Odisha: Political history - Revision history

Jyoti at 19:01, 1 June 2026

2026-06-01T19:01:48Z

Jyoti: /* Regulation of religion by law */

2025-04-11T07:36:21Z

‎Regulation of religion by law

Jyoti: /* The Patnaiks */

2025-04-11T07:34:51Z

‎The Patnaiks

Jyoti: /* The Naveen Patnaik era */

2025-04-11T07:33:36Z

‎The Naveen Patnaik era

Jyoti: /* 19 years in office (2000-19); looking ahead in 2019 */

2024-08-01T19:55:01Z

‎19 years in office (2000-19); looking ahead in 2019

Jyoti: /* The Naveen Patnaik era */

2024-08-01T19:35:36Z

‎The Naveen Patnaik era

Jyoti: /* 2024 */

2024-06-13T06:58:08Z

‎2024

Jyoti: /* Biju, JB, Naveen (intermittently: 1961-2019) */

2024-05-14T15:12:09Z

‎Biju, JB, Naveen (intermittently: 1961-2019)

Jyoti: /* Flashpoints */

2024-04-23T21:37:53Z

‎Flashpoints

Jyoti: /* Flashpoints */

2024-01-15T19:30:13Z

‎Flashpoints

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 =Kosal/ Kosalanchal=
@@ Line 304: / Line 326: @@
 ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY]]
 [[Category:Politics|P ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY
 ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:36, 11 April 2025
Line 207:		Line 207:
	The writer is an associate professor of anthropology at Smith College, US		The writer is an associate professor of anthropology at Smith College, US

−	~~=Regulation of religion by law=~~
−	~~==State of Bombay v Narasu Appa Mali, 1953==~~
−	~~[https://indianexpress.com/article/long-reads/religion-regulated-by-law-questions-narasu-remarried-1950-9882088/ Sadaf Modak , Apurva Vishwanath, March 14, 2025: ''The Indian Express'']~~

