Utkal Gaurab Madhusudan Das as a Protagonist of Gender Equality and Skill Development

by S.N. Sahu

Late Madhusudan Das was an outstanding personality and influential leader of his time. Born in Odisha on April 28, 1848, he led an eventful life marked by manifold accomplishments in diverse fields. Widely acclaimed for exceptionally high standard of service and sacrifice for the cause of Odisha and India, he breathed his last on February 4, 1934. In 1903 he founded the Utkal Sammilani (Utkal Union Conference) which became the nucleus of the historic movement to unify the Odia-speaking areas and create a separate State of Odisha on the basis of language.

A celebrated lawyer, he is part of the folklore of Odisha for achieving extraordinary excellence in the field of law and jurisprudence. His entrepreneurial skills proved his credentials as a dynamic man with a proven legacy for harnessing the business acumen of the people and developing their skills for economically empowering them and enhancing their self-esteem. The Utkal Tannery he established in 1905 to manufacture shoes and use leather for other economic purposes made a profound impact on Mahatma Gandhi who repeatedly referred to it in many parts of India in the context of his arduous efforts for providing alternative occupations to village people who predominantly depended on agriculture to earn their livelihood. Affectionately hailed as Madhubabu in the annals of modern Odisha, a lot has been written and said about him. It is, therefore, important to throw light on some of the extremely critical and sensitive aspects of his remarkable life which have hardly been discussed and disseminated.

Women’s Empowerment through Education

There is a significant gender dimension to one of the epoch-making events of his life. In the year 1848 in which he was born, Jyotiba Phule established the first ever school for girls in our country. It was in the same year that Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels published The Communist Manifesto, the revolutionary document which inspired generations of exploited people to unchain themselves from bondage, exploitation and servitude. The establishment of the first girls’ school in 1848 by Jyotiba Phule was as revolutionary as the Communist Manifesto. Madhubabu, who was born in the year in which the first school for girls was established, took the initiative to establish the first women’s college in Odisha in 1913. He named that college after his adopted daughter, Sailabala, and now it is known as the Sailabala Women’s College enjoying high reputation as an educational institution of excellence. The fact that he founded that College in 1913 spoke volumes of his deep commitment to empower women through education and promote the cause of gender equality and women’s empowerment. One may say that establishment of the Sailabala Women’s College by Madhubabu was as revolutionary a step as the establishment of the first girls’ school by Jyotiba Phule and publication of the Communist Manifesto by Marx and Engels.

To further appreciate his decision to establish the first women’s college in 1913, we need to understand the developments taking place then, both nationally and internationally, concerning women and their struggle for achieving equality and equal opportunity.

At that time in Odisha itself some of the great minds were exercised by the lack of opportu-nities for girls and women to have access to education. This was evident from a few of the articles written in the 1920s by none other than Utkalmani Gopabandhu Das on women’s education in Odisha. In one such article, titled ‘Nari Siksha Brudhi Paiba Kipari’(How to Improve Women’s Education), he regretted that social traditions and customs prescribing confinement of women to home for doing household and family work impeded the progress of women’s education. He, therefore, advocated measures for removing such mindset to ensure women’s access to education.

In 1913 at the international level a great churning was taking place for giving women equal legal rights. It is instructive to note that in 1913 when Madhubabu established the Sailabala College, American women in thousands organised a historic march demanding their right to vote which they eventually got in 1920. Similarly in the UK, the suffragette movement, started by women in the late 19th century, had become intense in 1913 inspired by the ideas of John Stuart Mill who advocated women’s rights and demanded exten-sion of adult suffrage for establishing a better representative government. It is against that background that we need to understand the pioneering role played by Madhubabu to establish the first women’s college in Odisha in 1913.

