‘No sole claimant to Mumbai’

Shirish Parkar, General secretary of Maharashtra Navnirman Sena

States were formed in this country on the basis of language. Bombay state was split into the linguistic states of Gujarat and Maharashtra on May 1, 1960. Based on the same linguistic parameter, Mumbai became part of India. Hundred and five Marathi people sacrificed their lives to keep Mumbai in Maharashtra. This is the history. And it is the Constitution of India which says that Mumbai belongs to Maharashtra and its people.
There is a lot of hue and cry when we say that Maharashtrians should get preference in the jobs created in the state. The debate is then dragged to another tangent and a distorted interpretation of the Constitution is thrown at us — that every Indian has the right to go anywhere in the country.
In my opinion, everyone who pays five per cent stamp duty and one per cent registration fee to Maharashtra government has the right to live in Mumbai. But the illegal encroachments and creation of new votebanks through them should not be allowed.
There are 20 lakh people living in unauthorised structures set up after January 1, 2000. These encroachers have burdened Mumbai’s infrastructure and also made the lives of regular taxpayers difficult. There are no footpaths. People are forced to walk on the roads, risking their lives. Businesses of shopkeepers, who pay regular taxes and water and electricity bills, have suffered because of illegal hawkers. When you think about it rationally, you realise the shallowness of the blanket statement “every Indian has the right to go anywhere”.
Coming back to the point that Maharashtians should get first preference in the jobs created within the state, whether in government or private sector. What is wrong with this demand? Should we not ensure the welfare of 50 lakh unemployed youth in Maharashtra? Forty per cent of the country’s taxes are collected from Maharashtra. And yet Maharashtrians are told that they will not get preference in jobs available in their own state.
This is double standard. Marathi manoos is saying, “I have been tolerant, but still they call me violent”.
The tendency to intentionally hurt Marathi sentiments is increasing. Samajwadi Party MLA Abu Asim Azmi refused to take the four-line oath in Marathi in Maharashtra Assembly. He instigated the violent incident. The letter that he wrote to the Speaker of the House seeking permission to take oath in Hindi was written in Marathi. The controversy created by Sachin Tendulkar’s statement that Mumbai belongs to India was unfortunate.

As told to Prasad Patil

* * *

Teesta Setalvad, Lawyer and secretary of Centre for Justice and Peace

The prime issue is the cosmopolitan history and culture of Mumbai or Bombay or Bambai — a cosmopolis with a rich past and many names.
The city’s birth was not due to a particular community but the result of its strategic location for trade and business which different communities took advantage of and both, the communities and the city, thrived. Hence, there can be no sole claimant to its evolution, either in the past or in the present.
While communities in the city squabble over non-issues like ownership, the city actually faces more serious problems like ghettoisation and segregation.
The root of the problem here stems from the fact that the violent means to express frustrations like joblessness have been insidiously allowed and nurtured by the ruling party since the 60s for obvious reasons. They ensured that by dividing the people there were no grounds for reconciliation.
Instead of channelising these issues into a constructive debate and dialogue, they used the issue to stay in power.
The day threats replace negotiation for peace, the rights discourse gets replaced by violent intolerance.
In Mumbai today we have Sindhis who migrated after the Partition, we have East Indians — the oldest inhabitants — Gujaratis, both Muslims and Hindus, who stood shoulder to shoulder and built this city to become a prosperous business hub of the country.
All the contributors to the prosperity of the city have come from other parts of the country who did well for themselves as well as advanced the fortunes of the city. Likewise, today it is the north Indians who are denied a healthy work culture in their own states and are forced to find better opportunities elsewhere. Hence they flock to Mumbai and other major metropolises. Overcrowded trains, corrupt city administration which has been dominated by the police force since the late 80s, the builder-politician nexus and so on, all these evils have added to the frustration of the ordinary Mumbaikar — be s/he a Marathi, Gujarati, Tamil, Marwadi, Kannadiga, Bihari or from Uttar Pradesh.
Those who use violence to map those frustrations are simply doing so at the behest of those who are responsible for the current state of affairs in the city.
They are the very people who are taken advantage of by the powerful builder lobby which, in turn, is playing footsie with the ruling party and the Opposition to exploit the city for their personal gains.

As told to Prasad Patil