Linguistic Reorganisation of States

Why language became a political question

The provinces of British India were drawn for administrative convenience and the accidents of conquest. The Madras Presidency included Tamil, Telugu, Malayalam and Kannada speakers; Bombay included Marathi, Gujarati and Kannada areas; and Hyderabad state had Telugu, Marathi and Kannada regions. During the national movement, the Congress had itself promised linguistic provinces. At its Nagpur session in 1920 it reorganised its own provincial committees on linguistic lines, and the Nehru Report (1928) supported the idea. Language, people argued, would make administration and education accessible in the mother tongue and bring government closer to the people. After independence, however, the partition riots made the leadership cautious. Nehru and Patel feared that redrawing boundaries on the basis of language would encourage separatism at a time when national unity was fragile. The story of how India moved from caution to acceptance is a key topic for both Prelims and Mains.

The first commissions

• Dhar Commission (1948) – the Linguistic Provinces Commission headed by S.K. Dhar recommended reorganisation on the basis of administrative convenience rather than language, and advised against immediate change.
• JVP Committee (1948–49) – a Congress committee of Jawaharlal Nehru, Vallabhbhai Patel and Pattabhi Sitaramayya also rejected language as the basis for reorganisation for the time being. It said that national security and unity must come first, although it left the door open where demand was strong and widely agreed.

The turning point: Andhra

The Telugu-speaking people of the Madras Presidency had demanded a separate state for decades. In October 1952, Potti Sriramulu, a Gandhian, began a fast unto death for an Andhra state. He died on 15 December 1952, after 58 days. Riots and protests broke out across the Telugu region. Within days Nehru announced the creation of Andhra State, which came into being on 1 October 1953 with Kurnool as its capital. It was the first state formed on a linguistic basis. The demand then spread across India.

The States Reorganisation Commission (1953–55)

In December 1953 the government set up the States Reorganisation Commission (SRC) under Justice Fazl Ali, with K.M. Panikkar and H.N. Kunzru as members. Its report (1955) broadly accepted language as the basis of reorganisation but rejected the theory of "one language, one state". It said four factors must be weighed:

1. Preservation and strengthening of the unity and security of India.
2. Linguistic and cultural homogeneity.
3. Financial, economic and administrative considerations.
4. Planning and the welfare of the people in each state and the nation as a whole.

The States Reorganisation Act, 1956 and the 7th Constitutional Amendment, 1956 implemented the plan. The old classification of Part A, B, C and D states was abolished, and India was divided into 14 states and 6 Union Territories. Kerala was formed by joining Travancore-Cochin with the Malabar district; Mysore state got Kannada areas from Bombay, Madras and Hyderabad; and the Telugu areas of Hyderabad (Telangana) were joined to Andhra to form Andhra Pradesh (1 November 1956), with a "gentlemen's agreement" to protect Telangana's interests.

Reorganisation after 1956

India today has 28 states and 8 Union Territories.

Did linguistic states weaken unity?

The fears of the early leaders largely did not come true. Most scholars agree that linguistic reorganisation strengthened Indian unity:

• It removed a major source of grievance and allowed regional identities to coexist with an Indian identity.
• It made democracy more participatory: politics, administration and education in the local language opened the door to new social groups.
• Regional parties grew, but they mostly worked within the constitutional system.
• Language-based states did not lead to secession; the main insurgencies (Naga, Mizo, Punjab, Kashmir) had other causes.

There were costs and unfinished issues:

• Border disputes – Belagavi between Karnataka and Maharashtra, and river-water disputes made more complex by new boundaries.
• Linguistic minorities inside each state – the Constitution provides safeguards under Articles 29, 30, 347, 350A and 350B (a Special Officer for Linguistic Minorities).
• Later demands moved from language to development and regional backwardness, as in Uttarakhand, Jharkhand, Telangana and present demands for Vidarbha, Gorkhaland and Bodoland.

The official language question

Alongside states, India had to settle the language of the Union. The Constitution (Articles 343–351) made Hindi in Devanagari the official language, with English continuing for 15 years. When the deadline of 1965 approached, there were violent anti-Hindi agitations in Tamil Nadu. The Official Languages Act, 1963 (amended 1967) allowed English to continue indefinitely alongside Hindi. The three-language formula in education was the compromise. The Eighth Schedule started with 14 languages and now lists 22.

Case study: the Samyukta Maharashtra movement

The SRC had recommended keeping Bombay as a bilingual state of Marathi and Gujarati speakers, mainly because of the special position of Bombay city, India's commercial capital, where Gujarati business interests were strong. Marathi speakers saw this as a denial of their claim, since the city lay in Marathi-speaking territory. The Samyukta Maharashtra Samiti, formed in 1956 by leaders such as S.M. Joshi, S.A. Dange, P.K. Atre and Keshavrao Jedhe, led mass protests, strikes and street meetings. Police firing in Bombay in 1955–56 killed over a hundred people; the memorial at Hutatma Chowk (Martyrs' Square) remembers them. In parallel the Mahagujarat movement, led by Indulal Yagnik, demanded a separate Gujarat. The Congress lost heavily in the Marathi areas in the 1957 elections. Finally, on 1 May 1960, the Bombay Reorganisation Act created Maharashtra, with Bombay as its capital, and Gujarat, with Ahmedabad as its first capital (later Gandhinagar). 1 May is still celebrated as Maharashtra Day and Gujarat Day. The episode showed that a democratic government had to respond to strong, peaceful popular demand, and that language identity was compatible with loyalty to the nation.

Mains practice question

"Linguistic reorganisation of states, once feared as a threat, became a pillar of Indian unity." Examine. (250 words)

Answer framework

• Intro: Congress promise, post-partition caution (Dhar, JVP).
• Body: Andhra and Potti Sriramulu; SRC criteria; 1956 Act; later reorganisations.
• Strengthened unity: accommodation, participation, no secession.
• Problems: border disputes, minorities, new demands on development lines.
• Conclusion: flexible federalism (Article 3) as a safety valve.