210

CHAPTER-V

COALITION GOVERNMENT AT

WORK IN ASSAM

5.1 : Coalition Government of Assam : Pre-Independence Period.

5.1.1: First Coalition Ministry: (1 April 1937- 4 February 1938)

5.1..2: Second Coalition Ministry: (5 February 1938- 18 September 1938)

5.1.3: Formation of the first Congress-Coalition Ministry under Gopinath Bordoloi

5.2 : COALITION GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM: POST- INDEPENDENCE PERIOD

5.2.1 : AGP-led Coalition Government in Assam

5.2.2 : Congress-led Coalition Government in Assam

5.3 : EVALUATION OF COALITION GOVERNMENT IN ASSAM.

&&&

211

CHAPTER-V

COALITION GOVERNMENT AT WORK IN ASSAM

5.1 : Coalition Government of Assam : Pre-Independence Period.

In April 1934, a section of the congressmen at the all India level decided to revive the

swarajya party to contest the forthcoming election to the central legislative assembly.

Gandhiji welcomed the decision. Accordingly, the CWC decided in their meeting at patna

(18 to 20 may 1934) to accept entry into the legislature as a part of the congress

programmed, their by revising its earlier stand. Subsequently a congress parliamentary board

was set up to conduct the elections. At the juncture, however, Gandhi announced his

retirement from active politics on 25 September 1934 and in the Bombay congress (26 to 28

oct 1934) he gave out that he would not even remain a primary member of the congress

party.386

On 12 June 1934, the government of India lifted the ban on the congress organization. 387

In

November, election for the legislative assembly was held. From Assam N.C Bardoloi was

elected from the Brahmaputra Velley defeating T R Phookun (congresnational party).

Similarly, Basanta kumur das (congress) from the Surma velley Abdul matins Choudury

(Muslim league) from the Muhammedan constituency were elected. 388

However, election to

the legislative council was postponed till the end of 1936, in view of the introduction of the

government of India act, 1935.

386 Majumdar,n.34,Pp.532-42 387 Ibid.,p.533 388 N C Bordoloi, TR phukun and Kulodhar chaliha were the aspirants for this seat.The APCC offered the

Brahamaputra valley seat to Bodoloi, chaliha withdrew his application but phookun contesting the APCCs

decision directly applied for nominatin to the congress parliamentary board.it may be mentioned that phookun

was in the legislative assembly since 1923.Tthe Board rejeceted phookun claim and offered the seat to Bordoloi.

Radehikaram Das, Dwitya aru tritya Asohoyog Andolanar smriti,H N Baruah,ed, Bharatar Mukati Yujat

Assam(Assamese), Guahti 1972,p.316

212

The Government announced that the act 1935 would come into force on 1 April 1937. it may

be mentioned here that the federal scheme, as proposed in the act of 1935, never came into

force because the precondition that a sufficient number of the Indian states would accede to

the federation was not satisfied. Therefore, only the constitutional provision dealing with the

provincial Government came into operation. On 23 August 1936, the AICC published its

election manifesto.389

It declared that the congress had rejected the government of India Act

1935 and therefore, it had taken the decision to go to the legislature not to cooperate with the

Act but to combat it.390

The congress party, acting on the basis of its election manifesto, reasserted its position at

fazipur (December 1936) that its strategy did not encompass the holding of the office or the

forming the ministry. Any deviation from the policy, the congress president categorically

said, would “mean a kind of partnership with British imperialism in the exploitation of the

Indian people.

While contesting the election the congress wanted to rise above the narrow orbit of

communalism and hence even, Muslim was nominated as candidates in different

constituencies. This gesture was obviously aimed at political solidarity of a diverse nation.

But in Assam despite sincere efforts of the APCC, non Muslim candidate could be persuaded

stand to stand in the election. The Assam provincial congress parliamentary board was

constituted to conduct the election. The board selected one candidate for each constituency to

avoid splitting of the congress vote. In the Brahmaputra Valley, the Muslim in general

supported the Assam Valley Muslim party led by Saadullah’s. The Muslim league also

fielded some candidates. The Nawab of dacca visited nowgoong and addressed a few

meetings of Muslim immigrants, asking them to cast their votes in favour of Muslim

candidates. In the Surma Valley, however, there was no unanimity among the Muslim

candidates. The leaguers and the independent contested against each other. Shaukat ali, the

Muslim league leader, arrived at sylhet and tried to sort out the differences by trying to

impress upon the Muslim the necessity of working together under the Assam Muslim league

389 Tara chand, History of the freedom movement in India, vol. 4, New Delhi 1972, p.214. 390 Ibid.,p.238

213

parliamentary Board. But the efforts were in vain. As against the fragmentation of the

Muslim in the surma Valley, the congress position there remained indivisible. Even the all

India krishak Sangha issued instructions that under no circumstances should a candidate

from any krishak organization stand against a congress nominee in the election.

To initiate the congress election campaign, the fourth Assam provincial political conference

was held at becheria (tespur) on 6th

December 1936 under the president ship of Bhulabhai

Desi, a prominent member of the central Assembly. Desi in his presidential speech, urged

upon the people to have the council represented by congressmen and their by help paralyse

the government and frustrate the operation of the new constitution. The strategy arrived at

was that legislatures were to be captured just to wreck the constitution from within. This

strategy of poll participation was explained in details to all.391

With a view to making the congress a formidable force in Assam politics, Bhulabai Desi

tried to persuade T. R Phookun, as fcongress leader of Assam to rejoin the congress

party.Phookon, realizing the situation agreed at first to abide by the congress rules and

regulation, but soon changed his mind and decided to dissociate from the congress party

altogether. Instead he devoted himself to form a separate political party. United peoples

party. But soon phookun himselp was expelled from his own party on the alleged charge of

anti party activity in the Guahati local Board election. Phookun, being discarded by the

congress and disowned by his own party, had no alternative but to stand as an independent

candidate.

A general election throughout the country under the new Act was held in February 1937. The

results affirmed the congress popularity among the people. I6t gained an absolute majority in

Madras. The united provinces, the central provinces, Bihar and Orissa. It became the biggest

single party in four provinces, namely Assam, Bengal, Bombay and the NWFP. In Sind and

the Punjub it was in comparatively smaller minority.392

391 APAI.,File No.B.2(17)36 of 1936;Home poll.File No 18/11/36-Poll,F.R.,first half of November 1936,NAI.. 392 Majumdar,n.34,p.559

214

In Assam, out of 108 seats, the congress captured 33seats. Out of 29 congress candidates who

contested from the Brahmputra valley, 26 came out successful; and out of 12 congress

candidates of the Surma velley, 7 got elected. In many cases the congress nominees were

returned by very substantial majorities, and in others they gained for splitting of votes among

two or more non congress candidates. The congress candidates had the advantage of a better

organization of which they made full use of. The following chart shows the composition of

the Assembly.

5.2: COMPOSITION OF THE ASSAM LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (UNDER THE

ACT OF 1935)

TERRITORIAL CONSTITUENCIES.

Sl.No Categories No.of seats. No. of

electros

Poll participation

rate in tested seats%

1 Non-muhammedan general

(including seven reservedseats

for scheduled castes

47

4,45,626

76.0%

2 Muhammedan 34 2,77,677 65.5%

3 Women 1 2199 55.5%

4 Indian christian 1 5,743 ----

5 European 1 2,357 ----

SPECIAL CONSTITUENCIES.

6 (a) Backward plains tribes 4 27.588 46.3%

(b) Backward Hhills areas 5 18,338 46.6%

7 (a) European Planters 7 975 ----

(b) Indian Planters 2 344 ----

8 (a)Comerce and Industry (Euro) 1 18 ----

(b)Comerce and Industry (Indian) 1 197 ----

9 Tea Garden Labour 4 34, 279 ----

Total 108 8,15,241 71.3%

The congress in their appeals highlighted the depressed condition of riots, inadequate grant

of remission of land revenue and the high costs of administration. “Even the past records of

the present minister and of the sitting members of the house were raked up and exhibited.”393

393 IAR,January-June1937,vol.I,P.168(0).

215

Two ministers and the president of the council were defeated.394

Though party feelings often

ran high, there was no disturbance before or at the time of polling.395

The strength of the

different parties. As they emerged from the polls was as follows.

STRENGTH OF THE DIFFERENT PARTIES

Sl No Party Names Total Seats Occupied

1 Congress

33

2 Independent Hindu 10

3 Muslim Praja party 01

4 United peoples party 03

5 Assam valley Muslim 05

6 Surma valley Muslim 05

7 Europeans 09

8 Backwards tribes 04

9 Labourer 04

10 Independent 14

11 Others 20

Total 108

An analysis of the election results reveals that the congress could bag only 33 seats out of

108 seats in the assembly, which worked out to approximately 31 percent of the total seats in

the assembly.

Secondly, though the party commanded a single majority in the assembly it could not form a

ministry without the help of the other parties. Thirdly, there was no Muslim member in the

party. The failure of the party in gaining an absolute majority was ascribed to the variety of

causes, namely lack of organization and the communal dissensions generated by the

communal award. Moreover, the apathetic attitude of the all India leaders towards Assam

was no less responsible for this. These shortcomings of the congress were placed before

Jawaharlal Nehru when the letters paid a visit to Assam in November 1937. toconsolidate the

position of the congress. Nehru suggested: “I should say that those members who are in other

394 Ibid. 395 Ibid.

216

groups should come over to congress and form the ministry as has been done in the NWFP.

