Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content. |
Contents |
Ten essential facts
The Times of India, October 31, 2015
.jpg)
1.
The Iron Man of India, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, passed Class 10 at the age of 22. Today, at this age most youngsters proceed to colleges for higher studies and some even opt for employment. Patel travelled to attend schools in Nadiad, Petlad and Borsad.
2.
On January 5, 1917 Sardar was elected councillor of the Ahmedabad municipality for the first time. He had contested from Dariyapur seat then, and had won by just one vote. In 1924, Sardar was elected president of Ahmedabad municipality.
3.
India had just two public health laboratories - in Pune and in Karachi in 1921. Sardar felt the need for more such laboratories that could track diseases and keep a check on quality of drinking water supply and food supplies. The third laboratory was set up within Dudheshwar waterworks compound at Shahibaugh.
4.
When corruption charges were pressed against Sardar Patel and 18 other councillors in Ahmedabad municipality, he sought Jinnah's help. In April 28, 1922, a case of 'misrepresentation of funds' worth Rs 1.68 lakh was registered in Ahmedabad District Court (ADC). Sardar successfully defended the case in ADC. But he was dragged to the Bombay High Court in 1923. Jinnah led a panel of lawyers and fought for Sardar Patel, winning the case.
5.
The assembly of the first Gujarati typewriter was commissioned by Sardar in 1924. For this, the Ahmedabad municipality had approached Remington company and paid it Rs 4,000 for putting together the first typewriter in the Gujarati language.
6. Sardar happened to be the first to pitch for removing "sexual disqualification" in the district municipal Act.
By this Act, women were barred from contesting elections as per Section 15(1)(C). A resolution was passed in this regard in the Ahmedabad municipality general board on February 13, 1913. Sardar had argued that keeping women out of the elected body was equivalent to eliminating the representation of half of the urban population. In 1926, Section 15(1)(c) was abolished. 7. After seeking help from nagarsheths Vadilal Sarabhai and Chunilal Chinoy for construction of VS Hospital, Sardar wrote to the provincial government for a grant of Rs 5 lakh to Rs 10 lakh in April 1927. Patel had earlier suggested that the city civil hospital should be under municipal control. But this suggestion was rejected. It was then that Vadilal Sarabhai and Chunilal Chinoy contributed for constructing a new hospital and a 21 acre plot was earmarked for it.
.jpg)
8. Sardar Patel was against anybody - including his close kin - using his name for profit.
Sardar was so strict about this that he had once told his son, Dahyabhai, to stay away from Delhi if possible, so long as he (Sardar) was in the national capital. "Don't misuse my name. Don't use my name for any favours in Delhi. Till I am in Delhi, stay away from it as far as you can," Sardar had written to his son.
9. In April 1947, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, then a Home member of the interim government, started his tour in Gujarat asking people to maintain calm and communal harmony. There had been a series of skirmishes.
In one meeting in Ahmedabad, Patel expressed his anxiety, "A snake grows a new skin to take place of the worn out one it sheds." Sardar further added, "We may become politically sovereign, but internally we lack the attributes of a free people, such as equality, cohesion and national character." He asked, "Has India organized a new state and society to replace the old order which she wants to discard?"
10. Sardar Patel was completely against building statues and memorials. If he were alive today, he would have opposed the state government's project under which a Rs3,000 crore sculpture of the Iron Man himself is coming up at Kevadiya near the Narmada dam. The 'Statue of Unity' will be the world's tallest structure of this kind when completed.
Milestones in the Sardar’s life
The Times of India, Nov 02 2015
Sardar passes Std 10
This may sound like a horror story for parents today but the iron Man of India, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, passed Class 10 at the age of 22. Today, at this age most youngsters proceed to colleges for higher studies and some even opt for employment. Patel travelled to attend schools in Nadiad, Petlad and Borsad.
Elected councillor
On January 5, 1917 Sardar was elected councillor of the Ahmedabad municipality for the first time. He had contested from Dariyapur seat then, and had won by just one vote. Even in Sardar's first election, he had courted controversy. A candidate MM Narmawalla had petitioned before district judge BC Kennedy to raise objections to Sardar's election. Sardar won the case in the end. In 1924, Sardar was elected president of Ahmedabad municipality.
1918: onions
Statue of Unity has brought global attention to Vallabhbhai Patel. But the Sardar’s nationalistic journey actually started with a vegetable, writes Vikram Doctor
It is hard to get a sense of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel’s personal life.
Mahatma Gandhi freely shared the most intimate details of his life in letters to his many correspondents. Jawaharlal Nehru opened up in letters to his daughter and over the years the many people who worked with him left reminiscences that give a certain sense of the inner man. Patel’s writings are almost never personal, but always focused on the issue at hand. He wrote no revelatory diary or memoir. His associates recorded his occasional dry wit, but little sense of his likes and dislikes comes through.
Gandhi gives one of the few glimpses of Patel outside the political sphere in his writings from Yerawada Jail where Patel and he shared a cell. They befriended a prison cat — or the cat befriended them — and every day Patel would share some of their milk in a saucer.