−	Narasu Appa Mali had his wife’s permission to take a second wife. It was not uncommon in the 1940s for a man to take a second wife, especially when he did not have a son from his first marriage. What followed the second marriage of this modest man from Miraj, a small border town in south-western Maharashtra, was anything but common.
−
−	A few years before Mali remarried, the provincial government had passed the Bombay Prevention of Hindu Bigamous Marriages Act, 1946. The Indian Penal Code, enacted in 1860, borrowing from English law dating back to 1603, had made bigamy an offence. However, this law was barely used since the offence was compoundable — a case could be initiated only on complaint by an aggrieved party and could also be withdrawn at their instance. Naturally, a woman would rarely go to court against her husband, especially when bigamy was a social norm. When the 1946 law was passed, the offence was made compoundable and carried serious consequences — a jail term up to seven years and a fine.
−
−	In 1954, Jayashri Raiji, a Member of Parliament from Bombay, had said in a speech that B R Ambedkar, the first law minister, had reportedly told the Parliament “that nearly 2,000 marriages were performed in contravention of the anti-bigamous Hindu Marriage Act in Bombay State in the first few months of the passing of that Act”, but “very few cases went to the court.”
−
−	On October 24, 1950, Mali and six others were convicted by magistrate R P Salve under the Act and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of two months with a fine of Rs 75. However, just two months later, in January 1951, B D Nandkarni, the sessions judge in Sangli, heard Mali’s appeal and acquitted him. Then, the government moved the Bombay High Court, setting the stage to defend the law’s constitutional validity. This was no longer the coloniser’s attempt to interfere with local customs, but an independent India’s first attempt at social reform.
−
−	State of Bombay v Narasu Appa Mali was a crucial turning point in India’s constitutional history. It opened up an important question that the country, for over 75 years now, continues to debate: can religion be regulated by law?
−
−	On July 24, 1951, the Bombay High Court held that the law was constitutional. The Court refused two crucial arguments of the petitioners. First, that the institution of polygamy was a “necessity” for a Hindu man to “perpetuate his family by the birth of sons” and second, that the law discriminated on the grounds of religion since the law only applied to Hindus, while Muslim men were allowed to be polygamous.
−
−	Justice P B Gajendragadkar, one of the two judges who decided the case, said that “even from the strictly orthodox point of view, bigamy was never a matter of obligation; it was permissive and permissive under certain conditions”. For the necessity of having a son, the ruling pointed towards adoption, since adopted sons had the same rights under the Hindu law as biological sons.
−
−	~~For the second argument, then Chief Justice M C Chagla, in his autobiography, Roses in December, wrote that it had his “sympathies”.~~
−
−	“It was argued that it was discriminatory to place a restriction on the Hindu community alone, when the Muslim community could indulge in polygamy. All my sympathies were in favour of this argument. I always felt that the government had shown lack of courage in not passing a Monogamy Act which applied to all communities. With great reluctance, I had come to the conclusion that I could not strike down the law, as it was well-settled that a social reform measure need not apply to all sections and that reform could be brought about by stages. Government was therefore justified in introducing this social reform as a first step applicable only to the Hindu community,” Chagla wrote in his memoirs.
−
−	Justice Gajendragadkar said that the legislature may have thought that the Hindu community was “more ripe” for the reform. “Social reformers amongst the Hindus have agitated for this reform vehemently for many years past and the social conscience of the Hindus, according to the Legislature, may have been more in tune with the spirit of the proposed reform. Besides, amongst the Mahomedans (Muslims), divorce has always been permissible and marriage amongst them is a matter of contract. If the State Legislature acting on such considerations decided to enforce this reform in the first instance amongst the Hindus, it would be impossible in my opinion to hold that in confining the impugned Act to Hindus as defined by the Act it has violated the equality before law as guaranteed by Article 14,” he wrote.
−
−	The Court’s most significant finding, however, was on an issue that continues to be debated: can religious customs and practices be considered “law”? This is crucial since Article 13 of the Constitution states that “laws” that are violative of fundamental rights ought to be struck down by the court. The government had argued that polygamy as a social practice was unconstitutional and therefore, the 1946 law was valid.
−
−	Even as the Court upheld the validity of the 1946 Act, it did not agree with the government’s contention. The ruling held that personal law is immune from constitutional scrutiny, a finding that would be very consequential. This would essentially mean that personal laws, even when regressive, can be permissible. This 1951 judgment was never challenged in the Supreme Court.
−
−	“The ghost of Narasu Appa Mali”, as senior advocate Indira Jaising referred to in a 2018 article, could be summoned to save a discriminatory personal law practice. In 2017, the ruling was cited to defend the practice of triple talaq. However, without overruling the Bombay High Court verdict, the Supreme Court struck down the triple talaq practice, carving out a space for gender parity, even in personal law. Justice Rohinton Nariman, one of the five judges on the Bench, had, sidestepping the Narasu ruling, said that since the triple talaq practice was codified in the Shariat Act, it was no longer just a custom but a legislation.
−
−	Speaking to The Indian Express, Jaising said the ruling must be overruled on this point. “The urgency increases with every passing day. More and more reliance is placed on uncodified laws. How can they be beyond the reach of fundamental rights?” she says.
−
−	The Narasu ruling, even if not overruled, is significantly diluted. In 2018, another religious custom, barring the entry of menstruating women in the Sabarimala temple, was challenged as being discriminatory. Justice D Y Chandrachud, in the ruling, had said that the Narasu finding was based on “flawed premises”.
−
−	“The decision in Narasu, in restricting the definition of the term ‘laws in force’ detracts from the transformative vision of the Constitution. Carving out ‘custom or usage’ from constitutional scrutiny denies the constitutional vision of ensuring the primacy of individual dignity. The decision in Narasu is based on flawed premises. Custom or usage cannot be excluded from ‘laws in force’. The decision in Narasu also opined that personal law is immune from constitutional scrutiny. This detracts from the notion that no body of practices can claim supremacy over the Constitution and its vision of ensuring the sanctity of dignity, liberty and equality,” the temple entry ruling stated.
−
−	“The Narasu Appa Mali judgment needed a re-reading, a reinterpretation, but that has not happened. I am not so sure in the current state of affairs whether anybody would like to touch it and open it up for debate because the whole debate has now become communal. In many cases, the courts have not applied Narasu Appa Mali, but found a way around it to speak of gender equity within personal laws, like the triple talaq judgment,” says Flavia Agnes, women’s rights lawyer and co-founder of Majlis, a legal centre for women.
−
−	With the Uniform Civil Code high on the BJP’s agenda, Uttarakhand, this year, became the first state to bring in a neutral civil code. When these are tested in courts, the “ghost of Narasu” will be summoned again, but it remains to be seen whether it will be exorcised.
−
−	As for Narasu himself, the Bombay High Court had reversed his acquittal. However, since he had “the consent and approval of his first wife”, the High Court did not think his jail term was justified. Paying a fine of Rs 100 in exchange for a month in prison, Narasu had perhaps moved on in life.