This open invitation did not yield any results as communalism played a predominant in

Assam politics. In the midst of currents and cross currents of communal and sectarian views,

the congress emerged as the one single party with a wider national out look workings for the

people as a whole irrespective of race, caste, creed and religion and language.396

The workings of the governments of India Act1935 vis-à-vis responsible government. After

the election were over, the all important questions of the acceptance of office was discussed

by the AICC in its meetings held at Delhi on 17 and 18 march 1937. The AICC authorized

and permitted the acceptance of office in provinces where the congress party commanded

absolute majority in the legislature, provided the governor publicly announced that he would

not exercise his special powers or set aside the advice of the minister in regard to

constitutional activities. But the governors of the provinces in which the congress obtained a

clear majority, or near majority, in the legislature were not prepared to give any assurance

along the terms demanded by the congress leaders. This created a political impasse in the

formation of the ministry. Controversy ensued between the congress and government. After

prolonged negotiation, linlithgow, the viceroy, issued a statement on the governor’s position

and gave the assurance that the governors would neither interfere with the policies of the

ministers. Nor obstruct day to day administration of the provinces nor exercise their special

powers arbitrarily. It was also proclaimed that in all matters normally fallings within

ministerial purview, including the position of the minorities, or services, etc, the governor

would ordinarily be guided in the discharge of his powers by the advice of his ministers, who

would be responsible not to the central legislature but to the provincial legislature.397

Such a

proclamation was definitely a step forward towards the realization of parliamentary

democracy.

In Assam the congress became the biggest single party in the house. Initially it had no

inclination to form a ministry though it had a fair prospect of doing so by coalescing with

other parties with similar ideology and objectives. Gopinath bordoloi, in a letters to Rejendra

396 K.N.Dutt,Landmarks of the Freedom Struggle in Assam,Gauhati,1969,p.83. 397 Tara Chand,n.43,vol.4,p.228

217

Prasad, argued the congress stand with: “the refusal to accept ministry and forming a solid

bloc of opposition will, to my mind, be a more workable policy.398

Bordoloi stand from the

point of view of strategy and which was earlier enunciated by Bhulabhai Desai in the Assam

political conference at Tezpur in 1936 was to frustrate the working of the constitution from

within. A joint meeting of the Assam parliamentary Board and the congress members of the

assembly was held on 22 feb 1937. Under the presidentship of Brojendra Narayan Choudary.

In the meeting Gopinath Bordoloi and Khirodechandra Deb were elected leader and the

deputy leader, respectively of the congress parliamentary party. As majority of the members

came from the Assam valley, they preferred to elect the leader from their own valley.

Desbeswar Sarmah and Siddhinath Sarmah were elected the chief and the deputy chief whip

of the party, respectively. In the meeting the programme of the party was chalked out within

the ideals and principles of the AICC. It included (i) persistent attempts to wreck the

constitution ;( ii) to do away with all repressive laws. (iii) to reduce the pay of the ministers

and the speaker to Rs 1,000 or even less.(iv) to Endeavour to abolish the second chamber. (v)

To agitate to transfer Sylhet and Cachar, excluding the hill area of the north Cachar.(vi)

reduction of land revenue (vii) abolition of opium, except on medical ground (viii)

amendment of local self government acts (ix) introduction of compulsory primary education

(x) remedy of the indebtedness and other distresses of the peasants.

On March 14, 1937, a meeting of the APCC was held at Barpeta with B.R Medhi, G.N

Bordoloi, Siddhinath sarmah, Liladhar Baruah, Omeokumur Das, Sarbeswar Barchetia,

Ghanashyam Das and others, to discus the question of acceptance of office under the reform

constitution. It was decided that as the party did not command absolute majority it should not

form ministry; rather it would play the role of the opposition. It was also resolved to observe

complete hartal on April 1, 1937, as a mark of protest against the introduction of the new

constitution.399

The abolition of the Assam legislative council was also demanded. In the

public meeting held on the same day at Barpeta, it was resolved to organize the congress at

the village level and to inculcate through the congress doctrine on the masses. The meeting

398 Bordoli to Rajendra Prasad,24 Febuary 1937,APCC papers,packet No.35, APCC office,Gauhati. 399 Report show that the hartal of the 1 April was a tame affair throughout the province even in places where

some enthusisn might have been expected. There were a few meetings sparsely attended and addressed by

people of no particular standing. Home Poll. File No. 18/4/37- poll< F.R, April, 1937. NAI.

218

also called for unity among all sectarian interests to form of single party to present a united

front against the ruling party and resolved that the congress would not accept office under the

new constitution.400

In the mean time the united Muslim party was formed with the newly elected Muslim

members to the assembly from the two valleys. According to an official report “…… all the

Muslim members’ are trying to combine together at least for the purpose of forming the

ministry.401

5.1.1: First Coalition Ministry: (1 April 1937- 4 February 1938)

Saadullah’s, the leader of the Muslim group of the Brahmaputra valley formed a coalition

party with the help of European and other tribal and non tribal members. He meets the

governor on 15 March 1937 and took the office of the premier on 1 April 1937, the inaugural

day of the constitution. The governor, before installing the Saadullah ministry, did not even

consult the congress group, the biggest single party in the assembly, which he normally ought

to have done as per democratic norms and parliamentary practices. It was obvious that right

form the beginning the governor centered his hope in Saadullah, who, according to him had

acquired intimate knowledge of the administrative machinery of the province as he had been

at the helm of administration since diarchy was introduced. “It was this reason more than

anything else that perhaps impelled the governor to commission him to form a ministry

instead of sending for the leader of the largest single party, the congress, to do so.402

400 APAI, File No. B-2(17)37. 401 Amrita Bazar Patrika, 24, Feb 1937. 402 Dutta, n.61, p.-89

219

Saadulla had five member coalition ministry comprising the following personnel:

Sl No Name Party’s Name Portfolios

1 Muhammad

Saadullah

Muslim Party. Premier Finance, Home and

PublicWork

2 Muhammad

Waheed

United Muslim

Party.

Education nad Forest

3 James Joy Mohan

Nicolas Roy

Progressive Party. Local self government,

Excise and Medicine

4 Rohinikumur

Choudhury

United Peoples

Party

Revenue Justice,

Legislation and General

Department

5 Ali Hyder Khan United Muslim

Party

Agriculture, Industry, Co-

operative Societies and

Registration

R K choudhuary of the united people’s party refused to join the congress but joined the

Saadullah ministry. This was set back to the congress. “if choudhuary would have joined

congress, the politics of Assam would have different.403

The Saadullah ministry was

dominated by the Muslim and it believed less in parliamentary responsibility than in

strengthening the hand of the bureaucrats. More over it depended for it continuance on

doubtful pacts and compromises since it had “diverse and reactionary elements” in the

assembly. Consequently, “set an example of political muddling of an un healthy kind. The

way saadullah acted in promoting the interests of the Assamese Muslims of his own valley

provoked only distrust amongst the Muslim members of the other valley. Such a coalition

could never be expected to be stable nor the system of parliamentary politics built on

fragmentation of electorate be successful. In fact the communal award was enunciated in

such a way that no party could generally form a stable ministry. Thus in Assam it was the

European group that held the balance between the congress and non congress. The congress,

how ever, succeeded in winning the support of the independents and the dissidents.

403 Lakhidar Borah, Bharatar Mukti Yujar Sonwaran, Baruah,ed.,n.42,p.187.

220

In fact, very little scope was allowed in the act for responsible government. Even if Saadullah

had the enthusiasm he could achieve little as more than one fifth of the provinces total

expenditure budget was non- votable, and some items were not even open for discussion.

Besides, on certain specified subjects only a private bill or resolution could be introduced in

the legislature after it had obtained the prior approval of the Governor. Thus the major

stumbling block was within the Act itself.

Within the sullied setting the Saadullah ministry took its birth, and that too without any

specific plan or programme. The assembly first met on 7 April 1937. the main business on

that occasion was the election of the speaker and appointment of certain committees.

Bassntakumur Das, a congress nominee, was elected speaker and deputy speaker defeating

the official candidate Keramat Ali 56 to 51 votes. Muhammad Amiruddin was deputy

speaker.404

The government thus begun with defeat. The ministry faced the second crisis

when the Muslim league led by Abdul Matin Choudhuary began opposing Saadullah, who

however, continued to enjoy the support of the European bloc.405

Thus it was not Saadullah

who really ran the Government. The bureaucrats and the European were the Actual agents

controlling the strings of Government. A member of the assembly was explicit on the issue.

“the white bureaucrats speak through their brown successors- the grip of imperialism the

chains of slavery tighten….. the new constitution was inaugurated on All- Fools’ Day I mean

the first of April, and the country has been befooled.”

On 8 April 1937, the Assam legislative council elected Mannomohan Lahiri and Zubida

Ataur Rahaman as the president, respectively.406

On 8 April 1937, the governor addressed

both the houses in a joint session when except for the speaker, all the congress members

abstained.407

The first budget session of the Assembly exposed the inherent weakness of the

Saadullah ministry, as it had only a bare working majority of not more than six against the

combined congress and independent bloc.