A rather stronger food memory comes from Reginald Reynolds, Gandhi’s young English follower. In To Live in Mankind, his memoir of Gandhi, he recalled an incident at the Sabarmati Ashram when they were gifted a hamper of vegetables, including onions. “They were still classified by ashramites as ‘stimulating food’, enemies of Brahmacharya and almost too indecent to mention,” he writes.
Gandhi’s other British disciple, Mirabehn, who had the ultra-orthodoxy of a convert, ordered them discarded, but Reynolds protested and was suddenly supported by Patel. “Reginald and I will eat them,” he said firmly and the two sat apart and ate the onions “viewed with some horror by our companions, rather as though we had been cannibals.” (Gandhi would later on become convinced about the health benefits of onions and, even more, garlic).
Patel’s liking for onions should not come as a surprise since they had brought him to Gandhi. This was in 1918 in Kheda in Gujarat in one of Gandhi’s first attempts to use the satyagraha concept he had developed in South Africa in India, and in a specifically rural context.
The British were insisting on collecting land tax despite failure of crops which, in that area, included onions. The local collector, Frederick Pratt (who was the brother of William Pratt, also known as Boris Karloff, the actor who created Frankenstein’s monster in the movies) told Gandhi that land tax was the basis of British revenue in India, which made him realise the power of a campaign to refuse to pay it.
A little earlier in Ahmedabad Gandhi had met Patel, a rising young lawyer, and had been impressed by his abilities. Kheda offered a chance to see if he could put these abilities to use in the field and Gandhi set him to work mobilising the farmers and explaining how they could refuse to pay the tax.
The government retaliated by confiscating cattle and other possessions from the farmers and, in some cases, declaring their fields along with any standing crops forfeited. In some cases, farmers about to harvest a crop of onions were directed to cease work.
Gandhi felt the order was legally faulty, and it was also morally wrong to stop farmers from harvesting a much needed crop. He told them to continue harvesting and, in a vegetable version of the salt gathering he would much later instigate at Dandi, he told them: “We may never bow down to blind authority but, if necessary, remove onions and go to jail a thousand times.”
One of the workers, Mohanlal Pandya, duly defied orders and harvested his onions, leading to his prosecution and conviction. He went to jail in triumph, hailed by Gandhi as “dungli chor” or “Onion Thief ”. But the real hero of this Onion Satyagraha was Patel, who had communicated with the farmers and co-ordinated the resistance and Gandhi paid him a fulsome tribute.
In a speech at Nadiad on June 29, 1918 Gandhi admitted that “the first time I saw him I wondered who that stiff man could be. What could he do! But, as I came in contact with him, I knew that I must have him.” Patel had been doing well as a lawyer but he saw the value of Gandhi’s work and came to join him. Now he had proved his worth in the Onion Satyagraha.
“Had I not chanced on Vallabhbhai, what has been achieved would not have been achieved, so happy has been my experience of him,” declared Gandhi that day. In the years to come, Patel would prove his worth to Gandhi and the nationalist movement many times over, in a career that started with onions.
Sets up India's third public health lab
India had just two public health laboratories in Pune and in Karachi in 1921. Sardar felt the need for more such laboratories that could track diseases and keep a check on quality of drinking water supply and food supplies. The third laboratory was set up within Dudheshwar waterworks compound at Shahibaugh. By 1927, before Sardar left active political life in Ahmedabad municipality, nearly 50 per cent of the city had access to piped drinking water and drainage.
The first Gujarati typewriter
The assembly of the first Gujarati typewriter was commissioned by Sardar in 1924. For this, the Ahmedabad municipality had approached Remington company and paid it Rs 4,000 for putting together the first typewriter in the Gujarati language.
His RTE formula
While today our government grapples with implementation of Right To Education Act in our schools, in 1917 Sardar had convinced the governor, Lord Willingdon, that the government should provide free and compulsory education for children in Bombay presidency. After being elected councillor of Ahmedabad municipality, he ensured passing of Bombay Primary Education Bill in Bombay legislative council.
Founding of VS Hospital
After seeking help from nagarsheths Vadilal Sarabhai and Chunilal Chinoy for construction of VS Hospital, Sardar wrote to the provincial government for a grant of Rs 5 lakh to Rs 10 lakh in April 1927. Patel had earlier suggested that the city civil hospital should be under municipal control. But this suggestion was rejected. It was then that Vadilal Sarabhai and Chunilal Chinoy contributed for constructing a new hospital and a 21 acre plot was earmarked for it.
Contribution
Legal acumen
Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel’s legal acumen turned liquor into water for client
The Times of India Parth Shastri,TNN | Oct 31, 2014
AHMEDABAD: Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel's legendary gift of gab which convinced the rulers of various princely states to accede to India was also equally fruitful in the courts of law where he would secure the release of his client by putting even judges on the back foot.
In one case, Sardar, using his unmatched brilliance and acumen, proved that the liquor inside the two bottles seized from his bootlegger client had 'turned into' water.
