming the gun at Bollywood.  



One issue that is being discussed on social media is that after the producers of Bollywood pay rupees five crores to the army welfare fund as repentance ...how much money will have to be paid to Raj Thackeray’s party? There cannot be any ‘cess’ in the name of patriotism. The rule of law should prevail in the country. In a democracy there is no place for unconstitutional obstruction by Raj Thackeray... If such obstacles carry on then there is a possibility that tomorrow Raj Thackeray may decide the price on the Pakistani players in IPL also. 

Disturbed by the obstacles created by Raj Thackeray, Ratan Tata has said - the growing intolerance in the country will prove to be dangerous in the future.

 Fadnavis should tell Raj Thackeray that there is no need to cross Lakshman Rekha – the line of control in politics. If your love for the country is overflowing, show your bravery at the border by crossing the line of control. Kindly do not sow the seeds of goondraj in Mumbai. "


[By Ajay Umat ]

End