404 Home poll.File No.18/4/37-poll,F.R.,first half of April 1937,NAI. 405 Choudhury resigned from the Central Legislative Assembly to enter the Provincial Assembly. Guga,

n.55,p.219 406 Home Poll. File No. 18/4/37-poll,F.R.,April 1937, NAI 407 ALAP,1937, Pp.-1-11 and 35-6

221

In the budget session, Saadullah president a surplus budget, the surplus was insignificant.

Nevertheless, in view of the persisting economic depression the presentation of a surplus

budget was unexpected. Saadullah was criticized for his failure to depart from the “

bureaucratic and orthodox principle of public finance” but the gained unanimous support

when he suggested that Assam be assigned the whole or part of the central excise proceeds

on petrol and kerosene produced within the province,408

and the heavy expenditure on the

Assam Rifles be borne by centre. Regarding this issue, nothing materialize immediately. It

was translated into practice only in 1941 through an amendment of the Assam Rifles’ Act of

1920.409

In the course of the budget discussion G.N Bordoloi, the leader of the opposition,

said the budget was “wretched” in the respect of its enunciated principles and operational

details. Criticizing the Government, he cited the maintenance cost of an army of occupation,

an expensive public service and the acute economic exploitation by outsiders which was

responsible for the moral degradation of the Assamese and Assam economic backwardness.

He charged that parliamentary system had been subverted through the European blocs

support to an otherwise minority Government. He said that the congress “wants to rejects the

federal constitution and will not allow it to function.410

The ministry sustained a defeat on 12

August 1937, when Abdul Matin choudhuarys Local rates’ Amendment Bill providing

reduced rates was passed by 67 to 37 votes.411

The revenue minister R.K choudhurys

amendment to delay implementation was also defeat. But the government scored a victory on

14 August 1937 carrying 60 to 37 votes at the consideration stage of the Removal of

Disqualification Bill, according to which mauzaddrs and Government pleaders would be

eligible for election, and members of legislature for appointment as parliamentary

secretaries.412

On 16 august 1937, in the course of discussion on a cut motion on general

administration the institution of second chamber came under fire. As a result the motion was

withdrawn the next day to avoid any possible crisis. But on 17 august 1937, the Government

sustained another defeat when the house refused, by 60 to 11 votes, the entire supply of Rs.

78,446 for maintaining the establishments of the two commissioners of the two valleys. The

establishments of the Divisional commissioners were found somewhat superfluous by the

408 IAR, July-December 1937, vol.2,p.237. 409 IAR July-December 1937,vol.2,p.236 410 G.N.Bordolois speech on 10 august 1937, ALAP,1937,Pp.512-7. 411 IAR.,July-December 1937,vol.2,p.239. 412 Ibid.

222

Webster committee and its continuance deemed to be a waste of state exchequer. The cut

motion was moved by the united Muslim party. Saadullah, in support of the continuance of

the establishments, argued that although the retrenchment committee of 1931 had

recommended the abolition of one of the two establishments, the secretary of state for India,

to whom the recommendation was forwarded, did not accept it. He further said that under

section 144 of the government of India Act of 1935, the provincial Government had nothing

to with the I.C.S officers. He raised the question of the validity of the Assembly decision of

the commissioner’s establishment. Nevertheless, the Government was compelled to accept

the cut as the Government of India Act 1935, made no provision for its restoration. As a

result, a serious political deadlock ensued which led to a constitutional crisis. The matter was

reserved for the speakers ruling. The speaker, B K Das, invited the advocate General of

Bengal Assam to make statement in the Assembly regarding the impasse. On 25 August

1937, he told the house that the decision of the Assembly was not ultra vires and as such the

validity of the Assembly’s decision of the cut on commissioner’s establishments did not

arise. On the basis of the Advocate Generals comments. The speaker in his ruling on 27

August 1937, held that the refusal of grants by the Assembly was perfectly legal and binding

on the Government. He referred to the white paper and joint parliamentary select committees

report as also the Acts of 1919 and 1935 in support of his ruling. The position of the

government became somewhat awkward, and Saadullah, on behalf of the government, agreed

to move the secretary of the state for India for abolition of the establishment of one of the

two commissioners, namely, the Surmas valley division.413

On the basis of the assurance,

Saadullah presented a supplementary demanded for commissioners establishment on 17

August 1937, The speaker, while giving his ruling on the next day, said that the demanded

was in order as the premier assured him that he would discharge the staff from 1 January

1938.The demand was voted accordingly. But the government betrayed its assurance when

on 21 December 1937 the Governor sent a message demanding supplementary grants from 1

January 1938 to 31 March 1938. As the members resented the move, the speaker refused to

admit the supplementary demand for the commissioner’s establishment for discussion. There

after, the governor, by exercising his special powers, nullified the Assembly decision and

413 Ibid.

223

certified the amount as being necessary for the discharge of his special responsibilities.414

Thus, the Governor not only acted against the assurance of the premier, but also rode rough-

shod over the opinion of the people. His actions were in contrary to the assurance given by

the Viceroy on 21 June 1937. Such an action was taken by the governor as “it is impossible

to regard with equanimity a situation which might be repeated by the legislature in other

fields where untouchable reserved posts are also open to indirect attack”.415

The Government sustained its eight defeat on 21 august 1937 when the assembly refused to

sanction the amount for the temporary intelligence staff of the criminal investigation

department, maintained at an annual cost Rs 75,000.The department was established to curb

terrorist activities in the province. As a result of the legislative Act, the criminal investigation

department lost about three quarters of there personnel. The government was worried: “this

my react un favorably on the situation and encourage revolutionaries, who will doubtless

realize the consequent inability to del with them adequately or to cooperate effectively with

the neighboring districts of Bengal. Time alone can show whether the step taken by the

legislature was wise”. This was heavy blow on the government and it had no other alternative

but to accept the verdict and abolish the staff. On the other hand, the congress demand

recommending a fifty percent reduction of land reveniue, with effect from 1937 to 1938, met

with defeat in August 1937,416

Omeo kumur Das and Siddhinath Sarmah taking part in the

debate on the motion referred to Rohini Kumur Choudhurys ( revenue minister) election

promises. The congress resolution was lost by 60 to 43 votes because the Saadullah

Government convinced the Muslim members that it was a calculated attempt at defeating the

Muslim majority Government. Thus it could obtain the Muslim leagues support, which was

hitherto supporting the congress. But later on, sayidur Rahamans amendment proposing 33

percent reduction in the land revenue was adopted by the house on 28 August 1937 with out

division.

In September 1937, official salaries Bill and removal of disqualification Bill were passed.

Earlier the governor fixed minister salary at Rs 2000 an speaker salary Rs 1000 per month

414 IAR.,July-December 1937,vol.2,Pp.240-2 and 245-7. 415 Home Poll.File No.18/8/37-poll,F.R.,Augest 1937,NAI 416 Home poll. File No.18/8/37-Poll,F.R.,August1937,NAI

224

and of the president of the council Rs 15 a day, while the house in session as well as the same

daily allowance 14 days before and 10 days after the session; and the deputy speaker and

deputy president were granted a nominal salary of Re 1 a day.417

The Saadullah government

introduced the salaries Bill with the monthly salary of Rs 2,800 for the premier, Rs 800, for

the minister, Rs 1000,for the speaker. The speaker, however, voluntarily declared that he

would accept not more than Rs 500 per month. The voluntary pay-cut decision of the speaker

of the Assam legislatve Assembly was something unheard of before. The congress

amendments to the Bill were defeated. The house adopted Sayidur Rahaman’s amendments

by 64 to 40 votes and fixed Rs 25,00 as the premiers and Rs 1500 as minister monthly

salary.418

The assembly also fixed emolument of the members of both the houses at Rs 100

per month Rs 5 per day as halting allowance. The council approved it on 19 February 1938.

When the question of the fate of six persons from Assam exiled to the Andaman’s came up

for discussion, the government assured that it would consider the matter sympathetically,419

Meeting were held in various parts of Assam demanding their immediate transfer.

Ultimately, these six prisoners were repatriated and “lodged in pairs in three jails of the

Assam Valley.”420

The first coalition ministry had succeeded in retaining its hold but not without a number of

reverses. Besides suffering a few defeats, it was on the verge of losing support of its

benefactors. To avoid this adverse situation, Saadullah had two alternatives at his disposal-

either to rally round the support of the groups which till then supported the congress or to

resign. Saadullah however was in no mood to resign and wanted to cling on to his office at

any cost. Referring to the ministry, the statement commented: “A Government which can not

control its own supporters and is continually humiliated by defeats carries little authority and

should either reassert its authority or resign.”421

To consolidate hid position Saadullah sought

the support of the Muslim of the Surma Valley, who constituted an overwhelming majority

among the Muslim members. Till then the Muslim league, the United Muslim party and the

417 Ibid 418 Ibid 419 Home Poll.File No.18/8/38.,F.R.,August1938,NAI 420 Home Poll.File No.18/9/37-Poll,F.R.,September 1937, NAI 421 The Statesman,Calcutta,22 August 1937.