Ravji Patel, a freedom fighter and contemporary of Sardar and Mahatma Gandhi, documents the wit of the Iron Man as a lawyer in his book, 'Hind na Sardar', published by Navjivan Press. The author doesn't mince words while stating that Sardar in his early career wanted name and fame and thus fought cases defending accused in criminal cases.
An incident that took place at the Borsad court is especially interesting. Sardar Patel was approached by a bootlegger arrested by the excise department. When the case came up for hearing in the court, Sardar insisted that the seized bottles of liquor be examined by doctors. At the time of the second hearing, to everyone's surprise, the medical report stated that the bottles contained only plain water.
The inspector who arrested the bootlegger was befuddled. After the accused was released, the cop approached Sardar for explanation. The lawyer confided in him that the magistrate was habituated to consuming liquor and was known to often target seized bottles, later replacing the liquor with water. He was thus sure of this turn of events," the book reads.
The architect of Modern India
Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel was one of the great social leaders of India. He played a crucial role during the freedom struggle of Indian and was instrumental in the integration of 565 princely states into the Bharat Union. Immediately after independence he played a vital role in reorganizing administrative structure of India; for he established the two All India levels services namely, the Indian Administrative Service and the Indian Police Service. He was the Chairman of three important committees which recommended for provisions for the Indian Constitution, namely: (a) the Fundamental Rights’ Committee (b) the State Constitution Committee (c) the Committee for Minorities. Partition of undivided India into two nations created serious problems of law and order. Patel took these problems head on and resolved them with amazing felicity. Migration of population and relief and rehabilitation of those who were coming from the parts of newly established nation of Pakistan were the most daunting of challenges facing Sardar Patel. Once the border lines were established, about 14.5 million people crossed over to the nation of their choice.
In brief, the accomplishments made by Sardar Patel in a short period of less than four years have no parallel in the entire Indian history. Perhaps such examples are not available even in world history. Dedication for the nation, sincerity and vision were his hallmarks. Whenever and wherever necessary, he took lightening decisions with great foresight, keeping national interest first and foremost. Hence the opening sentence of this presentation that without Sardar Patel the history of contemporary India would be incomplete.
The most herculean and important task that Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel accomplished was the vast political integration of Bharat, which is unprecedented in the annals of India’s long and chequered history.
Mountbatten announced the independence of the country along with its partition into two –India and Pakistan on June 3, 1947. This partition was slated to be completed by August 15, 1947. The most important and challenging task before India then was the geographical integration of the country. Around 565 odd and scattered princely states consisting of total area of 6, 00, 000 square miles were to be merged into the Union of India in a short period of just 72 days, i.e. by August 15, 1947 and that too in a volatile socio-political situation. There were four major problems that India faced at that point of time:
- Newly created Pakistan’s policy of grabbing as many states as possible by taking advantage of flux situation was a great threat to India’s territorial integrity. Pakistan pined for States of Junagarh and Hyderabad most obtrusively. Jinnah’s move of bargaining with the rulers of states, especially of Jaisalmer and Jodhpur, was also inimical to India’s interests;
- Separatist forces which desired India to be a weak nation had started so-called people’s movements in the name of religion and regional identity. This was most evident from incidents in Punjab and north-eastern parts of the country;
- Most of the officials in the higher echelons of government services were English who had already left for their native place. Therefore, administration was inefficient and phlegmatic at the most critical hours of the nascent freedom; and
- False vanity of some of the rulers of states to maintain their own separate kingdoms, as evident from their moves and misdeeds, was impeding the process of integration.
- In such a situation, seventy-two years old Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, without caring much of his health, took the challenge of a gigantic task with indomitable courage and firm determination. He asserted emphatically, ”Now, when we have arrived at the door of long-awaited freedom, we cannot take any more risk for our nation –cannot compromise for its unity and integrity.”
- He worked day and night and finally accomplished the much-awaited task of political integration of India in a short period, that too largely in an atmosphere of harmony, co-ordination and co-operation. The name of VP Menon is worthy of mention here as member of Patel’s dedicated team of workers. It was undoubtedly a task that has no parallel in the world history.
Even after the division that carved out a new nation Pakistan out of it, India remains largest politically integrated land mass ever in her long history of ups and downs. For this, undoubtedly, the credit goes exclusively to the mature and razor sharp statesmanship of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel.
The State of Junagarh came within the fold of the Indian Union due to Sardar’s able and exemplary non-violence-based diplomacy while the State of Hyderabad became a part of India on sheer strength of his unwavering political will. The State of Jammu and Kashmir became part of India only due Sardar Patel’s policy of implementing political decisions into quick action.
