Dr. Gunvantrai Ganpatlal Parikh : A Tribute | Anil Nauriya

[October 2 is the death anniversary of GG Parikh a leading figure in the India’s socialist movement]

Sometimes it is more difficult to write about an individual, the longer one has known him.

My first contact with Dr G G Parikh (“G.G.” as he was affectionately known) was in 1971-1972 when I started writing for Janata, the voice of India’s Socialist Movement. It has now been more than half a century since then. By the time he passed away, he had crossed a full century and more in age. I have thus known this veteran of the last mass struggle for the freedom of India for more than half his own life and most of mine.

Publications like Congress Socialist and publishing houses like Padma Publications were major vehicles for transmission of socialist thinking. Since 1946 Janata has sought to continue that tradition. Edatata Narayanan, an associate of Aruna Asaf Ali, was once its editor. In the early 1970s, the late Shri N G Goray, who was among the “Nasik group” involved in the founding of the Congress Socialist Party in 1934, was the editor of Janata. I would drop my articles at Shri Goray’s residence, 18 Windsor Place, New Delhi. But Shri Goray was often on tour and I soon started sending them directly to National House, Tulloch Road, Apollo Bunder, Bombay from where Janata used to be edited and published. With time Janata became family for me; at its core it meant essentially three persons : Its Managing Editor, Dr G.G. Parikh, and his colleagues the late Shri G B S Chaudhuri and the late Shri Sudhakar Prabhu Desai.

It was later in Delhi that I met Dr Parikh in person in the company of the late Shri Surendra Mohan, who, along with the late Shri Madhu Dandavate and the late Shri Vinod Prasad Singh, had inducted me into the Socialist movement.

A few years later, in 1983, I visited Bombay, along with a friend, Pranab Bhattacharjee, in connection with some research we were doing on the role of Big Business in independent India. I telephoned Dr Parikh. “Come to the Chowpatty sands”, he said. “We are on a dharna”. I now forget what the precise issue that provoked the dharna was. Chowpatty was Bombay’s famous beach, the site of many historic events in India’s freedom movement. It was thrilling to join Dr Parikh there. It gave me an opportunity to get better acquainted not only with him but also to meet several other relatively younger activists in the city. I remember especially the intense Madhav Sathe, now also sadly no longer with us, who would, on that visit, take me to a Democratic Rights meeting being held in Dadar; and the friendly Tambe brothers who almost became my guides in Bombay and invited me to share a meal with their parents at their home in Nana Chowk.

We needed accommodation in Bombay; as soon as Dr Parikh and Mrs Parikh (who was then a legislator) heard about it, the matter was arranged, without even my asking, at the Aamdar residence, not far from Apollo Bunder.

Apollo Bunder: The very name had fascinated me; I have vivid memories of my first visit there in 1983 to the Janata office on Tulloch Road. It was February and the Annual Budget had just been presented in Parliament. I was sitting in the Janata office talking with Shri Chaudhuri when Dr Parikh arrived. Always direct and to the point, just as he was in his letters and telephone calls, his first words to me, by way of acknowledgement of my greeting, were : “Will you write Janata’s editorial on the Budget? We need it by tomorrow morning”. So there it was: there would be no free lunch. I went around South Bombay looking for libraries for relevant books, documents and newspapers and was fortunate to find one close to the Aamdar residence. Working there, I produced a commentary which was handed to Dr Parikh the next day. The editorial was published unchanged under my initials.

Which brings me to my experience with Janata in the half century that I have been associated with it. My connection with the Socialist movement was primarily through Janata. I was broadly committed to the Congress Socialist Party’s foundational ideas, rooted in the Indian struggle for freedom and its dream of social transformation, but I was not tied to specific micro-“party lines” or to particular post-independence trends in the movement. I did not, for instance, share the derisive position that a section of post-independence Socialists seemed to adopt towards Jawaharlal Nehru. In fact, following Acharya Narendra Deva, the doyen of India’s Socialists, I had and have a positive and sympathetic view of Jawaharlalji, and his transformative efforts and concerns.

In the pre-internet era we corresponded by post. That correspondence which is instructive is available for later reference. Further in this article I will refer to a few selections and extracts from some of our subsequent electronic conversations as these are, in a sense, more ephemeral more difficult later to locate than the written communications.