It is all the more significant to note that the decision of Madhubabu to establish the first ever women’s college in Odisha in 1913 preceded the decision of Maharshi Danda Kishore Karve to establish the first ever women’s college in erstwhile Bombay on July 2, 1916. That college eventually became the first women’s university in the same year following the pattern of the Tokyo Women’s University. Such historical back-drops concerning women’s struggle for their legal rights and progress in education bring out the revolutionary significance of Madhubabu’s decision to establish the first ever women’s college in Odisha.

In the 21st century world gender equality, women’s empowerment and equal status of women with men are considered as major factors for achieving the sustainable developmental goals and countering the ever increasing problems arising out of global warming and climate change. British women themselves issued a manifesto in May 2007, called Women’s Manifesto on Climate Change,1 in which they stated: “We are also insufficiently empowered in taking action in our own homes to mitigate the effects of climate change”, and demanded more education and information so that they could be in a better position to deal with the menace of climate change. Against this background if we look at the decision of Madhu-babu to establish the Sailabala College, we gratefully acknowledge his farsighted approach in empowering women through education in the early part of the second decade of the twentieth century.

Madhubabu opened the Legal Profession to Women Lawyers of India 

In the annals of the history for gender equality Madhusudan Das’ name will shine forever for his exceptional struggle for allowing women law graduates to enter the law profession in 1923. Before 1923, women were not allowed to practice law in courts in spite of possessing valid law degrees on account of the Legal Practitioners Act which allowed only men with graduation degree in law to practise law in courts. When the adopted daughter of Madhu-babu, Ms Sudhansubala Hazra, finished her Bachelor of Law in 1921, she was asked by Madhubabu to apply to the Patna High Court for enrolment as a pleader. The matter was taken up by the full Bench of the Patna High Court which rejected it on November 20, 1921 on the ground of sex disqualification. The said Court held that the legal bar against women to do practice in law courts had to be removed by amending the Legal Practitioners’ Act and till that was done the High Court had no power to allow her application. She was heartbroken and shattered as her cherished ambition to pursue the profession of law and do practice as a lawyer received a fatal blow. She lost all hope and took a decision not to fight any more. Madhubabu, who was at that time the Minister of Local Government, was determined not to give it up. He drafted a memorial for her and it was sent to the Viceroy in August 1922 seeking for amendment to the Legal Practitioners Act for enabling lady lawyers to enroll as pleaders. A copy of the memorial was sent to the President of the Central Legislative Assembly, Sir Fredrick Whyte, who was then the President of the Central Legislative Assembly. In the enclosed letter he wrote that hardly memorials affecting public interest reached the Viceroy on account of the strength of the cause contained in it and stated that the memorial submitted by Sudhansubala “represents the grievances of a class of women who live in seclusion...” and “This is eminently a case in which public naturally expect personal attention of a Viceroy who is also an eminent lawyer.” Then he added: “Half of the population of India do not enjoy rights of citizenship of the British Empire. This is due to custom and caste. Government cannot abolish caste and social custom, but it is the duty of legislatures to steer between Scylla of social custom on the one side and the Charybdis of neutral policy of British Indian administration to the harbor of free British citizenship.” In other words, he was stressing the point that it was the legislature which should be proactive in taking up issues concerning rights of women without waiting for support from the caste and custom which hindered their progress. He also asked her to appeal to the Privy Council in London.

Accordingly the appeal was filed and the Secretary of State for India was made a respondent. To the utter shock and surprise of Madhubabu, the Privy Council informed its decision that 4000 pounds (Rs 6000) had to be deposited as fees to meet the expenses of the affected party, that is, the Secretary of State for India. He wrote a letter to Mr William Duke, Member of the India Office, on February 8, 1923 seeking assistance in the matter to bring down the fees to be deposited. Inter alia he wrote: “The question relates to permission to Lady Lawyers to practice in Courts. If there is any country and where Lady legal practitioners are necessary, it is in India and specially in those Provinces in which the Purdah system is stringent and Purdah ladies are often parties to suits involving decision of rights to properties of immense value. They cannot instruct lawyers of the other sex and consequently they become victims to the dishonesty of unprincipled Gomastas.” On March 8, 1923 the agents of the Privy Council sent a letter to Ms Sudhansubala informing that the matter was treated as a public interest and, therefore, no expenses would be required to be paid. Apart from taking those measures Madhubabu took up the matter with a Member of the Central Assembly, Mr H.S. Gaur, and requested him to introduce a Resolution to nullify the prohibition on women to enter the legal profession. He asked Sudhansubala to visit Delhi and meet the President of the Central Legislative Assembly and the then Home Member to sensitise them about the gravity of the matter. She also sent a copy of the memorial to almost all Members of the Assembly in August 1923 to make them aware of the impor-tance of allowing women to become lawyers.