India must be a strong nation and it should be safe internally and externally, both. Each and every citizen should contribute towards unity, integrity and development of the nation. Everyone must get equal opportunity to rise. Along with this, there should be no compromise with nation’s unity and security. All activities related to separatism, segregation and regionalism are dangerous. They should not be allowed. Rather, they should be met with firm and speedy action. All efforts should be made towards this end by overcoming of differences of ideas and perceptions with the spirit of national unity. This was Sardar’s socio-political approach. In his own words, ”No one would be permitted to try to damage the unity, security and integration of India. People and organizations indulging in separatist activities should control themselves and get into the mainstream as soon as possible. If they do not do so then there would be no hesitation in taking hard steps against them.”
On the basis of his nationalist ideas Sardar Patel could integrate India, which would be remembered by his compatriots for long time to come. Moreover, we can learn a lot from his ideas and work-ethos to keep Bharat united and find our due place at international level, and trough this to contribute to peace and prosperity all over the world.
(The authors are a J&k based researcher and practising advocate in J&K high court.)
Sardar Patel and Jammu &Kashmir
BD Sharma , Sardar Patel and our state "Daily Excelsior" 23/2/2018
Sardar Patel has been brought in the limelight by the BJP after it emerged as the main opposition party and later on as the ruling party. On the one hand the party designed to belittle Nehru- the icon of the Congress party and its present leadership and on the other hand it eulogised Patel. Sardar Patel fits the bill suitably as some of his thoughts weld in the frame of thinking of BJP. His differences with Nehru on a host of issues are a part of history and provide a lot of fodder both to the historian as well as the common man. Some years back, LK Advani came out with his blog in which he cast aspersions on Nehru for his role during the Hyderabad crisis and sang paeans of Patel on his firm, bold and timely intervention. Some days back Prime Minister Modi in his address in Parliament had also stated that Pt. Nehru had not handled the Kashmir issue properly and if Sardar Patel’s line of thinking were allowed, there would have been no issue on Kashmir as the State would have got fully integrated with India. This assertion of the Prime Minister has been contested by many including Prof Saifuddin Soz, a senior Congress leader, who, as reported in the Daily Excelsior, has contested this statement and asserted that Sardar Patel had consistently been offering Kashmir to Pakistan. It was, however, a folly on the part of Liaqat Ali, who evinced interest in Hyderabad instead of Kashmir despite the fact that Hyderabad had no land connection with Pakistan. He has quoted Mohammad Ali, former Prime Minister of Pakistan and Shaukat Hyat Khan, a senior Muslim League leader in support of his contention.
Simultaneously, the autobiography of Mehr Chand Mahajan, Prime Minister of the State in 1947 is being republished shortly which has also revived the memories of that time. The account given by Mahajan regarding accession of our state and Prime Minister’s speech has raised a lot of interest not only in the media but also in the social media. Obviously the role of Pt. Nehru and Sardar Patel, the two key players in the formative years of our nation come into focus in any discussion of that period. Before independence, Gandhiji had bestowed the leadership of Congress upon Nehru because of his popularity amongst the English elite, flair in international affairs, liberality in outlook and socialistic thinking in economic ideology. Sardar Patel on the other hand, despite his robust organization-building capacity, clear-headed thinking and vast base in the Congress party was left to play the second fiddle. Earlier also he largely remained under the shadow and submission of Mahatma Gandhi. It was during the Cabinet Mission of 1946 that the Sardar came out of his own. Peter Clarke, the famous English historian in his masterly work “The Last Thousand Days of the British Empire” tells us that the Mission wrangled for days together with Congress leaders without any progress because of waywardness of its leaders. Only Patel struck them as a man of business. Mountbatten, immediately after his arrival in India also found Patel to be a man of action and in the course of time engaged with him in solving many intricate problems. It was Mountbatten who insisted upon Nehru to allocate Ministry of States to Patel though Nehru was interested to retain it for himself. The Indian nation should always be thankful to Mountbatten for this decision as it was because of Patel that the integration of States took place smoothly.
Though the Sardar got more than 550 states integrated in India efficiently yet the accession of Jammu and Kashmir remained a bone of contention between the two nations. Many people feel that the problem lingered on because of some decisions of Pt. Nehru like its reference to UNO, the grant of of autonomy to the State and early ceasefire. Patel was not in agreement with him on these decisions, they point out. Some people, on the other hand, assert that it is merely a ploy to denounce Pt Nehru as he had taken all these decisions in consultation with his cabinet colleagues. On the contrary, they point out that it was Patel who was in favour of integration of the State with Pakistan. They refer to various authors in support of their contention.
One of them, Rajmohan Gandhi in his book “Patel; A Life”, states that Patel was ready to hand over the State to Pakistan if Jinnah had agreed to let India have Hyderabad and Junagadh. He refers to Patel’s speech at Bahauddin College in Junagadh in this connection. Another biographer Balraj Krishna, in “Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel” states ‘But for Nehru, he could settle the Kashmir in no time by arranging that the Kashmir valley go to Pakistan and East Pakistan to India. Both countries would benefit from such an arrangement.’ Another book “The Shadow of the Great Game- the Untold Story of India’s Partition” by Narendra Singh Sarila shows that Mountbatten had explained to Maharaja Hari Singh that his choice was between acceding to India or Pakistan and made it clear that he had assurances from the Indian leaders that if he acceded to Pakistan, they would not take amiss. HV Seshadri’s book “The Tragic Story of Partition” has also quoted Menon stating that Patel had no objection to Kashmir going to Pakistan. In “Freedom at Midnight” an exchange between Mountbatten and Patel has been recorded wherein the former proposes that he could motivate the princes to join with India if some of their privileges are allowed to be retained. Patel agrees to the proposal provided all the ‘apples’ are put in his basket. Mountbatten asks for sparing a dozen apples and later Patel agrees to leave six. Some people take the reference to apples as an allusion to Kashmir.