Throughout the period of our association Janata under Dr Parikh’s active stewardship published my writings without changing a single word. [1] This welcoming attitude and transparent approach towards expression of opinions did credit also to its long line of distinguished editors including N G Goray, H.K Paranjape, Prem Bhasin, Surendra Mohan and others. It contrasts sharply with and presents a counterpoint to current trends in India’s national mass media. Indeed I was inducted several years ago into Janata’s editorial board; and when the Janata Trust was being formed, Dr Parikh had kindly invited me to join it. It is I who had hesitated, knowing as I do the practical difficulties Trusts can face in their functioning when they have far too many out-station members. In 2010 Shri Surendra Mohan, and Dr Parikh through him, reminded me that I must write more frequently in Janata. I replied on 20 September 2010 to Shri Surendra Mohan :

“Dear Surendra Mohanji


Thank you for your letter which I received today.
As desired by you and Dr Parikh I will try to write more frequently in Janata.
Recently I have not felt like writing anything anywhere, not just in Janata!!
With respects and warm regards
 Affectionately, Anil”

Within 90 days of this, Surendra Mohanji passed away.

On 23 December 2010 : I found myself writing to Dr Parikh :

“Dear Dr Parikh
The condolence meeting today for Surendra Mohanji was well attended.
It went on from 3pm to 7.30 pm.
Regards
Anil
PS : I have recd your letter about the Yusuf Meherally Centre. Please
feel free to include my name in the Committee. It will be a privilege
to be on it. I’ll speak to you on phone.”

Dr Parikh wanted more articles on Acharya Narendra Deva, the doyen of India’s socialist movement and on Jawaharlalji as the 125th birth anniversary year of both more or less coincided. On 15 November 2014 he wrote to me:


“The special issue is out. You will receive it soon. However, I think
it will be good if we print at least one article on Acharyaji every
month and two or three in the mid-February issue. You will have to
help us. 
Since it is Nehru’s 125 anniversary, can you write an article
comparing and considering the two?”

On 20 November 2015 I had this fascinating mail from G.G :

“Dear Anil Nauriya,

 This is about your article on Socialists and Nehru. You seem to be addressing Lohia admirers in this article. This reminded me of a few things. Once, Janata had published an article by … on Dr. Lohia …. It happens that Bhai, Pannalal and my friend Baban D’souza had gone to meet Dada Naik (a socialist colleague who died recently), and the latter was so angry that they came straight to my place. I listened to them patiently and did not argue. We had already closed the chapter after publishing some angry letters. Then I was reminded of Premji, who, in a letter to me, called the admirers of Dr. Lohia as Chelas (Prof. Krishnakant has called Raj Narayanji as Dr. Lohia’s Hanuman) and in contrast he said that the PSPers were not like Chelas. I was reminded of JP, who used to tell us repeatedly that Karl Marx was a socialist and scientist and science teaches us that no truth is final. Yesterday’s truth can be today’s untruth, he used to emphasize. I am talking of those days when he had not joined the Bhoodan movement.

 There are two more things that came to my mind and I would like to share. After Panchmari, one night, Prabhakar Pandye, a well known editor of a Marathi daily, described how the JP and Lohia differences arose. He narrated an incident in Nepal where both of them had gone during the Quit India movement. It seems when they came to know that the police was chasing them, they started running. However, Dr. Lohia’s spects fell down and he stopped to pick them up. JP did not wait for him, as per the revolutionary teachings of those times, and Dr. Lohia could not forgive him. 

 The other incident is of Ladli Mohan Nigum. In Ahmedabad, George, he and I were staying at Dr. Surti’s during the days of Emergency…. He also told me that Dr. Lohia felt hurt because Nehru invited JP and not him to join the government. 

Yours sincerely, 

(G. G. Parikh)”

 


l I wrote to G.G on 21 November 2015 :

“ Dear GG

Thanks for your message.

I dont of course deny that Lohia had some important insights.
But I think we should abandon his anti-Nehruism.
Also I believe we must recognise that his alliance with the Jana Sangh in 1967 was a historical error made for short-term gain.

On caste I think it can be one of the criteria in identifying OBCs. But it should not be the exclusive criteria and we must shun caste politics.

We must also be in the forefront of opposing communalism, whether Hindu, Muslim or other.

We must also get away from too much association with NGOs. I believe we do have to pay more attention to building irrigation canals which the NGOs tend blindly to oppose.

We simply have to get India out of the cycle of drought and floods, if the misery of the Indian people is to cease. This is possible only by building a network of canals carrying water from surplus to deficit areas.

Today the Socialist movement is run by Lohiaites, NGOs and Civil Liberties organisations whose anti-Congressism leads them into covertly or overtly supporting the BJP.

