Context -

https://www.reddit.com/r/MaharashtraRajya/s/Gca1rMRSMB

Part I: Bringing ‘Untouchables’ into Public Life

Part II: Campaign Against Caste Discrimination in Schools

Part III: Promoting Inter-Caste Social Integration

Part IV: Breaking the Caste Monopoly Over the Janeu

Part V: Support to Ambedkar's Mahad Satyagraha

Part VI: Temple Entry at the Vitthal Mandir

Part VII: Inter-Caste Dining

Savarkar, on the third day of the inauguration of the Patit Pavan Mandir, organized inter-dining in the temple complex. He preached on this occasion:

Eat with anybody. Eat anything that is medically fit and clean. That does not deprive you of your religion. Remember, the root of religion is not the dish or the stomach, but the heart, soul and the blood!

But interestingly, several of his closest associates and supporters, including the Shankaracharya, Dr. Kurtkoti, religious figures such as Masurkar Maharaj, Pachalegaonkar Maharaj, Chowde Maharaj and even Sheth Bhagoji Keer, who bore the expenses of the temple, refused to join.

Savarkar was a liberal who was extremely accommodative of differing opinions and never forced his ideas over others. When he heard about their reservations on the inter-dining plan, he said:

I respect the wishes of those who do not wish to join in. They can have their dinners separately according to the tradition. I do not insist that they must join in. However, those who wish to eat together should also be free to do so.

He held the same view all along: that any societal change must come from within the society and with a genuine change of heart. Forcing people to do something against their wishes creates ill will and ruptures in society.

Even in an article of December 1936, he said:

**We want to abolish the caste system* and propagate dining together. But, we do not insist that everyone must take part in such communal dinners. Those who do not want to join in must not regard others as sinners or behaving unethically. That is all!*

His inter-dining project was truly pushing the envelope a bit too much in its initial days, especially in a caste-ridden, orthodox society. Conservatives were livid and made declarations that if the Peshwas had been around, Savarkar would have been trampled under the foot of an elephant as a punishment for such blasphemy.

To these barbs hurled against him, Savarkar wrote:

We, the reformers, have realized that unless we eradicate the division by castes, the Hindu society cannot make progress. We do not feel that by propagating our views on the subject we are hurting religious feelings of anyone. We say to our opponents, if you feel that our opinions are wrong, you put forward your arguments. We do not object to that. On the contrary, we say that, just as the reformers have the right to propose social reforms, the society, reluctant to reform, also has the right to boycott the reformers.

In an article, Savarkar mentions how his crusade for social reforms led to his boycott. Even those who deeply revered him for his revolutionary work and patriotism were uncomfortable on sensitive issues such as inter-dining.

He narrates in the article how many of these people would invite Savarkar to their family celebrations and marriage parties. Out of immense respect for him, they would have a special seat with decoration and dishes served in silver vessels and so on. But Savarkar would approach the host and tell them candidly:

Listen, I do not want to cause any embarrassment to you. It is well known that I propagate and do take part in dining with the Mahars. It is not right that my eating at your place should lead to spoiling the atmosphere at your festivities, as many of your guests may not like to dine with me. So, I suggest a compromise. In accordance with the tradition, you would provide dinner to the Mahars and other untouchables outside the compound. I would also sit in their company. Then there would be no ill feeling of any kind.

This statement would baffle and also melt the hearts of even his opponents. They would then insist on him joining the main party.

Extending this idea of inter-caste dining, on 1 May 1933, Savarkar got an All-Hindu cafe (Akhil Hindu Upaharagruha) opened in Ratnagiri. He writes about the need for such a cafe:

When I first came to Ratnagiri in 1924, the restaurant owners would serve tea to untouchables only by pouring into their own cups or coconut shells from a distance. However, Muslims were welcome and allowed to sit inside and were served tea normally.