225

Surma Valley Muslim independent were supporting the congress and could humiliate the

ministry time and again. As a first step, he joined the Muslim League and attended the all

India Muslim league conference at Lucknow in October 1937. There he gave the assurance

that he would advice and persuade his Muslim colleagues to join the League.422

5.1..2: Second Coalition Ministry: (5 February 1938- 18 September 1938)

Under thiscircumstances the reshuffling of the ministry became inevitable. Saadullah, in

order to reconstitute the ministry, persuated Muhammad Waheed, and Ali Hyder Khan of the

United Muslim party to resign. At their refusal to comply, Saadullah had no other alternatives

but to tender the resignation of his ministry to drop the two ministers. Thereafter, he was

again invited by the Governor to form a ministry, which he did on five February 1938, the

second coalition in succession within a year, comprising the Muslim League (24),

Progressive National Party (11), Constitutionalists(3), European Group (10), United peoples

party(8), and Independents(2). It had support of 58 in a house 108. On the other hand, the

opposition comprised of the congress (32), the United Muslim party (7), and Independents

(10). The speaker, a congressman, was expected to remain neutral all through. Saadullah’s

second coalition ministry was not only strong but also numerically larger than the previous

one. The personnel of the ministry were as follows:423

.

Sl No Names Party Name Departments

1 Muhammad Suddullah Muslim League Premier Finance, Home

and Public Works

2 James joy Mohan Nichols- Progressive Nationalist party. Local self Government

and Medicine

3 Rohinikumur Choudhury, United peoples party Revenue and Forest

4 Munawwar Ali,

Muslim League Education And Excise

5 Abdul Matin Choudhury,

Muslim League Agriculture, Industry,

Co- operative Societies

and Judicial.

6 Akshay Kumar Das

Constitutionalists Registration, Legislative

and General

Department.

422 Guha,n.55,Pp.225-6 423 “Provincial Autonomy: Ministries and parties in Assam, 1937-45”, Bureau of Public Information,

Govrenment of India, File No. 106/8/45-R, Reforms Department, NAI; Guga,n.55,p.219

226

Thus, by mobilizing the support of the Muslims in general and also of the backward classes

Saadullah faced the second budget session with renewed strength. This session, which

commenced on 15, February 1938, was more successful than the previous one as all the

demands were passed except the provision for the commissioners staff. The legislative output

included the Ministers Salary Bill, Payment of members Bill Assam Moneylenders Bill and

the good conduct prisoners Release Bill. Besides, a committee was appointed to enquire into

the effectiveness of the line system and the land settlement with the immigrants in the

Brahmaputra Valley retrenchment of expenditure on various heads and remission of land

Revenue. A resolution was passed by majority demanding the establishment of a high court

in Assam under Section 229 of the government of India Act 1935.424

Besides, on the very

first day of the session of the congress opposition Leader suggested that the out going

minister should make statement to the House explaining their position and thus initiate a

convention. Saadullah him self made a short statement explaining the reasons for his minister

resignation. Even Ali Hyder Khan made a statement in the Assembly regarding the

circumstances leading to the reshuffling of the ministry.425

Saadullah presented the budget for 1938-9 showing a deficit of Rs 4,62,000. In the course of

the discussion, the house expressed its displeasure with the premier abortive arguments with

the authorities in Delhi abut Assam’s claim for a share in the excise duty on produced within

Assam.426

Assam thus lost a considerable amount of revenue and naturally the ministry was

blamed for this failure. However, the premier gave an indication of improving provincial

finance by opening up one fourth of Assam’s waste- land which would bring rupees 10 to 15

laks to the depleted exchequer. The congress members hardly took any part in the

proceedings. Bordoloi, the leader of the opposition, stated that party Government had failed

inAssam and that the ministry was clinging to office inspite of defeats.427

The ministry was

mainly criticized for having no definite policy. But the leader of the European group, F, W

Hockenhull pointed out in defence that “ this criticism could hardly be applied to a ministry

424 Home Poll.File No.18/2/38-Poll-1938,F.R., February 1938,NAI 425 Ibid. 426 IAR,January-June 1938,vol.1 Pp.229-30 427 Ibid.

227

which had just assumed office and that would only be fair to give them a chance.”428

The

house rejected Hemchandra Datta’s Assam municipal Bill seeking to do away with the

system of nominations to Municipal Boards so that they might be constituted with elected

representatives of rate payers. This was a move towards democratization of the local body.

All the elected Hindu members, barring one, voted for the Bill while the government, along

the Muslim en- bloc and two nominated Hindu members, voted against it. Similarly,

Rajenendra Baruah’s motion refereeing to the Assam Municipal Bill,1937, to a selected

committee was lost by 51 to 41 votes. The ministry main purpose was to check the congress

ascendancy and to keep it away from succeeding to the reins of the Government.

On 21 February 1938, a no confidence motion was tabled against the coalition ministry by

Abdul Rahman. He characterized the ministry as being “incompetent” and “power

hankering”.429

Refuting the charge, the premier narrative the constructive work done by the

ministry and added that the so- called defeats had been nothing but motivated propaganda in

the Calcutta papers. He said that he considered the defeats as only apparent, otherwise as a

self – respecting and honourable person he would have resigned. The no-confidence motion

was defeated by 50 to 49 votes. This marginal win exposed the precarious balance on which

the ministry survived. Even this margin was possible through manipulation as “ there is

reason to believe that a considerable amount of money passed in the purchase of votes. On

twenty February 1938 Abdul Rahaman’s cut motion refusing Rs 78,023 for the

establishments divisional commissioners was passed without a division. This time the

ministerial group remains neutral. Saadullah stated that he would remain neutral pending the

secretary of state for India’s decision on the ministry recommendation for the abolition of the

commissioner’s posts.430

The Assembly passed the entire demand for general administration

minus Rs.78,023 for the commissioners establishments. “it was clear that upto the present the

new ministry appears to be more stable than its predecessor which had to submit to several

cut motions in the budget sessions last autumn.”431

428 Ibid. 429 Ibid. 430 IAR,January-June 1938,vol.1,Pp.229-30 431 Home Poll.File No.18/2/38-Poll-1938,F.R.,February 1938,NAI

228

As the house refused payment for the continuance of the two offices of the Divisional

commissioners the governor again, but exercising his special power, approved it vide section

78(2) of the Act of 1935. The congress members walked out of the House in protest.432

Saadullah’s motion for the presentation of an address to his Majesty the king for the

establishment of a High court in Assam was passed in the Assembly on 5 March 1938 by

50to 16 votes. The congress members and some Surma Valley Muslims remained neutral.

However, the amendment of Lakheswar Baruah for the location of the High Court at Guahati

was lost by 53 to 43 votes. With this, the Assembly was prorogued and thus “ended a very

difficult session for the ministry which at one time hung by a thread, too slender to be

comfortable.”433

In the 1938 Local Board election the congress claimed 65 percent of the votes in the

contested general seats. Of the 324 percent elective seats in 19 local boards, as many as 86,

an average of 26 percent, were reserved to represent planters’ interest Inspite of this, the

prospect of the congress capturing the local Board was Bright. But Saadullah’s tactics

ultimately frustrated the congress hopes. The former by misusing his power packed the local

boards with nominated members whose allegiance was with the planters group. This raised a

storm of protests all over Assam. Nevertheless, the congress secured the chairmanship of

four local boards.434

An adjournment motion was moved by Omeokumur Das, on 5,

September 1938, to raise a discussion on the manner of nomination to various local Boards

after the last general election. The opposition claimed that the ministry had utilized the power

of nomination as a sort of bribery for strengthening the position of the ministry. After a

prolonged discussion, the house rejected Siddinnath Sarmah’s, motion regarding the

reference of the Assam Local self Government (amendment) Bill to a select committee. The

motion was aimed at making the appointment of local bodies elective and doing away with

the system of nomination which would their by give the representatives of the people full

control over the administration of the local boards, as also minimize the control of immediate

officials.435

Besides, the communal policy pursued by the Government in nominating

432 Home Poll. File No.18/3/38-Poll-1938,F.R.,March1938,NAI. 433 Ibid. 434 Ibid. 435 Ibid.,p.181

229

members to the local boards caused displeasure within and outside the Assembly. Further,

settlement of the gauhati-shillong motor transport contract with the commercial carrying

company, an outsider, ignoring of the claims of the local concerns, labour unrest in the oil

fields at Digboi, troubles at colliers and tea gardens and communal strife here and there

raised a storm of protest against the ministry throughout the province. Besides, many

members belonging to the rolling bloc lost confidence in Saadullah and joined hands with the

opposition. The strength of the opposition increased from 49 to 55. on 12 September 1938,

motions were moved without speeches against the Saadullah ministry. An official report

described the situation thus.436

“ This move against the ministry, and the defection of several of their

supporters, appear to have been done in the first instance to the unpopularity of certain

ministers with some of the numerous groups into which the erstwhile ministerial party was

divided. Personal ambitions, however, rapidly became dominate and were responsible,

together with the eagerness on the part of some congress members to secure power on almost

any terms…….”

When the speaker asked if the house was agreeable to grant leave for these motions, as many

as 51 members stood in their seats to support.The speaker fixed the date for the discussion of

the motions on 13 September 1938. The members who asked for leave for their respective

motions were A.k. Chanda (congress), Mubarak Ali (united Muslim party ), Rabichandra

kachari (Independent),and L olitmohan kar (Independent).

