Bihar House suggests changes to statehood Bill

By Our Staff Correspondent

PATNA, APRIL 25. The Bihar Assembly today suggested several amendments to the Bihar Reorganisation Bill, 2000, seeking to create a separate state comprising 18 districts of south Bihar, including a change in its nomenclature to Jharkhand instead of the proposed Vananchal.

But there was little opposition to the Bill, in the changed political scenario, save for the protests by the CPI(M) and the Independent MLAs.

The passage of the Bill was cleared with the rejection of the three amendments moved by the CPI(M) and the Independents, who pressed for the rejection of the Bill itself in the ``greater interest'' of the State, urged the President not to give assent to present the Bill in Parliament, and that the Centre should withdraw the Bill. These amendments were rejected by voice vote.

But the crucial amendment moved by members of the CPI, Samata Party, CPI(M) and the RJD that the new State be named Jharkhand instead of Vananchal was supported by the Rabri Devi Government and adopted by a voice vote without much fuss when the BJP, which alone had been propagating the idea, said it was not opposed to the creation of a Jharkhand State.

Though parties such as the RJD and the NDA constituents - the Samata Party and the JD(U) - lent their support to the Bill, their members openly spoke against the bifurcation of the State underscoring time and again the disastrous consequences that the two states would have to bear in the event of separation.

Notwithstanding the fact that the RJD chief, Mr. Laloo Prasad Yadav, favoured the creation of a separate state, the thrust of his speech was on the adverse impact of a division on the two states. Mr. Yadav also promised to stand by the tribals in ``their battle against'' the RSS.

Saying that the tribals were in a hopeless minority in the proposed state, Mr. Yadav stressed that his fight for a greater Jharkhand state comprising areas of Bihar, West Bengal, Orissa and Madhya Pradesh would have given them a majority and the ``right to self-rule.'' He demanded that the posts of Governor, Chief Minister and a majority of Ministers be reserved for the tribals.

While Mr. Yadav did not speak against the division, other RJD members did not hide their reservation and the ``heavy heart'' with which they were supporting the cause. One of them even wanted the party to withdraw the whip if they were to express their real opinion on the issue.

What the JD(U) hinted obliquely, the Independent members openly charged that the move was not a division of the state but a division of power, which the RJD and its allies had covertly agree to with the BJP and its allies.

The Congress(I) leaders, including those from the south, did not appear too happy over the prospect of the plateau region having to fend for itself with little to boast about with coal mines getting close down and industries going sick notwithstanding support to the Bill.

The BJP members, led by the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Sushil Kumar Modi, and the JMM sought to take credit for creating the new state. But they too like other parties agreed that the rest of Bihar and the plateau region would have to be cushioned by the Centre with a hefty economic package for its survival.

The State Government has proposed that Bihar be given Rs. 1.80 lakh crores while the new state be given Rs. 75,000 crores.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Regional
Previous : Andhra Pradesh satisfied with Supreme Court
           verdict
Next     : Alamatti dam height can be raised to 519.6 m