In the General Elections last year Kuldip Nayar went to Amritsar and gave an interview …. in support of Jaitley who was the BJP candidate from there. Later Nayar claimed he was on a "private visit". As though he was the King of Mongolia or something!

Warm regards

Anil”

As its primary anchor, it was Dr Parikh’s approach that was reflected in Janata and helped to establish it as a free and unique platform for conversations among India’s socialists and the Civil and Democratic Rights movements. And also a host of people’s movements across the country in which too Dr Parikh was active and which he encouraged.

Despite his quiet and almost self-effacing personality, Dr Parikh’s activities thus had a vast canvas. The Yusuf Meherally Centre in Tara village of Raigad District of Maharashtra, lying in the shadow of Karnala Fort, which I had the privilege to visit on 30 December 2023 to participate in the functions held when Dr Parikh turned 99, is a tremendous institution that appropriately reflects his life, work and multi-faceted persona.

He took much interest in establishing the School for Socialism that some of us also sponsored or joined in supporting.

On 12 January 2022 Dr Parikh wrote:

I hope you know about our proposal to set up a School for Socialism in Kandikhal, Uttarakhand. We have done a lot of preliminary work. We will share it with you. We had a meeting at Tara on December 30 to discuss this proposal.

After our meeting on December 30, Guddi and I are discussing how to go about implementing what was decided on that day. Dr.Sunilam has summarised what transpired at the meeting and Medha has put down on paper her views. Both of these did it in the next two days. And Sunilam spoke to Dr. Anand Kumar, Ramashankar ji and Prafulla Samantara. I do too. Samantara was to attend our meeting but had to cancel the trip. Both committed themselves to the idea of setting up a School for Socialism. Dr. Anand Kumar has sent an email too. We will forward.

One thing that remained to be announced on December 30 was that the trustees of Janata trust will automatically be on the committee. We should add that after the meeting two friends met Guddi and me to discuss what next. This shows the enthusiasm that the meeting has created.

This letter is to request you to think about the steps that we should take to take the project forward. Your vast experience will throw up quite a few new ideas. We will share the details of our discussion on curriculum, faculty, duration etc. Please comment. And plan how to get a lakh friends to contribute a hundred or more. By September 23, thus year we should have a sizeable fund. We need some money urgently to give the finishing touch to the SS building. Please help. Guddi or I will ring up.”

I replied on the same day :

“ Dear GG Thanks for your message. Will await details. You will recall that I had declined to be a Trustee of Janata because of my experience that Trustees ought to be local. But if the School is to be in Mussoorie I would like to be added to the Trust that would run the School as , belonging to Dehradun, I am frequently in Dehradun-Mussoorie. Warm regards. Anil “


 G G’s mail reflected his anxious concern for the future trajectory of the Socialist movement We have since lost also the eminent Socialist Shri Pannalal Surana, who too had similar anxieties. To some of these Shri Surana had given expression a few years ago in a reflective address at Wardha. It was perhaps Shri Surana’s last formal address as President of the Socialist Party (India).

Subsequently, I gave some lectures at the School for Socialism camps held thereafter under the auspices of the Yusuf Meherally Centre’s facility in Kandikhal, Mussoorie. I invited the participants also to do some introspection further along the lines to which Shri Surana had earlier given public expression. On 16 September 2024 Dr Parikh wrote to me to find out how the School for Socialism series was doing:

“This is about SS (School for Socialism: A.N.). After a long time, I have started thinking about it. You were at Kandikhal and have seen the facilities we have. I was wondering whether we could organise the courses that Sandeep Pandey organised more frequently.

I would be happy if you would make suggestions.

GG”

I replied on the following day :

“I was in Kandikhal on the opening day in June.

Jabar does a fine job as a host, with accommodation and meals well looked after

Sandeepbhai is effective in conceptualising the Workshop gathering speakers and people.

 

After having attended two meetings at Kandikhal, my advice would be to divide the camps into two successive (I do not mean either/or) Parts : One Part focusing on Socialist history, doctrine and review of these matters.

 

The second Part dealing with various contemporary struggles, which may or may not be struggles within the Socialist stream.

 

The coordinators of the two parts should be different, because generally co-ordinators with an NGO background or say Ambedkarite or feminist background are not necessarily steeped in Socialist debates and issues.

 

Both parts of the Camp would be important and participants need to be exposed to issues of concern within both Parts. Once this is grasped by all, there can be an overall co-ordinator.