On 13 September 1938, Saadullah’s submitted his resignation on the eve of the debate on the

no-confidence motion.he started that he had submitted his resignation to the governor as he

had fond that several members of the coalition had left to join the opposition. The

announcement of his resignation was greeted with cheers from the opposition benches.

436 Home Poll.File No.18/9/38-1938,F.R., September 1938,NAI.

230

G.N Bodoloi, the leader of the opposition, paying a compliment to the out going premier

admired the spirit of democracy displayed by him.437

The house was adjourned till 15

September 1938.the speaker, while adjourning the house, said that he excepted a new

ministry to be formed in the mean while. The house rose amid cheers of Bandemattaram and

was adjourned.”438

5.1.3: Formation of the first Congress-Coalition Ministry under Gopinath Bordoloi

The congress party in Assam could rally the support of the tribal league and arrived at an

agreement to form new coalition government.439

However, the formation of a coalition

ministry proved to be a difficult task as two more members were needed for a majority.

Nevertheless, Bardoloi was invited by the governor and asked to form the ministry. Bardoloi

sought more time for consultation with the leaders of different parties as also the congress

president and the parliamentary sub committee.440

Abul Kalam Azad was deputed by the

subcommittee to supervise the formation the ministry. Azad soon realized that the congress

party lacked the requisite majority. So on political ground he raised objections to formation

of the ministry. Both, Bardoloi the leader of the congress Assembly party, and B.R Medhi,

the president of the APCC, were not satisfied with Azad’s decision. They, in consultation

with Azad, decided to invite the congress president, Subhas Chadra Bose, to mediate. Bose

arrived at shillong and played an important role by assisting the party with his “wise counsel

and excellent whip which it badly needed.” Bose not only helped Bardoloi in formatting the

ministry, but also helped him in ironing out the differences with the congressmen of the

Surma Valley over the composition of the ministry.441

It might be mentioned here that T.R

Phookun played an important Role behind the scenes in this negotiations. After finalizing the

formalities as regards the formation of the first congress-coalition ministry, Bose and Azad

issued a joint statement to the press:442

437 IAR,July-December 1938, vol.2,Pp.181-2 438 IAR,July-December1938,vol.2,p.181 439 APCC papers,packet No.11,APCC office,Gauhati. 440 IAR,July-December1938,vol.2,Pp.181-2. 441 Guha,n.55,p.230. 442 IAR,July-December 1938,vol.2,Pp.291-2

231

After consultation with the leaders of the Assam congress parliamentary party, it was decided

to have a cabinet of eight members, five Hindus and three Muslim. It was further decided to

select the Hindu personnel immediately, but to post pone the selection of the Muslim

personnel with a view to giving those Muslim groups who have not joined the congress

coalition an opportunity of doing so by accepting the congress policy and programmed and

congress discipline. After considering the response from the Muslim group, the Muslim

personnel of the cabinet will finally be selected.

Later, explaining his stand, Azad told the parliamentary sub-committee meeting that he

opposed the formation of the ministry on both political and moral grounds. He charged that

Bardoloi had already committed himself to the formation of the ministry without formal

consultation with the congress high command. To Azad this appeared to be a breach in party

discipline. He even alleged that he suspected Bardoloi of including in corrupt practices to

obtain majority support. However, he could not substantiate his allegations with concrete

proof. Azad admitted that he had to acquiesce in the formation of the ministry as both the

congress president and the chairman, parliamentary sub-committee, were in a fever of it. He,

however told the committee that he could no longer “conscientiously” serve the committee as

he felt that the congress ideals of purity and truth were being sacrificed in the case of Assam.

Subhas Chandra Bose,on the other hand, particularly favoured the formation of the ministry

because with the inauguration of the ministry the congress base would be strengthened in the

province. He did not subscribe to the view that the congress under no circumstances ought to

form a ministry with the help of other parties or groups. As regards charges of corruption

against Bardoloi. Bose admitted that he had “absolutely” no knowledge about it. He further

pointed out that Azad raised only political and not moral objections at Shillong. Vallabhbhai

Patel, the chairman of the committee, also opined that in consideration of the prevailing

international situation the formation of the ministry would put the congress in an

advantageous position. He too admitted that he had absolutely no knowledge of corruption

regarding Bardoloi. When Gandhiji opinion was sought, even he did not object to the

formation of a ministry. He requested toAzad not to resign and suggested that the CWC

should again depute Azad to Assam to investigate the matter of corruption individually. If the

corruption chare against Bardoloi was proved, the ministry should be dissolved forthwith.

232

Azad then did not press for resignation and expressed his reluctance to go to Assam again. It

was then decided that the congress president would again visit Assam to make an on the spot

enquiery about the charges of corruption.443

The congress coalition ministry from its very inception faced many stresses and strains,

pressures and pulls. Saadullah was not willing to give a free hand to Bardoloi. He was active

behind the scenes. All sorts of inducements to encourage floor-crossing were offered by both

the sites involved in this crucial struggle for power.444

In the tug of war, Bardoloi’s strategy

succeeded. He called the governor on 18 September 1938, and submitted a list of five

members of the ministry. The Governor approved the list. The formation of the first congress

– coalition ministry, headed by Bardoloi, was announced on 19 September 1938 in a Gazette

Extra ordinary. But before the ministry could be sworn in, the opposition, headed by

Saadullah, attempt to move a no confidence motion signed by 56 members against Bordoloi.

But the speaker disallowed it on technical ground. He gave the ruling that no motion could be

moved against a ministry which has yet to see the light of the day.445

Next day, when the

Assembly met as scheduled, Bardoloi announced the formation of congress coalition ministry

and immediately thereafter the speaker adjourned the House sine-die. The Assembly

dispersed; the minister –designate then went to the constitutional hall for oath taking.

Sudenly the took a dramatic turn when the ministers were inform by the Governor that the

oath-taking ceremony was postponed, contrary to the Gazette notification. The copies of the

Gazette were recalled and “whole country had a hearty laughter at the plight of this Governor

who was responsible for this bungle.”446

But soon the Governor changed his opinion and

“good sense prevailed on him.” He realized the futility of his attempt to bring back Saadullah

again to head the Government. On 20 September 1938, he recalled the new personnel of the

congressled ministry and administered to them the oath of allegiance and secrecy.

443 AICC Papers,FileNo.P.4/9/Assam:1938-39, NMML. Only R 444 Guha,n.55,p.299 445 Home Poll,File No.18/9/38,F.R.,September 1938,NAI. 446 IAR, July-December1938,vol.2,p.138

233

Initially the congress coalition ministry comprised five members,

1 Gopinath Badoloi, Congress Premie Home and

Education

2 Akshaykumur Das Constitutionalist. Excise and Agriculture.

3 Ramnath Das, Independent Medical and Public Health.

4 Raminikumur Sen, Independent Legislative, Local Self-

Government, Judicial and

General Department.

Rupnath Brahma Independent Forest and Registration

By 20 October 1938 the ministry was expanded with the inclusion of three Muslim

members. They were:

Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, Congress Finance and Revenue

Mahmud Ali, Independent. Cooperation and Industry

Ali Hyder Khan Independent. Public Works

The ministry was hailed with acclaim throughout the country. The people were keenly

interested, “for the air was still full of sounds of saber-rattling of the leaguers and European

planters, who declared from the house top that it was a minority ministry and as such it

would collapse the moment the open session of the Assembly met.”447

Even long before the

installation of the ministry, the anti congress elements, the leagures and the European group

under the leadership of Hockenhull combined under the banner of the Assam United Party,

made abortive attempts to frustrate the congress design.

When the Assembly met in December 1938, the opposition refrained from moving any no-

confidence motion. Meanwhile the Muslim members joined the ministry and five members

who had earlier signed the no-confidence motion openly announced their dissociation from

it.448

Still, some 14 adjournment motions were moved relating to inadequate relief to the

flood stricken people of Goalpara, Sylhet and Cachar, the threatened black listing and

eviction of some contractors from the forest depot of Kukurmara, and inadequate provision

for checking the cholera epidemic in habiganj, Sylhet. The speaker administrated a mild

447 IAR, July-December 1938,vol.2 Pp.183-4 448 IAR,July-December 1938,vol,2, p.183

234

admonition to the members of the opposition, saying that they ought to know that the subject

matter of such a motion could be discussed through other means, such a putting question

tabling resolutions. He added that : “the present tendency in parliament and elsewhere was

discourage as far as possible such motion.” On 5 December 1938, the opposition first tested

its strength when Lalitmohan Kr (independent) gave notice of a motion recommending

fixation of minimum rate of pay for lower primary school teacher. On government’s

assurance Kar wanted to withdraw the motion, but the opposition refused to grant leave and

demanded a division. The division resulted in 52 votes being cast in favour of the ruling

coalition party, while 46 supported the opposition. On the same day, AK Chanda (congress)

moved a resolution urging upon the Government to immediately release all the political

prisoners. The resolution was accepted by the house with out any division. Premier Bardoloi

assured that the release of the prisoners would be expedited. In fact all the prisoners,

numbering ten, were released by 13 December 1938.449

On 8 December 1938, after a through

debate lasting over two and half hours, the house rejected, by 54 to 50 votes, a no confidence

motion tabled by Muqbul Hussain choudahury against the ministry. The European Group

headed by Hockenhull took the leading part in attacking the congress. Saadullah supported

the move, remaining behind the scenes. A.K Chanda, defending the Government,

administered a scathing rebuff to Hockenhull whom he sarcastically called the de facto

opposition leader against the present ministry. The opposition members in their speeches

voiced strong criticism of the policy thus far pursued by the ministry. Hockenhull expressed

the doubts and apprehensions which were agitating the minds of the European community in

Assam as regards the congress party. Bardoloi not also replied to all of their criticism, but

also expounded the policy of the congress coalition. He even expressed his willingness to

face the general election if the Assembly so desired. “the division list, however, disclosed

that neither the eloquence of Mr Hockenhull nor the outbursts of Mr. Rohionikumur

Choudhury, ex minister, could convince the house to secure a verdict in favour of the motion

under discussion.450

The victory firmly consolidated the congress position. It was assumed,

therefore, that no more plots against it would be hatched especially as non of the prominent

Muslim Leagures participated in the debate against the ruling party in the Assembly.

