At his book release, Gadkari credits RSS and ABVP for his conviction, sensitivity
Union minister Nitin Gadkari on Friday credited his sense of conviction and purpose in life to his ideological mentor, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, and its students' union, the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad.
'Top RSS leaders' life and works, founded on sacrifice and selfless service, inculcated in me the seeds of sensitivity and patriotism. The RSS, which is focused on character building and nation building, left a lasting impression on me in my formative years. And it helped me evolve both as an individual and a politician,' Gadkari said.
He was speaking at the release of his Marathi book Sanghatil Manavi Vyavasthapan (Human resource management in RSS) in Nagpur. 'I learnt in the RSS and ABVP that politics is an instrument of socio-economic reforms. This sense of conviction and sensitivity came from the RSS and ABVP,' he said, after the book was released by Sunil Ambekar, communication in-charge of RSS.
'Human relationship is the biggest strength of politics and social work, and I learnt it in the the RSS. It should not be misused to serve vested interests,' he said.
The senior leader also offered glimpse into his early childhood days. 'As a schoolboy, once I came home and savoured the home-made 'ladoo'. Outside, my friend was waiting. Seeing this, my mother expressed her disappointment. Even if you have one piece of sweet, you should share it with your friends. This lesson has stayed with me,' Gadkari said. 'Now, I have a fourteen-seater dining table at home. Anybody who walks in during lunch time is asked to join me. These are small lessons but very important in shaping your lives. Similarly, watching RSS stalwarts helped in building my sensitivity. I closely saw how these leaders always upheld nation first,' Gadkari added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
32 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Withdrawal of GRs on Hindi: Maharashtra Government buckled under 'pressure' from Opposition, says Aaditya Thackeray
Shiv Sena (UBT) MLA Aaditya Thackeray on Monday (June 30, 2025) claimed that the Maharashtra Government withdrew its decision on the teaching of Hindi as a third language in primary classes owing to "pressure" from the Opposition and the civil society. Mr. Thackeray, along with the Leader of Opposition in the legislative council Ambadas Danve, Bhaskar Jadhav and other Opposition legislators, staged a symbolic protest on the steps of Vidhan Bhavan in Mumbai, holding placards reading "Mi Marathi" (I am Marathi). "Pressure triumphed over power," Mr. Thackeray told reporters on the Vidhan Bhavan premises where the monsoon session of the State legislature began earlier in the day. Facing mounting Opposition to the introduction of Hindi language in Maharashtra schools from Classes I to V, the State Cabinet on Sunday (June 29, 2025) decided to withdraw two GRs (Government Resolution) on the implementation of the three-language policy. Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis on Sunday (June 29, 2025) said the GRs have been withdrawn and announced the formation of a committee headed by educationist Narendra Jadhav to suggest the way forward on the language policy. "Despite having power, the government had to roll back its own resolutions owing to pressure from the people, the Opposition and others opposing the imposition of Hindi," Mr. Thackeray claimed. "We will continue our pressure on the government until it issues a formal decision in writing. We no longer trust this government. The unity of the Marathi people must be demonstrated before Delhi," said the legislator, son of former State Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray. Asked about motives behind the government's decision, Aaditya Thackeray alleged, "The BJP and Deputy CM Eknath Shinde-led Shiv Sena are working hard to prevent any unity between Uddhav and (MNS head) Raj Thackeray. But they are mistaken if they think they can divide the Marathi pride." Mr. Danve said, "We are happy that our demand has been partially met. But we are still skeptical of the Maharashtra Government, especially since it has now formed another committee to study the matter further." Nationalist Congress Party (Sharad Pawar) leader Jayant Patil claimed the government's reversal on the introduction of Hindi demonstrates how detached it is from the public sentiment. "The withdrawal of its own decisions on Hindi imposition shows how alienated this government is from concerns of the people. It also underscores the dysfunctionality of the administration," he charged. The State legislature's monsoon session commenced today and will continue till July 18. While the House proceedings began with obituary references, the Opposition made it clear it would target the government on a range of issues, such as farm loan waiver, fair prices for agricultural produce, inflation, employment, education and alleged administrative irregularities.