Eventually the Home Member introduced a Bill to amend the Legal Practitioners Act. The second reading of the Bill was completed in September 1923 and no Member opposed it. Ultimately it entered the statute book and became the law of the land empowering qualified women to practise law in the courts of India. Ms Sudhansu Bala enrolled herself as a lawyer on December 12, 1923 and appeared before the Patna High Court as the junior of Madhusudan Das who had by then resigned as the Minister of Local Government. It was because of the untiring efforts of Madhubabu that the women lawyers in India could remove an unjust barrier imposed against their entry into the legal profession. In the process he became the foremost champion of women’s rights to become practicing lawyers enjoying equal standing with men lawyers.2

Mahatma Gandhi and Madhubabu

A better and deeper appreciation of Madhu-babu’s life, work and worldview is possible by referring to Mahatma Gandhi who invoked Madhubabu’s name in the context of the whole nation whenever issues concerning economic and intellectual upliftment of village people were taken up in numerous platforms centring on the freedom struggle. One comes across at least seven volumes of the Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi from 1932 to 1945 in which Madhubabu’s name has been invoked by Gandhiji in the context of a variety of issues affecting our freedom movement.

One may refer to November 18, 1932 when Gandhiji sent a telegram to Madhubabu tendering apology to him for having sent a condolence letter when he was given the false information that Madhubabu had passed away. He began the telegram by stating: “Long live Madhusudan Das.”3 He went on to say that because of his stupidity he came to believe that Madhusudan was no more and added that God willed otherwise and it was proof enough that He would take more service from Madhusudan for long years to come.4 Gandhiji also issued a statement5 on Madhusudan Das tendering apology to him and it was published in the Bombay Chronicle on November 19, 1932. He did not live long and died in 1934. However, Gandhiji, having been deeply impacted by his exemplary ideas, reflected them in his writings and educated the whole nation for implementing them and reaping benefits for the long suffering people of our country.

Practice of Untouchability, Inferior Quality of Tanning and Economic Degradation

Mahatma Gandhi issued a statement on Untouchability on November 14, 1932 and it was published in Bombay Chronicle the next day, that is, on November 15. In that statement he referred to Madhubabu’s name and described him as a great philanthropist. Gandhiji also wrote that Madhubabu learnt the modern process of tanning and statistically proved the enormous economic loss suffered annually by our country ‘owing to the superstition of untouchability masquerading under the name of religion’.6 It is well known that Mahatma Gandhi understood the human and moral degradation suffered by our people, particularly the so-called untouchables and the country as a whole, on account of the scourge of untouchability. However, he acknowledged that Madhusudan Das proved statistically the economic loss arising out of untouchability.7 He explained it by saying that the higher castes always looked down upon the so-called untouchables who dealt with dead animals and dressed their skin. It is because of that hatred and abhorrence of the high castes for people dealing with dead animals and their skin that adequate skill in that field could not be developed and in the process enormous economic wealth associated with leather and its by-products could not be tapped.8

The economic degradation of India on account of untouchability proved to be a bane on our village economy which always remained woven around agriculture without credible and viable alternative occupations as a source of livelihood for the rural population.