	[[Category:History\|P ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY		[[Category:History\|P ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 =The Patnaiks=
@@ Line 70: / Line 126: @@
 ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY]]
 =The Naveen Patnaik era=

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:33, 11 April 2025
Line 140:		Line 140:

	The writer is an associate professor of anthropology at Smith College, US		The writer is an associate professor of anthropology at Smith College, US
		+
		+	=Regulation of religion by law=
		+	==State of Bombay v Narasu Appa Mali, 1953==
		+	[https://indianexpress.com/article/long-reads/religion-regulated-by-law-questions-narasu-remarried-1950-9882088/ Sadaf Modak , Apurva Vishwanath, March 14, 2025: ''The Indian Express'']
		+
		+	Narasu Appa Mali had his wife’s permission to take a second wife. It was not uncommon in the 1940s for a man to take a second wife, especially when he did not have a son from his first marriage. What followed the second marriage of this modest man from Miraj, a small border town in south-western Maharashtra, was anything but common.
		+
		+	A few years before Mali remarried, the provincial government had passed the Bombay Prevention of Hindu Bigamous Marriages Act, 1946. The Indian Penal Code, enacted in 1860, borrowing from English law dating back to 1603, had made bigamy an offence. However, this law was barely used since the offence was compoundable — a case could be initiated only on complaint by an aggrieved party and could also be withdrawn at their instance. Naturally, a woman would rarely go to court against her husband, especially when bigamy was a social norm. When the 1946 law was passed, the offence was made compoundable and carried serious consequences — a jail term up to seven years and a fine.
		+
		+	In 1954, Jayashri Raiji, a Member of Parliament from Bombay, had said in a speech that B R Ambedkar, the first law minister, had reportedly told the Parliament “that nearly 2,000 marriages were performed in contravention of the anti-bigamous Hindu Marriage Act in Bombay State in the first few months of the passing of that Act”, but “very few cases went to the court.”
		+
		+	On October 24, 1950, Mali and six others were convicted by magistrate R P Salve under the Act and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of two months with a fine of Rs 75. However, just two months later, in January 1951, B D Nandkarni, the sessions judge in Sangli, heard Mali’s appeal and acquitted him. Then, the government moved the Bombay High Court, setting the stage to defend the law’s constitutional validity. This was no longer the coloniser’s attempt to interfere with local customs, but an independent India’s first attempt at social reform.
		+
		+	State of Bombay v Narasu Appa Mali was a crucial turning point in India’s constitutional history. It opened up an important question that the country, for over 75 years now, continues to debate: can religion be regulated by law?
		+
		+	On July 24, 1951, the Bombay High Court held that the law was constitutional. The Court refused two crucial arguments of the petitioners. First, that the institution of polygamy was a “necessity” for a Hindu man to “perpetuate his family by the birth of sons” and second, that the law discriminated on the grounds of religion since the law only applied to Hindus, while Muslim men were allowed to be polygamous.
		+
		+	Justice P B Gajendragadkar, one of the two judges who decided the case, said that “even from the strictly orthodox point of view, bigamy was never a matter of obligation; it was permissive and permissive under certain conditions”. For the necessity of having a son, the ruling pointed towards adoption, since adopted sons had the same rights under the Hindu law as biological sons.
		+
		+	For the second argument, then Chief Justice M C Chagla, in his autobiography, Roses in December, wrote that it had his “sympathies”.
		+
		+	“It was argued that it was discriminatory to place a restriction on the Hindu community alone, when the Muslim community could indulge in polygamy. All my sympathies were in favour of this argument. I always felt that the government had shown lack of courage in not passing a Monogamy Act which applied to all communities. With great reluctance, I had come to the conclusion that I could not strike down the law, as it was well-settled that a social reform measure need not apply to all sections and that reform could be brought about by stages. Government was therefore justified in introducing this social reform as a first step applicable only to the Hindu community,” Chagla wrote in his memoirs.