The proponents of this theory easily forget that the events were taking turns very rapidly before 15th August, 1947 and negotiations regarding mergers of States were taking place hectically. A number of options were being evaluated by all the players in the game. In the course of these discussions even if any option regarding the merger of our State had been contemplated in one way or the other by Patel, the same cannot be construed to be in accordance with the contours of his thinking. So to suggest that Patel had consistently been for merger of the State with Pakistan is strange and illogical. It is unbelievable that a pragmatic and seasoned leader like Patel would not have seen the writing on the wall like the Maharaja though showing his keenness on independence but never thinking of acceding to Pakistan. Then Sheikh Abdullah, a popular leader of Kashmir was vociferously advocating accession of the State to India. According to Maniben’s Diary, Patel had been actively interacting with Sheikh Abdullah and then Dy Chief Minister. of State Batra during the months of Sept. and October, 1947. This was obviously for accession of State and shows Patel’s deep keenness in ensuring it. As far as the other opinion is concerned, only a naïve would have asked Jinnah to surrender its East wing i.e. half of Pakistan in exchange of Kashmir.
No doubt, Pt Nehru was taking a lot of interest in the affairs of our state much before the dawn of independence because of his emotional attachment to the State and his friendship with Sheikh Abdullah. Sardar Patel had in the circumstances seen advantage in having Nehru in the driver’s seat. But Patel was not found wanting as and when the need arose. It has been revealed by Gen. Manik Shah (then Colonel) to journalist Prem Shanker Jha that when the question of sending the army to Kashmir was being discussed in the Defence Council, Panditji had reservations for fear of adverse reaction from the international community. He was showing some reluctance to send the army even after being told about the seriousness of the situation near Srinagar on 25th October 1947. Nehru started talking about the United Nations, Russia, Africa, God Almighty, everybody, until Patel lost his temper. He said, ‘Jawaharlal, do you want Kashmir, or do you want to give it away.’ Nehru said, “Of course, I want Kashmir.” Then Patel said, “Please give your orders.” And before Nehru could say anything Sardar Patel turned to Manekshaw and said,’ you have got your orders’. Army consequently was rushed and the situation was saved. A man with such clarity in his mind with respect to his country’s objective and who could go even to the extent of crossing swords with his Prime Minister over it, would have never thought of handing over Kashmir to Pakistan.
Thirdly, Patel involved himself head and soul in monitoring the army operations in Kashmir. As told by Gen. Harbaksh Singh (then Dy Brig. Comm.) Patel air dashed to Srinagar as early as on 4th of November, 19 47 along with Sardar Baldev Singh to personally take stock of the situation and to assess Army’s further requirements despite the situation around the Srinagar air field being very vulnerable. No one can ever believe that a man who was so comprehensively involved in ensuring the ouster of raiders from the state would ever think of gifting the same to Pakistan.
It goes without saying that Patel had no cobwebs regarding integration of the state as has been highlighted by Durga Dass, the veteran journalist who records in his book’ India from Curzon to Nehru’ that Nehru favoured incorporation of a section in the constitution establishing a special relationship with the State. Patel wanted the state to be fully integrated with the Union. The Cabinet was divided over this and the Constituent Assembly favoured the Sardar’s stand. However in deference to the smooth functioning of the Govt., Patel agreed to back Nehru’s formula. This fact also unequivocally proves his clear headed approach regarding the accession of the state.
In the ultimate analysis it would be wrong to brush aside Nehru’s contribution as it was because of Nehru that Sheikh Abdullah came forward in favour of accession and to army’s support and maintenance of communal harmony. Moreover, Nehru’s influence over the Governor General was also helpful. However it is also a fact that Pt. Nehru committed some mistakes in the matter over a period of time. He was too sensitive to international opinion without realizing that in the process of laying strong foundations of a nation, a statesman has to act firmly and bid goodbye to feeble niceties. Many a time he could not foresee the consequences of his actions and often found his feet away from the ground of realpolitik. Patel, on the other hand, was an embodiment of realism. He was pragmatic, practical and a hard but realistic bargainer. He dealt with any issue with a firm and ruthless hand and one can safely say that if he had his way, he would have tackled this issue in a more pragmatic manner.
(The author is a former civil servant)
The Great Unifier
Swaminathan Aiyar’s caveats
Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel was … India’s ‘Iron Man’. As home minister in 1947, he helped weld together over 500 princely states to create a unified India. His birthday is now celebrated as National Unity Day.