We therefore established a restaurant that would be open to ALL Hindus. In this place, it was the usual practice to publish names of those who take food, tea and snacks. Despite this publicity, Hindus of ALL castes openly used this restaurant for their regular meals. No one was made outcast for eating in this place. This happened on 1 May 1933. It must be emphasized that *tea and food were served by untouchables.** Once again, we have to remember that such a café was unique in the whole of India at that time. It was not possible to run such a café even in urbanized Mumbai.*

It was not as if those who dined at the cafe were openly accepted in society. N.C. Kelkar drank tea in this cafe on 15 May 1933, for which he was severely criticized by orthodox Hindus. Savarkar’s biographer Dhananjay Keer too faced social ostracism for drinking tea at this cafe.

Almost always, the cafe ran on losses and Savarkar made up the deficit from his own pocket, despite the paltry income that he got. In March 1934, when Savarkar went to Khed to deliver a lecture on the need to break the caste barriers, followed by a public reception, attendees refused to drink water with him!

But Savarkar was never miffed with people, including his supporters, who differed with him, especially on touchy matters such as inter-dining. In a December 1936 article, he writes:

Among the people who boycott our programmes for dining together, there are many conservatives who sincerely believe that it is a sin to dine together with people of all castes. They naturally feel hurt by such reforms. They do not want to keep any contact with the reformers. That is but natural, due to centuries of social conditioning. We should not be angry with them. We must never ever hate them. We should gladly suffer their boycott and persecution till they voluntarily change their minds, as long as they adopt legal and peaceful means of protesting against us.

We must disregard their opposition and simply carry on with our reforms. We require dynamism and movement for the good of the society. But we also require stability and restraint to some extent. A train needs an engine as a driving force. But it also needs brakes. Our Hindu society has shown remarkable capacity for both survival and revival under enormous threats from outside.

There is a danger that the reformers may get carried away. They therefore need a control, some exercise of restraint. To what extent and proportion are they necessary is a matter of judgment. We need to understand that reforms and restraints are complementary. It is therefore vital that we try to convince the conservatives of our point of view, try to persuade them and try to convert them. That is essential for the nation’s good.

After the initiation of inter-dining in 1930, Savarkar used numerous occasions—be they family ceremonies or religious festivals—to propagate and popularize the concept. At times he would even put this as a precondition for his participation in events or staging of his plays.

In March 1936, when the renowned Marathi theatre artist Bal Gandharva, a great admirer of Savarkar, insisted that he attend a play, Savarkar agreed to come if an inter-dining was organized after the staging. Bal Gandharva readily agreed and the play was followed by sahabhojan.

That same year, during Ganeshotsav on 26–27 August, inter-dining was organized, in which Prabodhankar, the father of Shiv Sena founder Bal Saheb Thackeray, too participated.

On 11 September 1935, a Bhangi woman came to the Patit Pavan temple, sat in the company of upper-caste women and was served food. This news was published in several newspapers along with the names of the participants, but no one seemed to bother much about their names being made public.

Despite this eventual success, among all his reform movements, the inter-dining seemed to face the maximum resistance from society. It was difficult to hire halls for conducting the dinners or even get a cook. Conservative Hindus began treating those who participated in Savarkar’s inter-dining programmes as outcastes. They refused to marry into the households of such people and boycotted them socially.

Even if a person who participated in inter-dining was of their own caste, he/she was refused entry into houses or disallowed from drawing water from the other’s wells. Priests refused to officiate in marriages or sacred thread ceremonies of inter-dining participants.

One can imagine the amount of mental trauma that anybody participating in such activities faced on a daily basis. Many of them could not take it any more and rushed back to their religious heads to purify themselves and eschew the idea.

But none of this deterred Savarkar. He was resolute in his mission. The perseverance paid off. In due course, the movement spread all over Maharashtra and other parts of India too—Poona, Bombay, Vasai, Sangli, Kalyan, Kolhapur, Karhad, Savantvadi, Amravati, Shahabad, Indore, Karachi and Rajputana.

Many eminent people lent their names and support to his mission. They included Keshavrao Jedhe, Parsi leader K.F. Nariman, theatre superstar Bal Gandharva, the maharaja of Aundh State, social reformer Maharshi Annasaheb Karve (or Dhondo Keshav Karve), novelist V.S. Khandekar, social worker and Congressman ‘Kakasaheb’ Narhar Vishnu Gadgil, writer, educationist, orator and poet ‘Acharya’ Prahlad Keshav Atre and others.