In a piece entitled ‘Advice to a Harijan Worker’ 9 published in Harijan Bandhu on September 3, 1933 Mahatma Gandhi referred to the plan of some of the Harijan workers to take up leather work and stated that it was not enough to make slippers only. Stressing that the work of tanning assumed more importance for our villages than mere leather work, he asked a question: “What did Madhusudan Das do?”10 Answering it he stated: “He gathered the tanners of Utkal and studied how they did tanning.” Then Gandhiji observed that Madhusudan Das was dissatisfied with the level and quality of tanning and, therefore, sailed to Germany, learnt leather work there and brought an expert from that country and set up a factory in Cuttack. It is educative to learn from Gandhiji’s writings that many so-called untouchables learnt the work of tanning because of the dedicated efforts of Madhusudan Das and wrote: “Like Madhusudan Das you should first master the craft. It cannot be done in one month’s time. You can do very well, if you learn it properly. I can make arrangements for your training.”11

The narrative given by Gandhiji about Madhu-sudan Das testified to the deep impact of Madhubabu’s ideas and activities on his mind. It is proved beyond doubt that he considered Madhubabu as a role model in the field of tanning and projected his Utkal Tannery as a fine example of an enterprise to develop the skills of the people, use animal hides for generating wealth and create a culture of quality consciousness for producing high standard leather products.

Skill Development and Building Human Resources

The entire gamut of work done by Madhubabu concerning tanning and so passionately and eloquently explained by Mahatma Gandhi clearly has significance for our time when so many flagship schemes of the government such as ‘skill development’, ‘make in India’, ‘quality consciousness’ and ‘ease of doing business’ have being launched.

In reaching out to a foreign country like Germany and bringing a German expert and enlisting his talent and expertise to develop skill in India, Madhubabu set an excellent example of an entrepreneur whose sole objective was to empower people with skills so that they could go beyond their traditional profession completely revolving around agriculture. It was indeed a bold and forward-looking vision to uplift the people from poverty as also economic and caste degradation and boost their self-esteem.

Utkal Tannery as an Educational Tannery

Madhubabu breathed his last on February 4, 1934. Seven months later, that is, on September 7, 1934 Mahatma Gandhi wrote a long article entitled ‘Village Tanning and its Possibilities’12 in Harijan. He explained in the article that “the criminal neglect of the peasants and artisans has reduced us to pauperism, dullness and habitual idleness”. He noted: “With her magnificent climate, lofty mountains, mighty rivers and extensive seaboard, India has limitless resources, whose full exploitation in our village should have prevented poverty and disease.”13 However, he regretted that the divorce of intellect from body (labour), made India “perhaps the shortest lived, most resourceless and most exploited nation on earth”.14 He then stated: “The state of village tanning is, perhaps, the best proof of my indictment.”15 In other words, the deplorable tanning industry of the villages was indicative of the decline of India’s rural economy.

In the same article Gandhiji wrote: “It was late Madhusudan Das who opened my eyes in the great crime against a part of humanity. He sought to make reparation by opening what might be called an educational tannery. His enterprise did not come up to his expectations, but he was responsible for the livelihood of hundreds of shoemakers in Cuttack.”16 While doing so he drew parallel between the research done in Shantiniketan and Sabarmati Ashram in the field of tanning.17 It may be stated that Gandhiji could appreciate the diligence and creative effort of Madhubabu in the field of tanning because of his own effort in Sabarmati Ashram to do research on animal hides so that those natural productive assets could be put to good use.

Utkal Tannery was described by Gandhiji as an “educational tannery”. He did so after the sad demise of Madhubabu and put it in the pan-Indian context. Gandhiji, through his numerous writings, underlined the deeper and abiding relevance of Madhubabu’s work and educated the rest of India to learn from his seminal contributions which were of significance for economic empower-ment of the underpriveleged. What is evident from all such narratives of Mahatma Gandhi about Madhubabu was the countrywide signifi-cance of his manifold activities encompassing in their scope the vital issues of India in the third decade of the twentieth century.