449 ALAP,1939,Pp.13,258; ALCP,1939,p.22; Admn.Rep. for the year 1937-38; IAR,July-December

1938,vol.2.184. 450 IAR,July-December 1938,vol.2,Pp.184-5

235

Although the ministry was called the congress coalition ministry, it was as good as a sole

congress government as all the partners had accepted the congress plan and programme. The

party consolidated its position and self its position and set itself to initiate alleviating

measures in conformity with its election manifesto. Some measures of this programme

included the progressive eradication of opium, reduction of land revenue, restoration of land

confiscated by the previous Government for the failure of payment of revenue owing to

poverty, abolition of the commissioner’s establishments, and restriction of immigration into

Assam and safeguarding the interests of the indigenous population, etc. besides, it wanted to

install a spirit of nationalism and the will to serve people amongst the bureaucrats, the scene

of which was found wanting in the former regimes. Formerly, the relation between the police

and the people, especially the police and the congressmen, was mutual distrust and suspicion.

But the present ministry tried to set this right. Bardoloi issued a circular to all Government

servants, especially to the police personnel, impressing upon them the desirability of

changing their out look and telling them to consider themselves as the servants of the people

and not their masters and advised them always to work in that spirit.451

In the economic front

the ministry took certain measures with the avowed intension of easing the burden of taxation

on the poor and providing means for the uplift and the betterment of the masses.452

It reduced

the salary of the ministry to Rs 500/- per month in order to utilize the savings for uplift of the

tribal people. It also made further reduction in the land revenue. Moreover, it also remitted

the land revenue in the areas affected by the floods and reduced the expenditure on the

administration by making an all round ten percent cut in the traveling allowances of the

minister and officials. It also formulated schemes for the improvement of small scale

industries and introduced reforms in jails. With a view to realizing more funds, it reorganized

services, fixed the scale of pay, and restricted the expenditure on less useful public works.

The police budget was curtailed. To compensate the loss on account of the reduced excise

and land revenue, the ministry introduced the following measures.453

The Assam agriculture income tax Bill.

451 ALCP,1939,vol.9,p.4. 452 Bordolois budget speech, 9 March. ALCP,1939,p.22 and IAR, January-june 1940,p.285. 453 IAR,January-June 1939,vol.1,Pp.251-4

236

The Assam sales of Motor Spirit and Lubricant Taxation Bill.

The Assam Sales Tax Bill (to provide for imposition and collection of Tax on sales of

articles of luxury).

The Assam Excise (Amendment) Bill (to secure greater control over consumption of

liquor)

The Assam Amusements and betting Tax-Bill (to make an additional public revenue

for Assam and for the Purpose of imposing a Tax on entertainments and other

amusements and on certain forms of betting).

Much controversy, however, ensued over the Agricultural Income tax Bill. At first the

European and the Indian planters opposed it. Some of the rich peasants also expressed their

fear that they would be unduly taxed. Maulana Bhasani opposed the Bill on the Ground that

the surplus-yielding farmers would be unable to contribute to agricultural capital formation if

they had to pay the tax.454

The bill was referred to a select committee on 10 March

1939.saadullah moved an amendement for eliciting public opinion through circulation, but it

was negatived by 56 to 23 votes. The European members, despite their opposition, refrained

from voting.455

To meet the demands of the reach peasants, the select committee raised the

exemption limit from Rs 2,000 to Rs 3,000 per annum. The Assembly passed the modified

version of Bill on 6 April 1939, by 57 to 27 votes. Thereafter, the Bill went to the council.

As the passing of Bill would affect the European interests they pulled strings in London to

invoke the governor to veto power. But the secretary of state for India did not oblige them.

The council, however, rejected the Bill on 9 March 1939. This resulted in a political

deadlock. To resolve this, a joint session of both the houses was convented on 4 August 1939

under the presidentship of Herambaprasad Baruah, the president of the council. The Bill was

ultimately passed by 65 to 56 votes. Thus, the congress coalition gained a major success in

their bid to implement a progressive measure, that of taxing the rich for the benefit of the

poor. The Government however declared its wiliness to remove the inequitable causes, if

any, through Amendment.456

454 ALCP,1939,Pp.27-8;IAR,January-june 1939,vol,Pp.251 and 254 455 IAR,January-june 1939,vol.1 p.251 456 Ibid.

237

A perusal of the working of the Government of India Act of 1935 reveals that the partial

responsibility as introduced in the provinces by the Act of 1919, made a clear advance in the

right direction. The whole of the provincial executive was made responsible to, or removal

by, the legislative Assembly of the province. With the abolition of diarchy the reserved and

transferred subjects were placed under the charge of a popular ministry. Nevertheless, the

working of the Act was crippled by many limitations, especially the vesting of the office of

the Governor special powers to override the decision of the ministry. With all this, however,

the congress coalition ministry in Assam did succeed in enjoying a grater amount of

autonomy than the Saadullah ministry, despite the fact that the Governor did not want it to

assume power. The ministry worked with all sincerity to make parliamentary system of

Government a success. But the sectarian interests and existence of the European bloc

constantly hindered the smooth functioning of the provincial autonomy. Holding the balance

between the Hindus and Muslim, the European opposed most of the progressive and welfare

measures put before the House by the congress. They also stood against the settlement of the

Digboi strike and the enactment of the Agricultural Income Tax Bill. The multifarious

problems and the vested interests of the different communities hampered the implementation

of the Government of India Act of 1935 to its fullest extent.

5.2 : COALITION GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM: POST- INDEPENDENCE PERIOD.

Since Independence political matters were being continued steadily. The Congress party had

been ruling the state by gaining absolute majority in almost all the Assembly elections. But

the deep and dark clouds in Assam politics emerged on the issue of foreigners settlement

throughout the whole range of the state.

The origin of the problem leds us to the events of British occupation of Assam as well as the

North East India. The British in order to fulfill their policy of ‘grow more food’ on the soil of

Assam encouraged the shifting of dwelling places of the cultivators of East Bengal to the

land of Assam. As east Bengal and Assam both was under the occupation of the British, there

was no any legal problem in it. In response to this call of the Britishers a good number of

Muslims from the then East Bangal shifted their residents to different parts of Assam and

took settlement by taking ‘Five Rupee Tickets’ from the British Government. These Muslim

238

people cleaned the dense forests of Assam and made them cultivable. The whole range of

fertile lands become cultivable by dint of their sweating labour but they did not received

equal treatment as citizens of India. The Sadulla Ministry of 1937 did a lot to pay them due

respect and honour by inserting their names in the Electoral Roll. IN the Independent India

while a part of East Bengal went under Pakistan in the name of East Pakistan, the problem

took its root. People were in dilemma what to do? Where to go? Under such cirmstances a

fresh riot occurred under the initiative of some unseen evil powers to send these Muslims

towards East Pakistan. That was the most sorrowful episode of Assam history. A few of them

left Assam but the majority of the Muslim people decided to settle in secular Assam. Some of

them failing to decide what to do, started maintain double standards.

The most unfortunate turning point of the problem was the creation of Bangladesh in 1971.

Though India full heartedly supported East Pakistan to fight against West Pakistan for her

freedom struggle, ultimate date for considering the status of Indian Citizenship was decided

in a talk held between Jawaharlal Nehru and Muzibur Rahman, President of Bangladesh. The

decision was taken that every people who have entered into the soil of India before 25th

March 1971 will be considered as citizens of India. In 1972 Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed become

the President of India. He had instructed the Assam Government to legally insert the names

of all these shifted people of east Bengal irrespective to their belief and faith.

Muslims, economically poor, educationally illiterate and rigorous in religion do not believe

in the formula of Birth Control. Obviously they give birth to large number of children. Their

birth rate is high. So their number increased rapidly. This made the other people thought to

start anti foreigners issues in the state. Finally in 1979 Anti Foreigners Movement was

practically started in Assam under the leadership of All Assam Students’Union (AASU). The

Agitation continued for six years. The Movement was started with peaceful agendas like

Dharna, Ralley, Demonstration, Bandh etc. but very soon this peaceful penetration was

shifted to ferocious movement. At the beginning the movement was stared against all types

of Foreigners like Muslims, Hindus, Nepalies, Bhutias etc. But soon after the Movement was

termed as the Movement against the Bengali Speaking Muslims in the name of Bungladeshi

Muslims. Thousands of houses of the Bngali speaking Muslims were burnt out, lakhs of

239

Muslims were mercellesly killed. The whole state was burning out of this communal fire. At

last in 1985 tripartiet talk held in New Delhi and finally the Assam Anti Foreigners’

Movement was was concluded by signing thev ‘Assam Accord’.

