According to Advani, the criterion for a new state is a unanimous resolution by the assembly of the present states. In fact, the parties have their eyes fixed on power. The BJP will get Uttrakhand and Jharkhand while the Congress, Chhattisgarh. Whether Advani likes it or not, a Pandora’s box has been opened. Pressures for the formation of some more states have begun.

THE idea to have smaller states for better governance is not new. The Montagu-Chcmlsford report, prepared some 82 years ago. said: “The business of government would be simplified if administrative units were both smaller and more homogeneous." The British constituted and reconstituted the states. But It largely depended on the military, political or administrative exigencies.

India's real map was drawn only after Independence. The States' Reorganisation Commission (SRC) was appointed hi December 1953 to regroup the states. The report was received in June 1955. But when the government accepted It in 1956. it was under great pressure and bungled on some points. The government accepted the principle to group together the people speaking one language. But it made exception In the case of Punjab. Still, the then ruling Congress Party declared that It had made good the 'pre-Independence promise to carve out new states on the ba&ls of language. It was Justified In saying so. Indeed, the Nehru Committee of All Parties Conference in 1928 had lent its powerful support to the linguistic principle.

Pakistan did not have to change the boundaries for 25 years because the states bi the western part, more or less, conformed to the linguistic compulsions. At one Juncture. Islamabad amalgamated all the states in West Pakistan into one unit to be at par with East Pakistan. But the arrangement did not last long. In fact, the step-motherly treatment meted out to Bengali language or. more so the imposition of Urdu on East Pakistan, gave birth to the movement of Bangladesh.

Ultimately, the struggle for a Bengali identity triumphed and East Pakistan seceded from West Pakistan to become Bangladesh.

Being a unitary government. Bangladesh has not experienced linguistic chauvinism. Nor has Nepal, again a unitary state. The unitary government of Srl Lanka Is In the midst of turmoil, primarily because of language - the Tamils feeling discrimination at the hands of dominant Sinhalese. President Chandrika Ktunar.iiungas efforts to devolve power to the Tamil-speaking population are still to be tested at the polls.

Coming back to India, it may have stalled convulsions in the country by constituting linguistic units. But most states have taken the desire to work in mother tongue to a ridiculous extend and linguistic minorities .have suffered in the process. New Delhi's diffidence on the one hand, and the states' assertiveness on regional languages on the other, has created a climate of Intolerance for linguistic minorities. They have become victims of onslaught by the locals.

Take the fear of attack on Tamils In Bangalore following the kidnapping of film star Raj Kumar. The Kanriadlgas In Tamil Nadu have suffered in the same way over the Cauverl water. Mumbai has seen how the Shiv Sena has tormented the non-Marathl speaking population. This has told upon the country's homogeneity. The states have become linguistic islands, the centres of” local chauvinism. So much so, many states have made tests In regional language compulsory for employment. This goes counter to New Delhi's assurance that the state language can be learnt after recruitment.

Some states have even laid down that persons seeking a Job must be 'sons of the soil'. New Delhi has done little to discipline the erring governments. The ruling National Democratic Alliance (NDA). which is a conglomeration of regional parties, has connives

at the violation of constitutional guarantees. It is afraid lest any dissension should pose a threat to its power at the centre.

The result is that safeguards provided to linguistic minorities have remained on paper. The states have simply ignored their implementation. Take for example. the teaching facilities in mother tongue in primary schools. They are compulsory under the constitution, but the states generally make no arrangement. This is particularly true about instruction in Urdu. Uttar Pradesh Is the biggest culprit. Article 29 of the con-stltution provides that any section of citizens having a distinct language script or culture will have the right to converse in them. This is on paper alone. New Delhi has appointed a Commissioner for Linguistic Minorities to look after their interests. Poor man has no real say both at the centre and in the states. His reports accumulate dust and his ranking in official hierarchy is so low that he cannot meet even a Joint secretary, much less a minister. The centre's attitude can be Judged form the fact that it

combined for years the posts of Commissioners of Scheduled Castes and Linguistic Minorities.

Fortunately, the three new states, Uttrakhand, Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand -- parliament has given its approval --do not create any linguistic problem because all the three are Hindi-speaking states. But the linguistic minorities In the proposed states are already nervous. The PunJabl-speaklng Sikhs have expressed fears over the Inclusion of their district Udliamslngh Nagar in Uttark-hand. Hardy cultivators as. they are. they have converted the wilderness Into fertile fields. But they are afraid of the unknown. Jharkhand is already talking about revenge from Bihar for having appropriated its natural resources. Home Minister L.K. Advani has a point when he says that the appointment of another SRC would have opened Pandora's box. But the present arrangement, whereby the BJP and the Congress came together to carve out new states, is not wav to go about it. According to Advani, the criterion for a new state is a unanimous resolution by the assembly of the present states. In fact, the parties have their eyes fixed on power. The BJP will get Uttrakhand and Jharkhand while the Congress. Chhattisgarh. But both parties have not studied the immense burden of governance on the comparatively inexperienced shoulders of new states. The Home Ministry has also not paid enough attention to the knltty-gritty of administration. There has been no serious study of economic viability el-ther. The only consideration seems to be political.

Whether Advani likes it or not, a Pandoras box has been opened. Pressures for the formation of some more stales have begun. The SRC had rec-omimmdcd the creation of Vid-harba. The movement goes back to 1905 when there was a demand for the creation ol Maha Vldliarba. It will be difficult to resist the pressure as and when It builds up. The

assembly members from the area have already declared that they will alt separately In the Maharashtra legislature. Tlie old agitation for the creation of Telengana. separating from Andhara Pradesh, is bound to gain momentum. The Telugu domination is fell by the area, which Is primarily Urdu-., speaking, .

The dissenting note on up J by K.M. Pannicker, member of the SRC. has now been revived by Ajit Singh, a Parliament member and the son of Charan Singh. The Latter too wanted to split UP into three states. But the Janata government did not agree to his suggestion. Pannickers argument for the split of UP “for a successful working of the federal system' In the country holds good even today. Perhaps the Agra division can be Integrated with Haryana, which can then make Agra the State capital. Chandigarh can become solely Punjab’s.

The centre probably did not realise that creation of new states would give a fresh edge to agitation in the bilingual areas. Practically, all states have a population, speaking the language of neighbouring states. Orissa has already put in its claim to Seralkell and Kharsewan because Oriya is the largest single language group.

At present, the creation of three new states appears to have gone through peacefully. But the states are yet to be carved and financial and administrative mattes are still to be sorted out. After appointing^ the SRC, Jawaharlal Nehru said that it was done to soon after independence. He admitted there were "other priorities' the country should have pursued. The NDA may also come to the same conclusion sooner that later.