		+
		+	Justice Gajendragadkar said that the legislature may have thought that the Hindu community was “more ripe” for the reform. “Social reformers amongst the Hindus have agitated for this reform vehemently for many years past and the social conscience of the Hindus, according to the Legislature, may have been more in tune with the spirit of the proposed reform. Besides, amongst the Mahomedans (Muslims), divorce has always been permissible and marriage amongst them is a matter of contract. If the State Legislature acting on such considerations decided to enforce this reform in the first instance amongst the Hindus, it would be impossible in my opinion to hold that in confining the impugned Act to Hindus as defined by the Act it has violated the equality before law as guaranteed by Article 14,” he wrote.
		+
		+	The Court’s most significant finding, however, was on an issue that continues to be debated: can religious customs and practices be considered “law”? This is crucial since Article 13 of the Constitution states that “laws” that are violative of fundamental rights ought to be struck down by the court. The government had argued that polygamy as a social practice was unconstitutional and therefore, the 1946 law was valid.
		+
		+	Even as the Court upheld the validity of the 1946 Act, it did not agree with the government’s contention. The ruling held that personal law is immune from constitutional scrutiny, a finding that would be very consequential. This would essentially mean that personal laws, even when regressive, can be permissible. This 1951 judgment was never challenged in the Supreme Court.
		+
		+	“The ghost of Narasu Appa Mali”, as senior advocate Indira Jaising referred to in a 2018 article, could be summoned to save a discriminatory personal law practice. In 2017, the ruling was cited to defend the practice of triple talaq. However, without overruling the Bombay High Court verdict, the Supreme Court struck down the triple talaq practice, carving out a space for gender parity, even in personal law. Justice Rohinton Nariman, one of the five judges on the Bench, had, sidestepping the Narasu ruling, said that since the triple talaq practice was codified in the Shariat Act, it was no longer just a custom but a legislation.
		+
		+	Speaking to The Indian Express, Jaising said the ruling must be overruled on this point. “The urgency increases with every passing day. More and more reliance is placed on uncodified laws. How can they be beyond the reach of fundamental rights?” she says.
		+
		+	The Narasu ruling, even if not overruled, is significantly diluted. In 2018, another religious custom, barring the entry of menstruating women in the Sabarimala temple, was challenged as being discriminatory. Justice D Y Chandrachud, in the ruling, had said that the Narasu finding was based on “flawed premises”.
		+
		+	“The decision in Narasu, in restricting the definition of the term ‘laws in force’ detracts from the transformative vision of the Constitution. Carving out ‘custom or usage’ from constitutional scrutiny denies the constitutional vision of ensuring the primacy of individual dignity. The decision in Narasu is based on flawed premises. Custom or usage cannot be excluded from ‘laws in force’. The decision in Narasu also opined that personal law is immune from constitutional scrutiny. This detracts from the notion that no body of practices can claim supremacy over the Constitution and its vision of ensuring the sanctity of dignity, liberty and equality,” the temple entry ruling stated.
		+
		+	“The Narasu Appa Mali judgment needed a re-reading, a reinterpretation, but that has not happened. I am not so sure in the current state of affairs whether anybody would like to touch it and open it up for debate because the whole debate has now become communal. In many cases, the courts have not applied Narasu Appa Mali, but found a way around it to speak of gender equity within personal laws, like the triple talaq judgment,” says Flavia Agnes, women’s rights lawyer and co-founder of Majlis, a legal centre for women.
		+
		+	With the Uniform Civil Code high on the BJP’s agenda, Uttarakhand, this year, became the first state to bring in a neutral civil code. When these are tested in courts, the “ghost of Narasu” will be summoned again, but it remains to be seen whether it will be exorcised.
		+
		+	As for Narasu himself, the Bombay High Court had reversed his acquittal. However, since he had “the consent and approval of his first wife”, the High Court did not think his jail term was justified. Paying a fine of Rs 100 in exchange for a month in prison, Narasu had perhaps moved on in life.