India Today
34 minutes ago
- India Today
Why framers of India's Constitution didn't include secular in it
Speaking on the 50th anniversary of the declaration of the Emergency, RSS general secretary, Dattatreya Hosabale, questioned the inclusion of the terms 'secular' and 'socialist' in the Preamble by the 42nd Amendment to the Constitution. While the Congress attacked the RSS and BJP after Hosabale's remarks, Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar and Union Ministers Shivraj Singh Chouhan and Jitendra Singh backed the idea that the inclusion of the two words needs to be said the inclusion of the terms in the Preamble during the Indira Gandhi-imposed Emergency was a "travesty of justice" and "sacrilege to the spirit of Sanatana".Interestingly, the argument that Hosabale made of the term not being in the original draft of the Indian Constitution is not lone use of the term 'secular' in the original Constitution was in Article 25-2A. Here it was used to refer to "political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice", and not to describe the nature of the said, "Yes, the ideas of socialism and secularism existed through the rules and policies of the government, but that is different. However, it must be questioned whether 'secular' and 'socialist' should remain in the Constitution or not because the makers of the Constitution did not originally include this.""This was not added by Babasaheb but during the Emergency when democratic rights and the legislature were dysfunctional. Hence, such questions must be addressed today," the RSS functionary a political ideology, secularism is the absolute separation of the state from religion, but in the Indian context, it has meant equal respect to all religions. The Indian state is neither anti-religion nor strictly as the Constitution is secular in its spirit, both BR Ambedkar and Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru did not believe that it adhered to the dictionary understanding of the term Constituent Assembly agreed that while it was required in spirit, the official inclusion of the term 'secular' would have impeded the necessitated interventions towards ending discrimination and affirmative THE CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY DEBATESKT Shah, an eminent economist, advocate and socialist, proposed to add to clause (1) of Article 1 that read, "India shall be a", the words – secular, federal and regard to the secular character of the Indian State, he said, "We have been told time and again from every platform, that ours is a secular state. If that is true, if that holds well, I do not see why the term could not be added or inserted in the constitution itself, once again, to guard against any possibility of misunderstanding or misapprehension."However, he added, "The term secular, I agree, does not find place necessarily in constitutions on which ours seems to have been modelled."To this, the Chairperson of the Drafting Committee, Dr BR Ambedkar, expressed his inability to accept such a justified it by stating, "The Constitution is merely a mechanism for the purpose of regulating the work of the various organs of the State."For him, the Constitution was not a mechanism for deciding the policy of the state. Rather, the people themselves should actively shape the Constitution in accordance to their social and economic did not see the need to, as he said, "tie down the people to live in a particular form and not leave it to the people themselves to decide it for themselves".He also called the proposed amendment "superfluous" as there are other provisions in the Constitution, rather than fundamental rights that obligate the State to be secular, social, and federal in members, such as HV Kamath, argued that, if at all, the term can be added to the Preamble but not to the Constitution, especially within the first article, which talks about 'Union and its Territories and Jurisdictions'.Ambedkar strongly argued, "It cannot be laid down in the Constitution itself, because that is destroying democracy altogether," and the motion was negated by the Vice Jawaharlal Nehru asked the members of the constituent assembly demanding the inclusion of the term 'secular' to consult the by how this debate had been brought up numerous times, he said, 'It has a great deal of importance, no doubt. But it is brought in all contexts, as if by saying that we are a secular state we have done something amazingly generous, given something out of our pocket to the rest of the world, something which we ought not to have done."For him, the inclusion of the word would be a superficial assertion of having done something 'mighty'.ANCIENT CULTURE OF INDIA WAS NOT SECULARIndia has practised the "principled equidistance" model of secularism, which is engaging with all religions without favouring one over the assembly member, HV Kamath, distinguished