Paeans of praise have been heaped on Patel. …He was a great Independence leader. Yet his anniversary is an occasion to remember his failures as well as successes.
When Independence was close in 1946, the Congress and Muslim League jointly formed an interim government. Nehru was Prime Minister, Patel was home minister and Liaquat Ali Khan was finance minister. In this power-sharing experiment, the Congress should have gone all out to accommodate the Muslim League, showing that Hindus and Muslims could work together in a united India, avoiding Partition. This did not happen.
Leonard Mosley’s ‘The Last Days of the British Raj’ relates how Patel, supposedly the second most powerful minister, was infuriated that he could not even appoint a chaprasi without finance ministry sanction, which Liaquat would not easily give. Liaquat’s bureaucratic games made life difficult for all Congress ministers.
The crunch came in 1947. Indian industrialists had made fortunes during World War II because of scarcities. Liaquat presented a supposedly socialist budget with high taxes to claw back inequitable gains made during the war. Gujarat’s textile industrialists, friends and supporters of Patel, castigated this as a Muslim League attack on them, disguised as socialism. This added to Patel’s growing feeling that cohabitation with the Muslim League was not possible.
Actually, the Gujarat industrialists were guilty of Hindu communalism. Parsi and Muslim industrialists were hit by high taxes too. Patel should have shrugged off Liaquat’s budget as a headache inevitable in power sharing. That did not happen.
In February 1947, the Congress party was dead against Partition. Within four months, the party did a U-turn and opted for Partition. The Liaquat budget was not the only reason. Jinnah’s Direct Action Day in 1946 had sparked an orgy of communal killing that spread across India in subsequent months, and some Congress leaders thought that giving Muslims the Pakistan they wanted might create communal peace. Alan Campbell-Johnson’s ‘Mission with Mountbatten’ cites Nehru wryly saying that one way to cure a headache was to cut off the cause of the headache.
Then came the Mountbatten offer to advance the date of Independence from June 1948 to August 1947, provided the Congress and Muslim League could agree on a political package. This proved the clincher. Unable to resist the bait of early independence, all top Congress leaders (including Patel) agreed with the Muslim League on partitioning India.
Thus, Patel was an architect of Partition. Partition was a Great Division. Along with Patel, all top Congress leaders were Great Dividers.
The second great blunder was the decision to go for Partition at breakneck speed. Such a major change required careful consultation and preparation. Patel as home minister should have argued that rapid, unprepared Partition would be a public order disaster, especially when mass murder and migration started. Instead, he, along with leaders of both countries, persisted with a flawed Partition that killed a million people and created 10 million refugees, one of the greatest human disasters in history.
British India had 584 princely states, mostly with Hindu majorities. Patel persuaded over 500 of these to accede to India. For this he is called the Great Unifier. However, Pakistan also succeeded in integrating all Muslim-majority princely states, despite lacking a Patel. The princes acceded because they knew they faced military takeover if they resisted, a fate that befell Kashmir and Hyderabad. Unification of the princely states with India and Pakistan was inevitable, with or without Patel.
Views
Mooted women's representation
Sardar happened to be the first to pitch for removing “sexual disqualification“ in the district municipal Act. By this Act, women were barred from contesting elections as per Section 15(1)(C). A resolution was passed in this regard in the Ahmedabad municipality general board on February 13, 1913. Sardar had argued that keeping women out of the elected body was equivalent to eliminating the representation of half of the urban population. In 1926, Section 15(1)(c) was abolished.
Did not want family to exploit his name
The Times of India, Nov 02 2015
Parth Shastri
Iron will against use of name Sardar opposed
Sardar Patel warned his son, Dahyabhai, never to use his name for personal gains
Sardar Patel was against anybody — including his close kin — using his name for profit. Sardar was so strict about this that he had once told his son, Dahyabhai, to stay away from Delhi if possible, so long as he (Sardar) was in the national capital.
This may sound unbelievable at a time when cast-based reservations are being demanded in his name or when the state government is building his statue to show itself as the legitimate heir of his political legacy.
His grandson, Bipin Patel has written in his memoirs that Sardar Patel had told Dahyabhai in a letter written in the late 1940s, that if he is unable to sustain himself, he could go to him in Delhi.
“Don’t misuse my name. Don’t use my name for any favours in Delhi. Till I am in Delhi, stay away from it as far as you can,” Sardar had written to his son Professor Ramji Savaliya, director of BJ Institute of Learning and Research, said Rajmohan Gandhi, in his biography of Sardar Patel, had also mentioned a similar incident involving Dahyabhai and the Iron Man.
“In 1945, Sardar once asked his son to leave his room when he went to seek the former’s per mission to exchange a Karachi-based company for land left by a Muslim who had and Research, said Rajmohan Gandhi, in his biography of Sardar Patel, had also mentioned a similar incident involving Dahyabhai and the Iron Man.