	[[Category:History\|P ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY		[[Category:History\|P ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:55, 1 August 2024
Line 103:		Line 103:

	“People see new hope in Congress as we have promised complete farm loan waiver, better support price for paddy (Rs 2,600 per quintal up from the current Rs 1,750) and guaranteed monthly income,” said Odisha state Congress president.		“People see new hope in Congress as we have promised complete farm loan waiver, better support price for paddy (Rs 2,600 per quintal up from the current Rs 1,750) and guaranteed monthly income,” said Odisha state Congress president.
		+
		+	==Naveen era prepared the ground for the BJP victory in 2024==
		+	[https://epaper.indiatimes.com/article-share?article=13_06_2024_020_010_cap_TOI Pinky Hota, June 13, 2024: ''The Times of India'']
		+
		+
		+	After the declaration of Lok Sabha poll results on June 4, Modi began his victory speech with a ‘Jai Jagannath’ chant that drowned out the ‘Jai Sri Ram’ emanating from the crowd. Modi was celebrating his party’s whopping Lok Sabha and assembly victory – in Odisha. BJP won all but one of the state’s 21 parliamentary seats, picking up 12 new ones and altogether removing Biju Janata Dal (BJD) from Parliament. It also gained a majority in assembly (78 of 147 seats), removing Naveen Patnaik, the state’s longest-serving CM, who has run it for nearly a quarter century, from the helm. On Tuesday, the party chose four-time MLA Mohan Charan Majhi, a tribal, as the state’s new CM.
		+
		+	While BJD’s defeat may be in part an anti-incumbency mandate, it is BJD itself that paved the way for BJP’s grand arrival in Odisha.
		+
		+	BJD’s politics soil for BJP’s rise \| Patnaik consolidated a powerful regional movement that for a long time made Odisha immune to national narratives. In the foreground of his vision of a proud Odisha was Hindu identity, with BJD spending ₹800cr on a pilgrimage corridor to Jagannath Temple in Puri.
		+
		+	But this Odisha-for-Hindu Odias logic primed voters for the triumph of BJP and its political Hinduism narrative. In 2024, the party challenged BJD precisely over who best represents and is most suited to preserve the state’s ‘pure’ Hindu identity.  Building up an image of a weak Patnaik, Modi claimed that the CM, who is only four years his senior, was too frail for the task, and vowed to create a committee of inquiry to look into his health. Patnaik’s closest confidant, a Tamil Nadu-born former IAS officer, VK Pandian, was accused of being CM’s puppeteer and a Tamil intruder to boot. Much was made of Pandian being a ‘foreigner’ and a political impostor attempting to steal Odisha’s wealth.
		+
		+	EC ordered the transfer of Pandian’s wife Sujata Karthikeyan, also a bureaucrat, who led Mission Shakti and played a pivotal role in BJD’s mobilisation of women through self-help groups, healthcare coverage, and expansion of women’s reservations in panchayati and LS seats.
		+
		+	BJD’s success with women was no match for this year’s battle over political Hinduism. Running with the Odia Hindu Asmita – Odia Hindu Pride – slogan, BJP beat Patnaik at his own game.
		+
		+	BJP inroads into tribes \| BJD’s reliance on upper-caste Hindus backfired. SCs and STs constitute 40% of Odisha, while OBCs make up another 40%. BJP expanded across the state substantially by pulling tribal communities into the Hindu fold, which Patnaik’s Odia Asmita, by stoking Hindu pride, had paved such a smooth road for. Most tribal votes went to BJP, including in Mayurbhanj district, home of Droupadi Murmu, a tribal woman propelled to international fame two years back when she became President.
		+
		+	Hinduisation of Odia tribes has pitted Adivasis against Dalits, whom Christian missionaries have been converting since the 19th century. There has been wave after wave of religious violence since 2008, when the murder of a VHP leader precipitated a pogrom against Christian Dalits in Kandhamal. This Adivasi-Tribal opposition was a winning strategy for BJP: tribals constitute 23% of the population, while Dalits make up only 17%.
		+
		+	BJD’s skewed growth model \| Patnaik’s earlier success rested substantially on Odisha boasting one of the country’s fastest growing economies that attracted a lot of FDI, being focused on exploiting its wealth of natural resources.
		+
		+	While the promotion of Odisha as an ecotourist destination raised its national status as an upper-class travel destination, Patnaik’s vision of economic development leaned heavily on big capital investing in extraction.
		+	For all his claims about BJD being a pro-poor party, its economic success ended up dispossessing Adivasis and Dalits. The notorious Vedanta displacement of the Dongria Konds from areas around their sacred mountain Niyamgiri is but one example.
		+
		+	In the mineral-rich Sukinda town in Jajpur district, tribal residents voted against BJD for failing to address illegal mining, which Patnaik’s administration hadn’t stopped, and which had contaminated the town’s groundwater. While investments bloom, malnutrition remains chronic in the region, with tribals still migrating in droves for precarious, daily-wage labour.
		+
		+	Even ecotourism ended up being extractive rather than conservationist in nature, with tribal communities excluded from its profits.
		+
		+	BJP has its task cut out \| It remains to be seen if tribal conditions in Odisha will improve under BJP. In Chhattisgarh, BJP has tweaked key laws protecting Adivasi autonomy and access to forests. Activists have alleged BJP doesn’t respect Adivasi rights and that it has targeted Adivasi Christians.
		+
		+	The strategic elevation of tribal leaders like Murmu, an Odia Santhal woman, and portrayal of Adivasis as ‘proto-Hindus’ who can be mobilised against Christian and Muslim minorities, have successfully rendered BJP the state’s ‘tribal party’. Majhi, Odisha’s first BJP CM, is also a Santhal leader, from the same tribe as India’s President, and from Keonjhar, an important mineral mining district.
		+
		+	To counter the destruction of Odisha’s ecology while protecting its minorities, a shared Dalit-Bahujan-Adivasi platform will have to work against progressive deforestation, expedited by the region’s rampantly extractive economy.
		+
		+	The writer is an associate professor of anthropology at Smith College, US
		+
		+	[[Category:History\|P ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY
		+	ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY]]
		+	[[Category:India\|P ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY
		+	ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY]]
		+	[[Category:Odisha\|P ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY
		+	ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY]]
		+	[[Category:Pages with broken file links\|ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY
		+	ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY]]
		+	[[Category:Politics\|P ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY
		+	ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY]]