Too Much Preoccupation with Cattle breeds Bovine Intelligence

In twentyfirst century India the fraternity of farmers across the country is in despair on account of the appalling state of our agriculture which, due to many factors, has become unremunarative. The decline in agricultural productivity and suicide of farmers constitute a sad commentary on our society, governance and economy. The pitiable condition of agriculture was understood by Madhubabu and we find it in the account of Mahatma Gandhi who referred to the diminishing returns from agriculture and the concomitant misery of farmers working in the field with the cattle and remaining idle for half of the year because of the absence of any other occupation to eke out a living. Gandhiji was distressed at the miserable condition of people and wrote in 1934: “..in the words of Madhusudan Das” villagers working with cattle got “reduced to the level of the beast, and without proper nourishment, either of the mind or the body and, therefore, without joy and without hope”.18

In fact Madhubabu’s economic activities centring on tanning enabled Mahatma Gandhi to promote the cause of the Swadeshi economy. Therefore, immediately after using the afore-mentioned observations of Madhubabu, Gandhiji wrote: “Here is work for the cent-per-cent swadeshi-lover and scope for harnessing of technical skill to the solution of a great problem.”

A month later, that is, on October 24, 1934,19 while delivering a speech at the Subjects Committee Meeting of the All India Congress Committee, Mahatma Gandhi commended a resolution for revival of village industries and again invoked the name of Madhubabu. He did so in the presence of other stalwarts of the freedom movement such as Rajendra Prasad and Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan. In what context did Gandhiji take the name of Madhubabu? He did so by referring to his Harijan tour in Utkal which he undertook on foot and had in his own words “an extraordinary experience”.21 He narrated with pain and anguish the plight of villagers whose sole source of living was agriculture. Stating that “...farmers do not produce enough even for the seeds”, he observed: “You can hardly find such poverty anywhere else.”22 He referred to the helplessness of village people in such a situation and noted: “Apart from India there is perhaps no other country where people depend so completely on agriculture.”23

It is against that backdrop that Gandhiji took the name of Madhubabu who had said that village people should be provided with some additional occupation. He also recalled Madhubabu’s visit to Germany to learn leather work.24 And, above all, Gandhiji remembered Madhubabu coining a phrase called “bovine intelligence”25 and used it in his speech. “Bovine intelligence” was used by Madhubabu to refer to the dulled and stunted faculties of villagers on account of their continuous preoccupation with cattle to pursue the profession of agriculture. It will be appreciated better by referring to the words of Gandhiji who said: “I have always remembered his (Madhusudan Das’) one remark that those who always work with oxen must have bovine intelligence. Our farmers lost their work and became dull-minded.”26

The unmistakable impact of persuasive ideas of Madhubabu on Mahatma Gandhi was clearly evident when he summoned Madhubabu’s name in the presence of outstanding leaders of the struggle for independence and used his ideas in the context of the countrywide movement for a Swadeshi Economy based on indigenous resources of people for liberating India from colonial rule and exploitation.

On different occasions Gandhiji was sharing Madhubabu’s ideas among the people of our country to sensitise them for developing the human resources of India so that we could boast of what he called the “living machines we have”.27 It was manifest in his speech28 delivered at a public meeting in Nagpur on February 23, 1935, slightly more than a year after the sad demise of Madhubabu. He said that during his Harijan tour in Odisha he walked in many parts of the State and it was brought home to him that revival of village industries was a categorical imperative to make Khadi universal. He acknowledged that he could not have realised it had he toured by rail or car. Then in his speech he added: “As the late Madhusudan Das had said, our villages were fast being reduced to the state of brutes with whom they worked and lived as a result of the forced idleness in which they passed their days.” “If they continued in that state,” he cautioned, “not even independence would improve the state of India”.29 Those cautionary words of Mahatma Gandhi have become grim realities for our farmers and village people sixtyeight years after our independence causing despair and hopelessness among them.