“In 1945, Sardar once asked his son to leave his room when he went to seek the former's per mission to exchange a Karachi-based company for land left by a Muslim who had gone over to Pakistan,” said Savaliya.
“It was his concern that his position could be exploited by nefarious elements and his family might not be spared. Both his children — Dahyabhai and Maniben — became MPs but they lived by the standard set for himself by Sardar Patel,” said Savaliya. Savaliya said that Sardar had himself set high standards for public servants. “Even today, Sardar’s family has largely stayed out of politics,” said Savaliya. family might not be spared. Both his children -Dahyabhai and Maniben -became MPs but they lived by the standard set for himself by Sardar Patel,“ said Savaliya. Savaliya said that Sardar had himself set high standards for public servants. “Even today , Sardar's family has largely stayed out of politics,“ said Savaliya.
Opposed memorials, statues
The Times of India, Nov 02 2015
Kapil Dave
If Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel were alive today, he would have opposed the state government’s project under which a Rs3,000 croresculpture of the Iron Man himself is coming up at Kevadiya near the Narmada dam. The ‘Statue of Unity’ will be the world’s tallest structure of this kind when completed. Soon after Mahatma Gandhi’s death on January 30, 1948, Sardar Patel wrote a long article on February 22, 1948, in the 'Harijan Bandhu' newspaper on the enthusiasm for constructing temples, statues and mem o r i a l s dedicated to Gandhiji after his death, says city based historian Rizwan Kadri. Quoting Bapu himself, Sardar Patel appealed to people that Gandhiji — who was for ‘rachnatmak karya’ (creative public service) — was against waste of public money on temples, statues and memorials of leaders.
Hence, it would be not appro death on January 30, 1948, Sardar Patel wrote a long article on Febru ary 22, 1948, in the 'Harijan Bandhu' news paper on the en thusiasm for constructing temples, stat ues and me morials dedicated to Gandhiji after his death, says city based his torian Rizwan Kadri. Quoting Bapu himself, Sardar Patel ap pealed to people that Gandhiji wh o w a s f o r `rachnatmak kar ya' (creative public service) -was against waste of public money on temples, lic money on temples, statues and memori als of leaders.
Hence, it would be not appro priate to build such memorials for him, he said.
“I express my displeasure over the ongoing attempts to build temples in the name of Gandhiji and statues for worshiping or a kind of memorial,” Sardar Patel wrote. “I believe Gandhiji would have felt pained at such things. He had expressed his thoughts on this issue in clear words several times. So I appeal to all to stop thinking of building such memorials or anything like that immediately.” Sadar Patel said that that the best memorial to Gandhiji — and one which he would have approved — is to follow his ideals and carry forward his creative public service. “The best way is to keep him alive in the temple of our hearts forever, said Sardar.
Are we really free?
The Times of India, Nov 02 2015
In April 1947, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, then a Home member of the interim government, started his tour in Gujarat asking people to maintain calm and communal harmony. There had been a series of skirmishes. In one meeting in Ahmedabad, Patel expressed his anxiety, “A snake grows a new skin to take place of the worn out one it sheds.“
Sardar further added, “We may become politically sovereign, but internally we lack the attributes of a free people, such as equality, cohesion and national character.“
He asked, “Has India organized a new state and society to replace the old order which she wants to discard?“
R S S, minority communities, China
Yashee, Dec 17, 2022: The Indian Express
Unlike the other members of the ‘triumvirate’ that shaped independent India, Jawaharlal Nehru and Mahatma Gandhi, Sardar Patel, ever the man of action, does not leave behind copious writings on his views and beliefs. This has often led to muddled debates on what the lifelong Congressman stood for. However, the Sardar did make a number of public speeches in his long political career, which have been collected and published. These, along with his letters, and of course his actions, give a fairly detailed picture of his convictions and his aspirations for India.
Here are Patel’s views on three subjects that are as relevant today as they were to the nascent republic of India.
Sardar Patel’s views on R S S
Patel is often believed to be sympathetic to Hindutva causes, but it is important to see his views on the R S S holistically – while he did believe that many members of the R S S were patriotic and their energies could be used for the country’s welfare, he was clear they had to bow to the Constitution and could have no place in the official state apparatus.
Christophe Jaffrelot has written in The Indian Express, “On January 6, 1948, in a speech in Lucknow, he [Patel] invited the Hindu Mahasabha to amalgamate with the Congress. He held out the same invitation to members of the R S S, criticising Nehru obliquely: “In the Congress,those who are in power feel that by virtue of authority they will be able to crush the R S S. You cannot crush an organisation by using the danda [stick]. The danda is meant for thieves and dacoits. They are patriots who love their country. Only their trend of thought is diverted. They are to be won over by Congressmen with love.””
The R S S, of course, was banned after the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi on January 30, 1948. The Home Ministry headed by Sardar Patel said in its communique announcing the ban, “…the cult of violence sponsored and inspired by the activities of the Sangh has claimed many victims. The latest and most precious to fall was Gandhiji himself. In these circumstances it is the bounden duty of the government to take effective measures to curb this re-appearance of violence in a virulent form and as a first step to this end, they have decided to declare the Sangh as an unlawful association.”
