Conflict between Nehru and Nair
Let us read parts of two letters –
Firstly, a letter written on December 26, 1949. It reads: “I am disturbed at developments at Ayodhya. Earnestly hope you will personally interest yourself in this matter. Dangerous example being set there which will have bad consequences.”
Second letter, written on April 22, 1951, reads: “My dear Rajendra Babu, I am greatly worried about the Somnath affair. As I feared, it is assuming a certain political importance. Indeed, references have been made to it internationally also. In criticism of our policy in regard to it, we are asked how a secular Government such as ours can associate itself with such a ceremony which is, in addition, revivalist in character. Questions are being put to me in Parliament and I am replying to them saying that the Government has nothing to do with it and those persons who are connected in any way are functioning entirely in their personal capacity.”
Any naive person would easily draw a conclusion that the two letters have been written by the same person. Any naïve person would understand that letter writer draws intellectual inspiration from western ideas. Any naive person would realise that the letter writer had utter disregard, contempt, and disrespect towards the Hindu sentiments.
The letter writer is none other than Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of Bharat. Nehru’s kindness and special love for Muslims is a well-known fact. His policy of secularism, favouring minority communities and disrespecting Hindus, led the country for the next few decades, posing several challenges to national and geographical integrity. Nehru’s Secularism, in the course of time, also resulted into social, political, economic and several other problems. But Nehru Bhakts have no courage, intellectual honesty and openness to admit the reality. The reality is that Nehru’s secularism was opposed from the initial days. It was opposed from within Congress and from forces outside the political arena. We have two glaring examples to show how Nehru was opposed on two major issues, involving Hindu sentiments. Firstly, Rajendra Prasad and other Congress leaders like Sardar Patel and KM Munshi went ahead with renovation of Somnath mandir in Gujarat despite strong objection and opposition by Nehru. In the second case of 1949, the then district collector of Faizabad, simply refused to obey Nehru’s order to remove idols of Bahgwan Ram and Sitamata from Ayodhya mandir. As a result, idols of Bhagwan Ram and Sitamata continued to be placed in the mandir. It happened even though the union and state government wanted to remove them. It happened thanks to possible strong outcry by Hindus.
Nehru’s approach towards Ayodhya can be understood by three letters, which he wrote after two idols – Bhagwan Ram and Sitamata – were appeared in the central dome of Babri structure in Ayodhya in December 1949. On December 26, 1949 Nehru sent a telegram message to the then Uttar Pradesh chief minister GB Pant. It says, “I am disturbed at developments at Ayodhya. Earnestly hope you will personally interest yourself in this matter. Dangerous example being set there which will have bad consequences.”
Second letter was sent to C Rajgopalachari, the then Governor-General of India on January 7, 1950. It says, “I wrote to Pantji last night about Ayodhya and sent this letter with a person who was going to Lucknow. Pantji telephoned me later. He said he was very worried and he was personally looking into this matter”.
In the third letter, which was sent to noted Gandhian KG Mashruwala, Nehru wrote, “You refer to the Ayodhya Mosque. This event occurred two or three months ago and I have been very gravely perturbed over it. The U.P. Government put up a brave show, but actually did little. Their District Officer in Faizabad [K.K. Nair, ICS] rather misbehaved and took no steps to prevent this happening.” This letter was written on March 5, 1950.
All three letters are evident of the reality that Nehru was highly upset and disappointed over appearance of idols at Ram janmabhoomi site. Nehru, himself, admits that he was `disturbed over developments in Ayodhya’. He also describes the incident as `dangerous example, which will have bad consequences. Letters also obviously show that Nehru was not happy as nothing was happening to remove idols despite his instructions. He blames KK Nair, the then district officer of Faizabad, saying that Nair misbehaved and took no steps to prevent the happening. Letters are enough to argue that Nehru had very little respect and concern for Hindu sentiments about Ram janmabhoomi.
Nehru, some reports suggest, had asked to remove idols of Bhagwan Ram and Sitamata from the mandir. But it could not happen due to the stand taken by KK Nair, the then district officer of Faizabad. Nehru’s antipathy towards Hindus can be understood by his three letters. But what happened with KK Nair was more serious.
Contrary to his of a ‘democratic’, ‘liberal’, and ‘accommodative’ politician, Nehru acted with utter vengeance to KK Nair. Nehru could not tolerate his ‘subordination’ as he was under fear that Ayodhya development would affect his image at international level and would also affect the Kashmir issue.
Nair had to pay a heavy price for submitting a realistic report to the political leadership of Uttar Pradesh and Delhi. Nair was eventually suspended from the services by the Pant government. Nair fought the case in the court and emerged victorious also. He later resigned from the services and practiced as a lawyer in Allahabad High Court.
But incidents involving Nair indicate that the Nehru and Congress regime never forgave him. After receiving a letter from the State government of Uttar Pradesh to do a report on the Ram Janmabhoomi issue, Nair sent his assistant Guru Datt Singh to submit a report. On October 10, 1949, Singh recommended the construction of a Ram mandir at the site. Singh had visited the site and observed that both Hindus and Muslims performed their ceremonies, side by side.
He wrote, “Hindu public has put in this application with a view to erecting a decent and Vishal mandir instead of the small one which exists at present. There is nothing on the way and permission can be given as the Hindu population is very keen to have a nice mandir at the place where Bhagwan Ram Chandra Ji was born. The land where the mandir is to be erected is of Nazul (government land)”.
Nehru and Pant were irked because of this report. Pant, subsequently, ordered to evict Hindus from the mandir. But Nair refused to budge before the pressure stating that it would lead to riots. Nair refused to remove idols. Nair defended his decision of not acting on a directive of the then prime minister, routed through the state government. He wrote a letter to the UP Chief secretary saying, “I would, if the government decided to remove the idols at any cost, request that I be relieved and replaced by an officer who may be able to see in the solution a merit which I cannot discern”.
But Nehru was determined to remove idols from the mandir. He wrote another letter to Govind Vallabh Pant saying he would visit Ayodhya if necessary. In the same letter, Nehru said, “I shall be glad if you will keep me informed of the Ayodhya situation. As you know, I attached great importance to it and to its repercussions on all-India affairs and more especially Kashmir. I suggested to you when you were here last that, if necessary, I would go to Ayodhya. If you think this should be done. I shall try to find the date, although I am terribly busy”.
Nehru never visited Ayodhya. Letters make us believe that Nehru would have visited Ayodhya only for removal of idols. Eventually, the mandir was locked, preventing Hindus from entering. Only one priest was allowed for worship. The gates were opened in 1986.
KK Nair will always be remembered for his professional duty. Nehru stands exposed because of KK Nair. Kandangalathil Karunakaran Nair was born in Kerala on September 11, 1907. His life began from the village of Kuttanad in Alappuzha in Kerala. After completing his education in the State, Nair went to England for higher studies and cleared the Indian Civil Service (ICS) examination at the age of 21. He was then posted as the Deputy Commissioner cum District Magistrate of Faizabad, the earlier name of Ayodhya, on June 1, 1949. After resignation from the services, Nair joined Bhartiya Jan Sangh. Both Nair and his wife eventually became the members of the Lok Sabha in 1962.
Nehru’s letters and his behaviour with KK Nair shows him in very poor light and underlines his limitations. Nair, on another hand, proved to be a rightful person. It was the Nehru versus Nair battle. Nair has finally won and Nehru has lost.
#RamMandir #SabkeRam #AyodhyaRamMandir