Fresh Election held in the state in 1985. But before election the leaders of Assam Agitation

formed a Regional Party named ‘Assam Gana Parisad’ (AGP). The other group of people, the

Muslims formed ‘United Minoritry Front’ (UMF). AGP got absolute majority in the election

and formed the Government. UMF occupied the third position by winning 18 seats, while

INC was the main opposition party in the Assembly. AGP ruled over the state for a period of

5 years but could identify and remove only 298 Bangladeshis from the state.

In the 1990 Election, Congress came back to power by defeating the regional party. After this

AGP had to go for exploration of Coalition for the next 1995/6 Election. It signed Pre Pol

Coalition with CPIM and ……….. a party of Bodoland. They received majority in the

Election and finally formed a Coalition Government led by AGP.

5.2.1 : AGP-led Coalition Government in Assam.

Asom Gana parisad (AGP) that came to power in 1985 as a result of prolonged agitation with

absolute majority. The main agenda of the party was to construct ‘GOLDEN ASSAM’ by

driven out the Bangladeshies from Assam. The emotional support of the whole Assamese

Sovenist groups were with them. They own as many as 65 seats and formed the Government.

Prafulla Kumar Mahanta, the young and most energetion leader become the Chief Minister.

The total picture of the Election Result was as follows:

Rresult of Assam Assembly Election 1985

Sl No Parties Seat Contested Seat Won % OF Votes

1 Congress 125 25 23.2

2 BJP 03 0 1.1

3 AGP 111 65 35

4 CPI 21 0 1.2

240

5 CPIM 39 2 4.5

6 UMF 60 18 12

7 OTHER PARTIES 207 9 9

8 INDEPENDENTS 533 7 14.4

TOTAL 1099 126

They newly formed regional party came to power. People took a great hope on them. They

ruled for long five years. But as dereamt by the people of Assam this new Government

could not bring the solicited change in the State. They could neither identified huge number

of foreigners nor could construct the Golden Assam. Most of the leaders were found to be

indulged in corruption and nepotism, This regional party that was formed on the blood of

Assamese people have been proved to be utter failure. The opportunity was taken by

Congress party in the next 1991 Assembly Election. Here they received absolute majority by

defeating the ruling regional party. The total scenario of 1991 election was as follows:

Rresult of Assam Assembly Election 1991

Sl No Parties Seat Contested Seat Won % OF Votes

1 Congress 125 66 29.4

2 BJP 48 10 6.6

3 AGP 121 19 17.4

4 CPI 37 04 2.5

5 CPIM 29 2 3.9

6 UMF 29 0 1.3

7 OTHER PARTIES 410 10 11

8 INDEPENDENTS 808 15 11.9

TOTAL

The 1991 Assebly election had some other important factors. Here AGP was not the only

party to diminish its position. UMF the other regional party, formed by the Minorities of the

country to fight for their own interest had totally wiped out from the political scenario of the

241

state. On the other hand BJP the other fundament and Hindu sovenist party had shown their

rise by occupying 10 prestigious seats.

Fter this election AGP started thinking to make pre poll alliance with the small parties. They

thought for alliance with BJP but majority of the party leaders opposed due to its

fundamentalist character. At last they formed pre poll alliance wirh CPI, CPIM and some

other small parties. The alliance proved fruitfull. In the next 1996 election they jointly own

the masic number. The scenario was as follows:

Rresult of Assam Assembly Election 1996

Sl No Parties Seat Contested Seat Won % OF Votes

1 Congress 126 36 30.7

2 BJP 21 04 10.3

3 AGP 99 61 30.1

4 CPI 12 03 2.1

5 CPIM 10 02 1.9

6 UMF 20 07 1.1

7 OTHER PARTIES 204 03 11.0

8 INDEPENDENTS 658 11 12.8

TOTAL 1150 124

5.2.2 : Congress-led Coalition Government in Assam

The 2006 Assam Assembly Election marked a major shift in the state politics. The prepoll

scenario was very critical. Almost all the political parties started their movement of making

alliance and understanding among the parties of equal thought and manifesto. As a result

Assam Gana Parisad (AGP) and Bharitiya Janata party (BJP) formed their prepoll alliance

and shared the constituencies on the basis of number of their supporters. The other major

change in the political scene of Assam was the creation of United Democratic Front (UDF)

under a combined venture of as many as 13 minoritry and other backward class

242

organizations. This was mainly backed by three Muslim dominated Religious Socio Political

Parties mnamed Jamiat e Ulema, Jamaat e Islami and Nadua tut Tameer. Bodoland Peoples’

Party (BPF) was formed mainly by the Ex BLT Extrimists of Bodoland, who came under

negotiation with the Government and constituted Bodoland Autonomous Council under the

provision of Sixth Schedule of Indian Constitutioin.

This election has brought to an end to the entrenched scenario of winning majority by a

single party for the first time in the electoral history of Assam. The Era of Coalition

Government has finaly begun in Assam. In the Election not a single party could occupy the

solicited seats for the formation of the Government. The whole scenario was like this:

Sl No Name of Party Seats occupied

1 Congress 53

2 Bharatiya Janata party (BJP) 06

3 Asom Gana Parisad (AGP) 24

4 Bodoland Peoples’ party (BPF) 11

5 United Democratic Front (UDF) 10

6 CPI (M) 06

7 Indipendent 06

Total 126

The result clearly reflects deep roated fractured politics with every community asserting its

identity. The Congress could occuy as many as 53 seats with a shortage of 10 seats to meet

the masic number of 62 seats for the formation of Government. Circumstances compled the

Congress Suprimo to accept the conditional support of 12 members of Bodoland Peoples’

Party (BPF) led by Hagrama Mahilary, the formar chief of BLT, the Bodo Extrimist

organization. Congress had to include the member of the BPF party even in the Ministry. As

many as three prestigious Ministry of Assam Government were given to this minor party.

The Department of Public Health, Department of Agriculture and the Department of

Transport and Communication were given to them. Even the whole Government has been

dwindling during the whole tenure as the BPF party always kept the Government under

243

pressure of withdrel of support if their demand is not fulfilled. In this way the BPF party

could get their desire fulfilled.

The Mr Tarun Gogoi-led Congress-BPF coalition Government pursued the mantra that

“development cannot wait for peace” and claimed it turned around the economy, changed the

mindset of the people and consequently helped improve law and order and industrial climate.

Promising to continue the same mantra, the ruling Congress has rolled out a long list of

developmental works, backed up with statistics of development indices, initiated over the

past ten years of its rule to woo the voters.

4. 3 : EVALUATION OF COALITION GOVERNMENT IN ASSAM.

With the first phase of elections over and the final phase scheduled for tomorrow, we still do

not have a clear picture of the contest in the State. There are no reliable opinion or exit polls

about this election to guide us. Yet a clear victory for the AGP can be ruled out. The AGP's

best hope would be to match the Congress' seats in a hung assembly and forge a wider post-

poll coalition than it has been able to do in the elections. The Congress appears to have an

edge, but it is not clear if that can give it a clear majority in the Assembly.

A simple reading of Assam's electoral history in the last two decades shows a pattern of

regime alteration with every election. It began with the landmark elections of 1985,

following the Assam Accord the same year between the leaders of the Assam movement

against foreign immigrants and the Government of India headed by Rajiv Gandhi. The

Assam Gana Parishad, a new political outfit and a political expression of the Assam

movement, succeeded in mobilizing its core Assamese speaking constituency in a big way

and won a clear majority. The next elections were held six years later, in 1991, following

another short period of disturbance and President's rule. The Congress managed to come to

power this time, taking advantage of a divided AGP. The AGP came back to power in 1996

by putting together a large coalition that included the Left and smaller political parties. But

this AGP government, led again by Prafulla Kumar Mahanta, proved very unpopular and was

voted out unceremoniously in 2001 in favour of the Congress led by Tarun Gogoi.

244

Going by this simple logic, it should be the AGP's turn in the Assembly elections of 2006.

But nothing can be more misleading than this simple-minded reading of history. Even the

AGP's supporters would not claim that we are seeing another wave in favour of the party.

This was quite clear in the Lok Sabha elections of 2004. The Congress government in the

State was three years old, and yet there were no signs of the usual anti-incumbency mood.

The Congress won 9 of the 14 Lok Sabha seats in the State, though its vote share dropped to

35 per cent. The AGP won two seats, an improvement upon its disastrous shows in the

previous Parliamentary and Assembly elections. The BJP also won 2 seats but finished

second in terms of votes.

AGP SPLIT ED

Since then the AGP has suffered a major split. Prafulla Kumar Mahanta, one of the AGP's

founders and a two-time Chief Minister, has left the party and floated the Assam Gana

Parishad (Progressive), which is fielding 90 candidates in this election. The AGP had split

earlier too and suffered because of that. This is arguably the most serious split the party has

faced so far. It is true that Mahanta is not longer the icon of Ahomiya nationalism that he

once was and had become a moral and political liability for the AGP by the time he was

forced out of the party. It is therefore unlikely that his claims of being the real AGP will have

much popular support. It is the parent party, led now by Brindaban Goswami, that looks all

set to inherit the legacy of the AGP. In the long run, Mahanta's exit may be a blessing in

disguise and might enable the party to rejuvenate itself. Yet, in this election Mahanta's

candidates will inflict some damage to the AGP, especially in districts like Nagaon, Sonitpur,

Lakhimpur, Darang and Hailakandi.