In the same speech Gandhiji said that no other country in the world except China could boast of the crores of living machines and stressed that India had to employ those human machines which remained idle and make them intelligent machines.30 It is instructive to note that Madhubabu’s name and ideas were used by Gandhiji when he was articulating his thoughts on human resource development and improve-ment of intelligence of the village people in his speech delivered in Nagpur in 1935. In several other speeches delivered in other parts of India Gandhiji used to refer to the same ideas of Madhubabu to awaken the people and nation’s consciousness to provide employment opport-unities to the people beyond the agricultural sector.

Bridging the Gap between Intellect and Hand

On March 14, 1940, slightly more than six years after the passing away of Madhubabu, Gandhiji, while delivering a speech at the Khadi and Village Industries Exhibition in Ramgarh, recalled the name of Madhubabu for bridging the gulf between intellect and hand.31 He stated that as compared to the modern city civilisation the handicraft civilisation would endure provided a correlation could be established between brain and brawn.

He then said: “The late Madhusudan Das used to say that our peasants and workers had, by reason of working with bullocks, become like bullocks; and he was right.”32 Adding further, he continued by saying: “We have to lift them from the estate of the brute to the estate of man and that we can do only by correlating the intellect with the hand.” Thereafter he observed: “Not until they learn to work intelligently and make something new every day, not until they are taught to know the joy of work, can we raise them from their low estate.”33

Madhubabu and Leo Tolstoy

It is rather revealing that on October 22, 1937, while speaking at an Educational Conference, Gandhiji drew a parallel between Madhubabu and Leo Tolstoy. He said in his speech: “The late Madhusudan Das was a lawyer, but he was convinced that without the use of our hands and feet our brain would be atrophied, and even if it worked it would be the home of Satan.” Then he stated that “Tolstoy had taught the same lesson through many of his tales”.34 All such pronounce-ments of the Father of our Nation brought out Madhubabu’s high stature and profile and his far-reaching significance beyond the frontier of Odisha and India.

One finds that Gandhiji continued to invoke the name of Madhubabu till 1945. He did so while delivering his speech35 at the All India Spinners Association, organised in Sevagram on March 25, 1945, and that too in the context of his grand quest and plan for moving people from agriculture to other professions, such as spinning and khadi and village industries, for earning their livelihood and putting an end to the dichotomy between intellectual and physical work. He supported his stand and conviction in that regard by saying that “...agriculture by itself cannot develop the intellect as much as khadi and other village industries can.” He then added by stating: “As the late Madhusudan once said, constant company of bullocks turns men into bullocks.”36

The copious references made by the Father of our Nation to Madhubabu’s contributions for educating the people and nation as a whole testify to the abiding relevance of his work for national reconstruction. In juxtaposing Madhubabu’s name with the hallowed name of Leo Tolstoy, Gandhiji was underlining the former’s global significance. All these bear testimony to his exceptional qualities and deeds which need to be reiterated for the benefit of the younger generation.

A Selfless Leader

To understand many other dimensions of Madhubabu which are of immense significance for India of the twentyfirst century, it is extremely essential to refer to a seminal article “The Oriya Movement”37, authored by Professor F.G. Bailley and published in The Economic Weekly on September 26, 1959. He has made a striking point concerning Madhubabu and other great leaders of the erstwhile Orissa whom he characterised as leaders with “missionary spirit”. He explained “missionary spirit” as that spirit which motivates leaders to sacrifice personal interest and comfort to achieve a goal which is regarded as a moral obligation.38 At that time any one in the erstwhile Orissa who embraced the Bengali language and culture was seen to have been in a superior position to pursue his/her interests. Therefore, Professor Bailley, while describing Madhubabu as “the prime mover of the whole campaign” of the Oriya movement, stated that if he had wanted to achieve his personal interest he was in a vantage position to do so because of his “adoption of Bengali language and culture” and “...need never have troubled himself about those of his countrymen who had neither the ability nor the opportunity to do the same”.39 Then the noted Professor concluded: “Yet he spent his life in fighting for Oriya culture and Oriya language”.40 It indeed constitutes a great tribute to Madhubabu’s personality the defining feature of which was his exalted character and missionary spirit to render service at the cost of self.

Madhubabu adopted Constitutional Method to achieve his Goals

The manner in which Madhubabu and other leaders fought for the cause of the Odia language, culture, nationalism and identity is of great significance for our time. It was based on peaceful and lawful methods without inciting violence and disorder. It is noteworthy that Dr Ambedkar, in his last speech in the Constituent Assembly, had said that if any approach for redressal of grievances would be inconsistent with the Constitution it would result in “the grammar of anarchy”. In fact Professor Bailley referred to this point in his aforementioned article and wrote that “...Oriya Nationalism advanced its claims largely through diplomatic and constitutional means. There was no resort to violence and no attempt to force the Government’s hand by ‘direct action’. The strength of the movement rested on the moderation of the leaders and their personal eminence.” 41

Madhubabu, as “the prime mover of the whole campaign”, was a shining example of the leader who held on to constitutional methods to pursue the goals many of which were taken up by Mahatma Gandhi till 1945 in his numerous writings and speeches. At a time when many States of our country, including Odisha, are facing the menace of Naxal violence threatening the constitutional method of governance, we need to stress on lawful means as also the “strength of moderation and personal eminence” which were amply displayed by Madhubabu and the leadership of that era. He is a role model for the present-day leadership who are responsible for governance of twentyfirst century India. The legacy of Utkal Gauraba Madhusudan Das endures and his life and work offers valuable lessons for human resource development, skill building and the adoption of the constitutional method to address the complex challenges confronted by our economy, society, nation and world as whole. 

Footnotes
1. http://www.wecf.eu/cms/download/2007/Womens_Manifesto_ ClimateChange.pdf

2. Sudhansubala Hazra, “How Women Got the Right to Practise in the Law Courts of India” in Madhusudan Das—The Man and his Mission (Ed.) by Debendra Das, (Pragati Utkal Sangha, Rourkela, 1998), pages 143-51.

3. Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Vol. 58, p. 18.

4. Ibid. 

5. Ibid., p. 19.

6. Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Volume 57, November 14, 1932, p. 413.

7. Ibid.

8. Ibid., p. 412.

9. Collected works of Mahatma Gandhi, Volume 61, p. 360-361.

10. Ibid., p. 360.

11. Ibid., p. 360-361.

12. Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Volume 64, p. 407-410.

13. Ibid.

14. Ibid.

15. Ibid.

16. Ibid., p. 407

17. Ibid., p. 408.

18. Ibid., p. 409.

19. Ibid., p. 409.

20. Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Vol. 65, pages. 219-226.

21. Ibid., p. 220.

22. Ibid.

23. Ibid.

24. Ibid.

25. Ibid.

26. Ibid.

27. Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Vol. 66, p. 255.

28. Ibid., pp. 254-56.

29. Ibid., p. 255.

30. Ibid.

31. Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Vol. 78, pp. 56-58.

32. Ibid., p. 57.

33. Ibid.

34. Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Vol. 72, p. 361.

35. Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Vol. 86, p. 103.

36. Ibid.

37. F.G. Bailley, “The Oriya Movement”, The Economic Weekly, September, 26, 1959. http://www.epw.in/system/files/pdf/1959_11/39/politics_in_orissaivthe_oriya_movement.pdf?0=ip_login_no_cach e%3D927e131d3e62db13b63 df53470ef549d

38. Ibid., p. 1335.

39. Ibid.

40. Ibid.

41. Ibid., pp. 1334-35.

The author was an Officer on Special Duty and Press Secretary to late K.R. Narayanan when the latter was the President of India. He then served as a Director in the Prime Minister’s Office. He is now serving as a Joint Secretary in the Rajya Sabha Secretariat. The views expressed in the article are personal and have nothing to do with the Rajya Sabha Secretariat.