 

This is the primary and initial suggestion I have based on my experience at the camps.”

In 2016 Dr Parikh had asked me for suggestions on the revival of the Socialist movement in India. This is what I sent him on 6 October 2016:

“Dear GG
I’m sending my suggestions as desired.
Warm regards
 Anil


1. An active programme to counter communalism


2. A team to visit Gujarat and make a critique of the ’Gujarat model’ (This I suggested well before the 2014 General Elections at a NE (NE = National Executive: A.N.) meet in Delhi but no one seemed seriously interested).


3. An intensive ideological review bearing in mind that the challenge now is to the very notion of the Indian nation as envisaged by the Indian national movement since the late 19th century in which movement the socialists subsequently emerged and of which the socialists were later a part.


4. In view of [3] above a little detachment from the Nehru-Lohia controversies.


5. Transformation of the June 25/26 observances so as to oppose not merely political authoritarianism/ political intolerance/ fascism but also social authoritarianism/social intolerance/ fascism as represented by the attack on the same day on Gandhi in Pune in 1934 during his anti-untouchability tour.


6. More attention to the writings of the foundational figures and important leaders of the Indian socialist movement. This may include Lohia but ought not to be confined to him. Also, collection of material from 1930s onwards on socialist dalits, Muslims and women and on other marginalised groups in the socialist movement.


7. A little distancing of the socialist movement from NGOs and civil liberties groups such that socialist programmes may be formulated independently of them. One may co-operate with such groups on specific issues but the socialist movement is not congruent with them.

8. Setting up of schools (6 to start with, North, South, West, East, Central region and north-eastern region).

9. Establishment of a national newspaper. Resources to be collected for that rather than for legislative and parliamentary elections.

10. Electoral resources to be spent at the moment only on panchayat, municipal and other local government bodies. Anyone wishing to contest for the Legislative Assemblies/ Parliament must find their own resources.

11. Vigorous observance of National Week (April 6 to April 13).

12. Vigorous efforts to build up organisations like the Rashtriya Seva Dal.”

Dr Parikh, along with the Yusuf Meherally Centre established and developed under his inspiration, can be said to represent the legacy of India’s struggle for freedom, its constructive imaginat, its pluralist and secular heritage, and also all that was the finest in India’s Socialist Movement, evidencing a firm commitment to the reconstruction of India’s society on a just and equitable foundation.

For that very reason we shared a deep respect and admiration for Mahatma Gandhi. I remember how moved he was on reading my Prem Chand Memorial Lecture in 2011 at Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi, on the “The Egyptian Voice in Gandhi” which I had sent to him for publication in Janata. He called to say that he read it several times because it revived for him many forgotten memories.
In his last few weeks Dr Parikh had agreed, at my suggestion, to chair a Bombay-based Committee for commemorating the Bicentennial of Dadabhai Naoroji (1825-1917), the Grand Old Man of India, who had been among the founders of the Indian National Congress in 1885. Dadabhai was three times its President - in 1886, 1892 and 1906- and had attended the International Socialist Conference in Amsterdam in 1904. He had also guided Gandhiji from London during the latter’s African years.

Dr Parikh had already chaired my online talk on Dadabhai Naoroji on 6 April 2025, at the start of National Week (6 to 13 April), preparatory to the Grand Old Man’s 200th Birth Anniversary that was coming up in September 2025. The talk was organized online by the Socialist Party (India).

On 30 August 2025 I wrote an email to G.G. to say that Delhi would be observing 200 years of Dadabhai Naoroji’s birth on 4 September 2025. It was meant as a gentle reminder about the commemoration in Bombay, Dadabhai’s own city of birth.

G.G., as he was affectionately known, wrote back on 2 September 2025, a month before he finally left us :

“Dear Anil Nauriya,

All the best.

Allow me to apologise for not doing anything in Mumbai to celebrate 200th anniversary of Dadabhai Naoroji. My immobility, painful thighs etc. prevented me from meeting people and those who promised to help me backed out.

Forgive me.

Yours sincerely,

(G. G. Parikh)”

Precisely a month after this absolutely humbling letter from G.G. followed the birth anniversary of Dadabhai ‘s great disciple, Mahatma Gandhi. On that very day the latter’s own distinguished disciple left us. Deprived though we now are of the comfort of G.G’s physical presence, he has seemed, in the very timing of his departure, especially to enjoin us to set our sights high, as he had done.

New Delhi, 11 December 2025.