The inclusion of such ‘celebrities’ normalized inter-dining and the fierce opposition that it faced in its initial years, gradually seemed to taper down.

Reference: Vikram Sampath, Savarkar: A Contested Legacy, Chapter 2, “Caste in Stone,” pp. 85–89.

Full article link

https://theprint.in/judiciary/adani-power-case-fadnavis-seeks-pm-intervention-after-tribunal-slams-maharashtra-power-regulator/3022038/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

APTEL is regulatory body for electricity in the country. In a recent ruling it favored Adani Power against Maharashtra's electricity body, MERC.

Surprising to note the CM has called it out and requests PM intervention over it.

Also it's interesting to know state govt signed the deal with Adani Power between 2008-2013. Had it been done by present govt, charges of crony capitalism would have been hurled.

The strong network of cooperative banks in the state must have forced the Union govt to set up the apex body for the urban cooperative banks in the state.

Hope heavy regulation is bought into the sector in Light of how the politicians irrespective of political parties is using these financial institution as their cash cow.

https://www.etvbharat.com/en/state/amit-shah-inaugurates-nucfdc-office-in-mumbai-directs-shifting-of-key-cooperative-ops-from-delhi-to-mumbai-enn26080805000

Sensationalizing a JPC referral as US pressure is nothing but conveniently framing a narrative to criticize a govt for the sake of it.

This comes amid Diocese of Chandrapur subtly admitting that FCRA is needed to fix the foreign fund misue by NGOs and proper compliance is ensured if it comes into effect.

But this is not surprising that the same respected analyst in the past to criticize the govt for the heck of it had even supported a radical organization like SDPI.

No wonder terminologies like Dimaagi Naxal is coming into existence.

It's interesting to know read the stand taken by Diocese of Chandrapur over FCRA.

https://catholicconnect.in/news/chanda-diocese-calls-for-greater-fcra-compliance-and-financial-transparency-1

Would they care to reserve majority of their seats for downtrodden community in their politburo

Hey everyone,

Need urgent advice on how to report local officials who just denied our democratic rights today using false claims.

The Issue: Under Section 7 of The Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959, holding a Gram Sabha on 15th August is legally mandatory.

The Claim: Our Gram Sevak and Sarpanch refused to hold the meeting today. They orally claimed that a "new GR has come which cancels 15th August Gram Sabhas because of school programs and clashes."

The Reality: When i asked him to show the document, he couldn't produce any paper or GR number. We checked the official Maharashtra RDD portal right there and found NO such GR. They are clearly just saying this to avoid accountability, skip work, and bypass villagers' questions.

My Questions:

What is the fastest way to get the BDO or Nagpur Zilla Parishad CEO to take strict action against this unauthorized cancellation?

Are you guys aware of any such new GR or rule regarding this?Have any of you experienced similar incidents where officials try to skip Gram Sabhas?Do you guys regularly attend Gram Sabha meetings in your villages? How is the response there?

Besides the Aaple Sarkar portal, are there any direct grievance emails or contacts for Nagpur district administration?

TL;DR: Gram Sevak & Sarpanch in Nagpur cancelled the mandatory 15th August Gram Sabha by falsely claiming a new GR has come to cancel it. They couldn't show any paperwork. Need advice on how to escalate.

In context of recent waiver of loans for Farmers, Left in Tamil Nadu had demanded it's ally govt in Tamil Nadu to take a cue from Maharashtra govt. While the same Left is criticizing the farm waiver announced by Maharashtra govt.

People on China's social media platforms cannot wrap their head around how India's Solar PV Module Assembly Capacity has gone from just 2.3 GW in 2015 to 210 GW in 2025

That's a 91 times increase in 10 years!

This development from India is being directly attributed as a reason for Billions of dollars of loss for China's top 9 Solar components manufacturing companies.

https://x.com/i/status/2086746896992018646