the Indian model of secularism by saying, 'When I say that a State should not identify itself with any particular religion, I do not mean to say that a State should be anti-religious or irreligious."Propagating 'dharma' or duty to be the religion of the State, he said, 'A secular state is neither a God-less State nor an irreligious nor an anti-religious State."Another member, Loknath Misra, mentioned India's history to argue that religion cannot be divorced from life and the term 'Secular State' cannot be "a device to bypass the ancient culture of the land". For him, the inclusion of the term 'secular' would require all the rights related to religion in the Constitution to be strongest argument against the inclusion of 'secular' in the Constitution was that it would negate the various religious Ian Copland justified the exclusion of the term on two grounds in his book, 'A History of State and Religion in India'. One, the Protestant concept of 'enlightened secularism' did not suit a country where the rulers and religious public have since times immemorial interacted with each other. Two, adding the term might make the public think that the government 'had religion in its sight'.So, while the future of India was rooted in the idea of secularism, it was not the European model but a contextualised Indian model taking into account by the framers of the DEMOCRACY IS AN IDEAL TO BE AIMED FORThe Articles such as 15(4), 16(5), 17, 25, and 45 already laid down rules as to how, even with the right to religion enshrined as a fundamental right, certain practices within religions are unconstitutional and even the then Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi, enacted the 42nd Amendment Act in1976 while the country was in a state of national emergency and added the term 'secular' to the Preamble to the Indian Constitution.A member argued, 'What is the use of calling India a secular State if you allow religious instruction to be imparted to young boys and girls?', while another questioned the validity of legislating through private laws.A long debate was then held over the need for a uniform civil code, the meaning of religious instruction, apprehension over the freedom to propagate religion and the future of minority rights in a secular this, Nehru evoked the idea of a "secular democracy" and stated, "It is an ideal to be aimed at and every one of us whether we are Hindus or Muslims, Sikhs or Christians, whatever we are, none of us can say in his heart of hearts that he has no prejudice and no taint of communalism in his mind or heart."'SECULAR' AN ATTACK ON SPIRIT OF CONSTITUTIONSpeaking at the book release of 'Ambekar's Messages', the Vice President of India, Jagdeep Dhankar called the addition of the words to the Preamble a 'betrayal' and 'sacrilege to the spirit of Sanatana'.He said, "The Preamble of the Indian Constitution is unique. Except Bharat (no other) Constitution's Preamble has undergone change, and why? Preamble is not changeable'.Hence, what Hosabale said is not untrue, and he has been joined by others in his criticism of the 42nd Amendment, which added 'secular' to the Congress leaders and the larger opposition have called this an attack on the Constitution, Union Ministers Shivraj Singh Chouhan and Jitendra Singh backed a review of the inclusion of the terms 'socialist' and 'secular'.Chouhan said that the core of Indian Culture is 'Sarva Dharma Sambhav' (equal respect to all) and not 'dharma nirpeksh' (secular). With this he demanded the removal of the supported Hosabale by saying that Ambedkar crafted 'one of the best Constitutions in the world and if it was not his thinking, then with what thought did someone add these terms'.Chief Minister of Kerala Pinarayi Vijayan called this uproar by the RSS 'sheer hypocrisy and political opportunism'.He said, 'Invoking the Emergency to discredit these principles (secularism and socialism) is a deceitful move, especially when the RSS itself colluded with the Indira Gandhi government during the time for its own survival'.There was consensus among the framers of the Indian Constitution that India should not be a theocratic state and there was also debate about 'secular' was the right term to define otherwise. Though a decision was made, the debate continues, 75 years on, because Indira Gandhi included the term during the Emergency when most opposition leaders were hounded underground or packed into jails.- Ends advertisement
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Maharashtra withdraws Hindi language orders in schools after backlash, forms review panel