He was clear that the ban could be lifted – but only when the R S S agreed to his conditions, such as giving up secrecy, drafting a constitution for the organisation, and showing loyalty to the Constitution and the flag.
Patel has also addressed the question of his being seen as sympathetic to the R S S. In March 1949, he said in an interview, “You will recall that there was a time when people called me a supporter of the R S S. To some extent that was true because these young men were brave, resourceful and courageous, but they were a little mad. I wanted to utilise their bravery, power and courage and cure them of their madness by making them realise their true responsibilities and their duty. It is that madness that I want to eradicate.”
As administrator, Patel was clear government servants could not join the R S S, believing that no one in an official position should have links to communal organisations.
Sardar Patel’s views on minorities
Patel believed that those who saw themselves as Muslims first had had the option of choosing Pakistan. Those who were now in India had the duty to “forget the classifications of minority-majority and move forward as one”, and trust the “good-sense and sense of fairness of the majority”.
But along with this, he was absolutely clear that “if there is no unity in the country, it is bound to go down”.
In a speech in the Constituent Assembly on May 25, 1949, on the question of whether religious minorities should have reservations in legislative bodies, Patel said, “So far as the other communities are concerned, I feel that enough time was given when we met in February in the Advisory Committee when these proposals were brought forward on behalf of the minorities, particularly the Muslims, enough time was given to consult their own constituencies, their communities and also other minority communities. It is not our intention to commit the minorities to a particular position in a hurry.
If they really have come honestly to the conclusion that in the changed conditions of this country, it is in the interest of all to lay down real and genuine foundations of a secular State, then nothing is better for the minorities than to trust the good-sense and sense of fairness of the majority, and to place confidence in them. So also it is far us who happen to be in a majority to think about what the minorities feel, and how we in their position would feel if we were treated in the manner in which they are treated. But in the long run, it would be in the interest of all to forget that there is anything like majority or minority in this country and that in India there is only one community.”
In a speech in Chennai’s Island Ground after Gandhi’s assassination, Patel said, “The first requisite for building a strong, free India is unity and peace. If there is no unity in the country, it is bound to go down. Therefore, we must first of all adjust our differences and behave in such a manner that there is complete harmony and peace in the country…We in the Government have been dealing with the R.S.S. movement.
They want that Hindu Rajya or Hindu culture should be imposed by force. No Government can tolerate this. There are almost as many Muslims in this country as in the part that has been partitioned away. We are not going to drive them away. It would be an evil day if we started that game, in spite of partition and whatever happens.
We must understand that they are going to stay here and it is our obligation and our responsibility to make them feel that this is their country. It is, of course, their responsibility, on the other hand, to discharge their duties as citizens of this country.”
Sardar Patel’s views on China
On November 7, 1950, Patel wrote a long letter to Nehru detailing his apprehensions about Chinese designs on Tibet and on India itself. History has borne out that Patel’s estimate of China was astute and prescient.
Patel wrote, “…we have to consider what new situation now faces us as a result of the disappearance of Tibet, as we knew it, and the expansion of China almost up to our gates.
Throughout history we have seldom been worried about our north-east frontier. The Himalayas have been regarded as an impenetrable barrier against any threat from the north. We had friendly Tibet which gave us no trouble. The Chinese were divided… China is no longer divided. It is united and strong. All along the Himalayas in the north and north-east, we have on our side of the frontier a population ethnologically and culturally not different from Tibetans and Mongoloids… Recent and bitter history also tells us that communism is no shield against imperialism and that the communist are as good or as bad imperialist as any other.”
Patel wrote that Chinese ambitions did not only cover the “Himalayan slopes on our side but also include the important part of Assam.”
“Chinese irredentism and communist imperialism are different from the expansionism or imperialism of the western powers. The former has a cloak of ideology which makes it ten times more dangerous. In the guise of ideological expansion lie concealed racial, national or historical claims… Our defence measures have so far been based on the calculations of superiority over Pakistan. In our calculations we shall now have to reckon with communist China in the north and in the north-east, a communist China which has definite ambitions and aims and which does not, in any way, seem friendly disposed towards us,” he added.
Muslim friends
Jinnah fought for Sardar
The Times of India, Nov 02 2015
Sardar Patel and Jinnah may seem as two opposite ends of a spectrum. But and Jinnah may seem as two opposite ends of a spectrum. But there was a time when Sardar had sought Jinnah’s help in city, when corruption charges were pressed against him and 18 other councillors in Ahmedabad municipality. In April 28, 1922, a case of ‘misrepresentation of funds’ worth Rs 1.68 lakh was registered in Ahmedabad District Court (ADC). Sardar successfully defended the case in ADC. But he was dragged to the Bombay High Court in 1923. Jinnah led a panel of lawyers and fought for Sardar Patel. Sardar finally won the case.
See also
Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel
