BJP MP stirs Vidarbha pot in Delhi; ripples felt in Mumbai

Nagpur/Mumbai: In a surprising move, BJP MP from Bhandara-Gondia Nana Patole moved a non-government Bill in the Lok Sabha on Friday seeking statehood for Vidarbha. The Bill could not be tabled in the allotted time and is now likely to come up on August 12 but its repercussions were felt more in Mumbai on a day when chief minister Devendra Fadnavis was away in Nagpur. The Congress-NCP Opposition along with the ruling Shiv Sena cornered BJP in the state Legislative Council over the Bill moved by Patole in the Lok Sabha.The ruckus forced the council chairman Ramraje Nimbalkar to adjourn the upper house for the day.
The state assembly was repeatedly adjourned for brief periods and also witnessed pro and anti-Vidarbha members raring for a fight. When pro-Vidarbha BJP MLAs Ashish Deshmukh, Vikas Kumbhare and others entered the well shouting slogans in support of Vidarbha statehood, Sena leader and transport minister Diwakar Raote, joined by some party colleagues, were seen moving menacingly towards them.
An unseemly clash was avoided with ministers Vinod Tawde and Girish Bapat pacifying both the sides. The Shiv Sena has always wanted a united Maharashtra.
But it was the bold step of Patole that stunned supporters as well opponents of the statehood issue. It was a surprise as there is total disinterest in the BJP on statehood for Vidarbha after it came to power in the Centre as well as the state.
Many of the regions leaders, including Nagpur MP Nitin Gadkari and Fadnavis, had assured people of the region that statehood for Vidarbha is priority for BJP. Subsequently, they have either maintained a discreet silence on the issue or passed the buck between state and centre.
Political sources told TOI that a sidelined Patole could have made the move to attract party attention. But he denied it outright. “I have been a fierce supporter of statehood demand all through my political life,” Patole told ToI from New Delhi.
Patole, who left the Congress to join the BJP before the 2009 state elections, said the BJP had at its national executive a few years ago passed a resolution supporting a separate Vidarbha state and therefore he saw nothing wrong in moving the Bill.
Asked about the strong reactions emanating in Mumbai, Patole said the fact that the chief minister (Fadnavis) was from Vidarbha and doing his bit for the region was riling the Sena, the Congress as well as the NCP. “Fadnavis is handling every crisis smoothly, so the opponents of Vidarbha are ganging up and trying to corner him on the statehood issue,” said Patole.
Amid the pandemonium in the Council, Peoples Republican Party MLC Jogendra Kawade was the lone member to stand up in support of statehood for Vidarbha in the 78-member house.
Opposition leader Dhananjay Munde raised the issue through the point of propriety saying that the government should clarify its stand on Vidarbha demand. In the lower house opposition leader Radhakrishna Vikhe Patil too wanted to know if Patole raising the demand in Delhi had support of his party.
“The united Maharashtra came into being after 105 martyrs laid their lives. But in the last few months people like former attorney general Shrihari Aney are demanding not only a separate Vidarbha but a separate Marathwada as well. This is a very serious issue. The government needs to clarify if it supports the MP’s stand,” said Munde.
Sena MLC Neelam Gorhe said the house should pass a proposal unanimously supporting united Maharashtra. Senior Congress leader Narayan Rane expressed doubts over BJP’s political intentions. “A non-government Bill moved by an independent MP can be understood but how can a ruling party MP move such a Bill without party’s concurrence,” Rane asked.
Isolated though he was, Kawade, who has been elected from the Congress quota, summed it up nicely, saying: “Opposing and discussing a non-government Bill moved in Parliament is like opening the umbrella in Mumbai when its raining in Delhi.”
Patole said the Congress leaders like Rane and Vikhe-Patil were carrying forward personal agendas by opposing Vidarbha statehood since the party had never taken a stand on the issue.