Mumbai, Amid a growing chorus against the introduction of the Hindi language in Maharashtra schools from classes 1 to 5, the state cabinet on Sunday decided to withdraw two GRs (government orders) on the implementation of the three-language policy. Addressing a press conference on the eve of the monsoon session of the state legislature, Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis also announced the formation of a committee under educationist Dr Narendra Jadhav to suggest the way forward and implementation of the language policy. The panel has sought three months to study the issue and prepare a report. Fadnavis alleged Uddhav Thackeray had accepted the recommendations of the Dr Raghunath Mashelkar committee to introduce a three-language policy from class 1 to 12 when he was chief minister and set up a committee to implement the policy. "The state cabinet has decided to withdraw the Government Resolutions (GR) issued in April and June regarding the implementation of the three-language policy from class one. A committee headed by Dr Narendra Jadhav will be formed to recommend implementation (of the three-language formula)," Fadnavis said. He said the government will take a fresh decision based on the report of Dr Jadhav, a former member of the Planning Commission and ex-Vice Chancellor. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch vàng CFDs với sàn môi giới tin cậy IC Markets Tìm hiểu thêm Undo "The other names of the committee will be announced in some days. The panel will study the Mashelkar Committee's report and suggest from which standard (class 1 or otherwise) the three language formula will be implemented,'' he said. The Fadnavis government had issued a GR on April 16, making Hindi a compulsory third language for students in classes 1 to 5 studying in English and Marathi medium schools. Amid backlash, the government issued an amended GR on June 17 making Hindi an optional language. The move was criticised by the Opposition- Shiv Sena (UBT), MNS, and NCP (SP)- which dubbed it the "imposition" of Hindi in Maharashtra. Fadnavis acknowledged the difference of opinion over finalising the grade (class 1 or 5) for implementing the three-language formula. "The decision (on language policy) has been taken in the interest of Marathi students. If three languages are taught, students will get credit in the academic bank," he added. Fadnavis said the then CM Thackeray had appointed an 18-member Mashelkar Committee on September 21, 2020, comprising reputed figures from the education sector, on how to implement the NEP. A GR was issued on October 16, 2020. "The committee submitted a 101-page report on September 14, 2021. The panel stated that apart from the Marathi language, English and Hindi languages should be taught in classes 1 to 12. The report was tabled in the state cabinet on January 7, 2022. The minutes of the cabinet meeting are available,'' he said. He claimed Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Vijay Kadam, who runs an educational institution, was a member of the Mashelkar committee. Fadnavis also claimed Uddhav didn't mention that his government disagreed with the Mashelkar committee's report. "At that time, Uddhav didn't say that his government was not accepting the three-language formula. The then government set up a sub-group on the Mashelkar Committee's report," he added. Accusing Uddhav Thackeray of playing politics over the language issue, Fadnavis said the Shiv Sena (UBT) chief was opposing the Hindi language as he wants to "lay red carpet for the English language". Fadnavis said the Mahayuti government headed by him issued the two GRs in April and June as part of the sub-group set up by the then Thackeray-led MVA government. "We changed the decision to make the Hindi language mandatory and made it optional," he added. Shiv Sena (UBT) and MNS had announced a joint march on July 5 to oppose the "imposition" of the Hindi language. The march was cancelled after the government withdrew the GRs. Fadnavis also took potshots at MNS chief Raj Thackeray. "Raj Thackeray was nowhere in the picture at that time. He should ask Uddhav why his stand changed when his party joined the Opposition," he said. Fadnavis said Babasaheb Ambedkar wanted everyone to learn the Hindi language. "Any Indian who doesn't accept this proposal as part and parcel of a linguistic state has no right to be an Indian. He may be 100 per cent Maharashtrian, 100 per cent Gujarati, and 100 per cent Tamil, but he cannot be an Indian in the real sense of the word, except in geographical sense. If my suggestion is not accepted, India will then cease to be India," he said quoting Ambedkar from "Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar: writings and speeches". Deputy Chief Ministers Ajit Pawar and Eknath Shinde were also present at the presser. Pawar appealed to Marathi people not to participate in the morcha given the government's decision to withdraw the GRs. Shinde said the government's decision will be in the interest of students. "We have no ego," he added. PTI Is your child ready for the careers of tomorrow? Enroll now and take advantage of our early bird offer! Spaces are limited.