	=Chief Ministers=		=Chief Ministers=

@@ Line 69: / Line 69: @@
 [[Category:Politics|P ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY
 ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY]]
 =The Naveen Patnaik era=
@@ Line 101: / Line 102: @@
 BJP and Congress — faced with the Naveen juggernaut — are hoping the people are in the mood for change. “ E veryone is comparing 19 years of Naveen in Odisha with just five years of Modi at the Centre,” BJP state vice-president Sameer Mohanty said.
-“People see new hope in Congress as we have promised complete farm loan waiver, better support price for paddy (Rs 2,600 per quintal up from the current Rs 1,750) and guaranteed monthly income,” said Odisha state Congress president
+“People see new hope in Congress as we have promised complete farm loan waiver, better support price for paddy (Rs 2,600 per quintal up from the current Rs 1,750) and guaranteed monthly income,” said Odisha state Congress president.
 =Economy vis-à-vis  neighbouring states=

@@ Line 138: / Line 138: @@
  “Our concerns are on issues relating to pride, dignity and welfare of (Odiyas)... We are unable to agree with the state govt,” state BJP chief Manmohan Samal posted.
-[[Category:History|P ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY
+==Lok Sabha elections==
 ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY]]
-[[Category:India|P ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY
+[[Category:India|P ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY
 ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY]]
-[[Category:Odisha|P ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY
+[[Category:Odisha|P ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY
 ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY]]
-[[Category:Pages with broken file links|ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY
+[[Category:Pages with broken file links|ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY
 ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY]]
-[[Category:Politics|P ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY
+[[Category:Politics|P ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY
 ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:12, 14 May 2024
Line 32:		Line 32:

	The Patnaiks belong to the ‘Karana’ caste, who make up less than 1% of the state’s population but dominate the political landscape in a state that has not been known to vote on caste lines. Odisha’s population includes 22.8% scheduled tribes, 17% scheduled castes and 54% backward castes.		The Patnaiks belong to the ‘Karana’ caste, who make up less than 1% of the state’s population but dominate the political landscape in a state that has not been known to vote on caste lines. Odisha’s population includes 22.8% scheduled tribes, 17% scheduled castes and 54% backward castes.
		+
		+	===As in 2024 May===
		+	[https://epaper.indiatimes.com/article-share?article=11_05_2024_020_007_cap_TOI Ashok Pradhan, May 11, 2024: ''The Times of India'']
		+
		+
		+	Bhubaneswar: The Patnaiks have been the most dominant force in Odisha’s political and economic landscape. Just three individuals from two Patnaik families —Janaki Ballav (JB), Biju and the latter’s son Naveen — have governed the state as chief ministers for 45 years of the 77 since Independence. In the last 32 years, however, Odisha has seen 11 CMs.
		+
		+	Patnaiks, with variations in spelling, belong to the ‘Karan’ caste. Another prominent surname from the community is Mohanty. They comprise around 2% of the state’s population. Such is their prominence in Odisha’s politics that many refer to them as “political caste” by many.
		+
		+	Naveen, seeking a sixth term in office, has been at the helm since March 2000. If elected again, he will become the country’s longest serving CM in Aug, going past Sikkim ex-CM Pawan Chamling. His father, Biju, was Odisha CM from 1961 to 1963 and 1990 to 1995. JB governed the state for 14 years, from 1980 to 1989, and again from 1995 to 1999.
		+
		+	A bachelor at 77, Naveen, has earlier said no member of his family would enter politics. It has, however, been a subject of speculation that either his nephew Arun Patnaik or his niece Gayatri, kids of his elder brother Prem, may take over. The chatter has subsided recently with Naveen’s aide, V K Pandian, emerging as BJD’s second-in-command.
		+
		+	Another Karan, Nabakrushna Chaudhary (1950-1952 and 1952 to 1956) was CM for six years. Other CMs include largely Brahmins, some Rajputs, barring Nilamani Routray (OBC, 1977-1980), and two tribals Hemananda Biswal and Giridhar Gamang. The total tenure of Hemananda (Dec 1989-March 1990, Dec 1999-March 2000) and Giridhar (Feb 1999 to Dec 1999) as CM was 14 months.
		+
		+	“Karans and Brahmins together comprise less than 10% of the population but continue to dominate Odisha’s politics and business,” said R K Satapathy, a retired political science professor.
		+
		+	Shukadeb Naik, a former sociology professor, said unlike many other states, caste has never been much of a factor in among voters in Odisha. However, the leadership position has been largely occupied by the forward castes. “Giridhar and Hemanand may be called exceptions as they were made CMs for a few months each as a token gesture by the Congress high command,” he said. The state has around 22.8% tribals and 17% Scheduled Castes and an estimated over 50% OBCs.
		+
		+	Patnaiks dominate leadership positions in the opposition rank and files as well. Congress state unit president Sarat Pattanayak and its election coordination committee chief Bijay Patnaik, a former chief secretary, are from the Karan caste though from different clans.
		+
		+	Members of Congress strongman JB’s clan are also fighting polls. JB’s son, Pruthvi Ballav (47), is seeking to make his political debut from Begunia on a Congress ticket. JB’s son-in-law, Soumya Ranjan Patnaik, has entered the fray from Ghasipura assembly seat as an Independent. Soumya, a media baron, was elected BJD MLA in 2019. His elder brother Niranjan Patnaik, a former Odisha Congress chief, has been contesting from the Bhandaripokhari assembly seat.
		+
		+	Dipti Ranjan Patnaik, the elder brother of Niranjan and Soumya, leads a business empire with interests ranging from mining to seafood. The Karan caste’s influence can be seen across various sectors — real estate, education, media, seafood and mining in this mineral-rich state. The SN Mohanty Group, another business house owned by the Karans, donated around Rs 45 crore in electoral bonds to BJD.
		+
		+	Though the current state BJP chief Manmohan Samal and party’s prominent Odisha face Dharmendra Pradhan belong to OBCs, Samir Mohanty, who was earlier the state BJP chief, is a Karan. Two notable figures in BJP, Aparajita Sarangi and Baijayant Panda, are Brahmins.
		+
		+	[[Category:History\|P ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY
		+	ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY]]
		+	[[Category:India\|P ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY
		+	ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY]]
		+	[[Category:Odisha\|P ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY
		+	ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY]]
		+	[[Category:Pages with broken file links\|ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY
		+	ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY]]
		+	[[Category:Politics\|P ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORYODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY
		+	ODISHA: POLITICAL HISTORY]]

	=The Naveen Patnaik era=		=The Naveen Patnaik era=