The effect of the split is compounded by the break-up of the AGP's alliance with the BJP.

This was a short-lived alliance stitched together during the last Assembly elections,

vigorously opposed within both the parties and not accepted by their voters. The alliance

compromised the AGP's secular credentials and threatened to reduce its already small

catchment area further by alienating Muslims of Assamese origin. Besides, in the long run

the BJP was a rival to the AGP, not its ally. This may have prompted the AGP to opt for the

245

two Communist parties as smaller but older and more durable allies this time. This long-term

policy has a short term cost: it reduces the AGP's capacity to take on the Congress. If it was

possible for the AGP and the BJP to pool their votes, their combined strength would have

been adequate to take on the Congress; at present the AGP-led alliance is simply too small

and fragile. It includes the CPI, the CPI (M), the SP and the ASDC (H). Too many `friendly

contests' among the partners reduces the effectiveness of this alliance. Mahanta's AGP has

aligned with Nationalist Congress Party, a small force in this part of the North East, and a

faction of the Bodo party. But none of these alliances appear very formidable.

HISTORY OF REGIME CHANGEIN ASSAM457

Parties 1985 1991 1996 2001 2006 2011

Turnout 79.2 74.7 78.3 75.1

Congress Contested 125 125 126 126 126 126

Won 25 66 36 71 53 78

Vote % 23.2 29.4 30.7 39.8 - -

BJP Contested 31 48 21 46

Won 0 10 4 8

Vote % 1.1 6.6 10.3 9.9

AGP Contested 111 121 99 77

Won 65 19 61 20

Vote % 35 17.9 29.9 20.6

CPI Contested 21 37 42 19

Won 0 4 3 0

Vote % 1.2 2.6 2.1 1.1

CPIM Contested 39 39 10 22

Won 2 2 2 0

Vote % 2.4 3.9 1.9 1.6

UMF Contested 60 29 20 10

457 Report of Election Commission, Concerned Year

246

Won 18 0 7 0

Vote % 12.1 1.1 1.1 .2

Other Parties Contested 207 410 204 224

Won 0 10 0 2

Vote % 9 11 11 19

Independence Contested 533 254 658 395

Won 9 10 11 19

Vote % 14.4 11 12 19.5

Besides the short term factors like the party split and the break up of the alliance with the

BJP, there is a long term factor that makes it difficult for the AGP to come back to power

with a clear majority of its own. Ironically, this has to do with the success of the Assam

movement. The politics of Ahomiya nationalism accentuated the anxieties of not just the

majority Assamese speakers, but also of all other ethnic groups. Since then each ethnic group

has sought to carve out an exclusive politics of its own. This has led to the rise of many

small, ethnicity based, political parties. The major parties have also defined their identity by

appealing to specific social groups. The era of `catch all' parties has given way to a political

system based on `social cleavages'. The last few elections have seen nearly 20 seats in a 126-

member Assembly going to small parties and Independents. The AGP and the BJP have no

presence in these seats, though the Congress has a chance of picking up some of them.

NO DOMINANCE

Since no single social group enjoys an overwhelming dominance in this State divided by

linguistic, religious and tribal identities, it is very difficult to create a political majority. The

AGP's Ahomiya nationalism has focused on the `indigenous' Assamese speakers. But only 58

per cent of the population speaks Assamese, leaving a very large chunk of population

inaccessible to the AGP. This include the 22 per cent Bengali speakers and speakers of

languages such as Bodo, Karbi, Rabha, Mishing and Hindi, etc that serve as markers of

ethnic identity. Most of these small linguistic groups represent the 12 per cent Schedule Tribe

247

population of the state. Then there are religious and community divisions that cut across the

linguistic divide. Nearly one-third of the State population is Muslim (31 per cent, to be

precise), which includes both local Assamese speakers and the `immigrant Bengalis'. The

AGP has had a fair share of support among the Assamese speaking Muslims, but this has

declined of late. This is the AGP's basic dilemma in electoral politics: it is required to

produce a political majority out of barely half of the State's electorate. This can happen in

moments of extraordinary mobilization such as 1985 or with skilful coalition building as in

1996. It would be very hard to replicate those conditions this time. The AGP's task is made

much more difficult by the entry of the BJP in the last decade. If the AGP would like to

polarize the State on linguistic line, the BJP is trying to do so on religious lines by playing up

fears about the Muslim immigrants. If the AGP has the advantage of being able to access

Assamese Muslims, the BJP has a special appeal among the Bengali Hindus. But both of

them compete for the core Hindu Assamese vote. Earlier a nonentity in Assam politics, the

BJP has paid a lot of attention to the State in the last decade and has improved its

performance. It commands about 10 per cent of the votes in the Assembly elections and

overtook the AGP to emerge as the second largest party in the last Lok Sabha elections. This

time it is contesting all but one seat in the State and trying to occupy the second position in

State politics as well. For the BJP, its best bet in the current round of election lies in Assam.

No wonder it has lined up all its political leaders and screen stars for campaigning. The BJP

is a long-term problem for the Congress as well, but in this election the BJP will cut into the

AGP votes and thus help the Congress.

WIDE APPEAL

This explains the edge the Congress appears to have in this election. The Congress is the only

party in the State that can appeal to a cross section of the population. The Congress has a

much larger pool of votes to draw upon compared to its rivals. In the years following the

Assam Accord, Congress support among Assamese Hindus eroded sharply, rendering it into

a party of the religious, ethnic and linguistic minorities. But in the last few elections, the

Congress has improved its position among Assamese Hindus. It has traditionally had a strong

hold over the tea garden workers who constitute a big voting bloc in the upper Assam areas

that went to polls in the first phase of elections. The Tarun Gogoi government has had a

248

mixed record, but is certainly not as unpopular as the Mahanta-led AGP government was at

the end of its tenure. Ongoing negotiations with ULFA may not have produced very much,

but the very fact that these negotiations are on produces a climate of peace and hope that may

work to the advantage of the ruling party.

It is still not clear how this edge for the Congress would translate in terms of seats. All the

four Assembly elections held in the State since 1985 have been won with very thin

majorities. In the last Assembly elections in 2001, a resurgent Congress contesting against a

discredited AGP could not sweep the State; it won 71 seats, a clear majority but not the kind

of majority this situation would have produced in any other State. This time it is going to be

tougher for the Congress to repeat the performance, due to five years of incumbency and a

resurgent AGP.

What makes the situation particularly difficult for the Congress is the possibility of a large-

scale disaffection of Muslim voters. The IM(DT) Act, originally meant to deport illegal

migrants, had become something of a shield for the immigrant communities, mainly

Muslims. The rejection of the Act by the Supreme Court has made them feel vulnerable. The

Central Government reacted, perhaps a little late, by making an Assam specific amendment

in the Foreigners Act that provides the same safeguards against summary deportation as

provided by IM(DT).

However the resentment among the Muslims has not subsided. This has given rise to a new

political front, the AUDF that seeks to repeat the performance of United Muslim Front in the

1985 elections. The AUDF may not succeed in winning many seats on its own but has the

potential to damage the Congress in half a dozen constituencies going to the polls tomorrow.

If a significant section of Muslims move away from the Congress, the State would appear to

be headed for a hung assembly and considerable political uncertainty. 458

The Peoples Democratic Front of Bodoland (PDF) withdrew its support to the AGP-led

coalition government in the State. Disclosing this, the newly-elected party president Garla

Batha Basumatary said the decision was taken at the party convention held at Changlimara

458 The Hindu, Online edition of India's National Newspaper, Sunday, Apr 09, 2006

249

near Chariduar in Sonitpur district on April 25 and 26. The withdrawal of support from

the AGP Government was taken since the government had failed to solve the problems of

the State in general and Bodos in particular, Basumatary said.459

The result clearly reflect deep roated fractured politics with every community asserting its

identity. The Congress could occuy as many as 53 seats with a shortage of 10 seats to meet

the masic number of 62 seats for the formation of Government. Circumstances compled the

Congress Suprimo to accept the conditional support of 12 members of Bodoland Peoples’

Party (BPF) led by Hagrama Mahilary, the formar chief of BLT, the Bodo Extrimist

organization. Congress had to include the member of the BPF party even in the Ministry. As

many as three prestigious Ministry of Assam Government were given to this minor party.

The Department of Public Health, Department of Agriculture and the Department of

Transport and Communication were given to them. Even the whole Government has been

dwindling during the whole tenure as the BPF party always kept the Government under

pressure of withdrel of support if their demand is not fulfilled. In this way the BPF party

could get their desire fulfilled.

The Mr Tarun Gogoi-led Congress-BPF coalition Government pursued the mantra that

“development cannot wait for peace” and claimed it turned around the economy, changed the

mindset of the people and consequently helped improve law and order and industrial climate.

Promising to continue the same mantra, the ruling Congress has rolled out a long list of

developmental works, backed up with statistics of development indices, initiated over the

past ten years of its rule to woo the voters.۩

459 , Assam online, Vol 3, Vol.3, No.24 [*] April 27, 1998