Vocalizing Silence: Political Protests in Orissa, 1930-42 (SAGE ...

Vocalizing Silence

Other Volumes in the Same Series:

Volume 1: Independence and Partition: The Erosion of Colonial Power in India by Sucheta Mahajan

Volume 2: A Narrative of Communal Politics: Uttar Pradesh, 1937 39 by Salil Misra

Volume 3: Imperialism, Nationalism and the Making of the Indian Capitalist Class, 1920 1947 by Aditya Mukherjee

Volume 4: From Movement to Government: The Congress in the United Provinces, 1937 42 by Visalakshi Menon

Volume 5: Peasants in IndiaÊs Non-violent Revolution: Practice and Theory by Mridula Mukherjee

Volume 6: Communalism in Bengal: From Famine to Noakhali, 1943 47 by Rakesh Batabyal

Volume 7: Political Mobilization and Identity in Western India, 1934 47 by Shri Krishan

Volume 8: The Garrison State: The Military, Government and Society in Colonial Punjab, 1849 1947 by Tan Tai Yong

Volume 9: Colonializing Agriculture: The Myth of Punjab Excep-tionalism by Mridula Mukherjee

Volume 10: Region, Nation, „Heartland‰: Uttar Pradesh in IndiaÊs Body-Politic by Gyanesh Kudaisya

Volume 11: National Movement and Politics in Orissa, 1920 29 by Pritish Acharya

Volume 12: Communism and Nationalism in Colonial India, 1939 45 by D.N. Gupta

Vocalizing Silence

Political Protests in Orissa, 1930 42

Chandi Prasad Nanda

SAGE Series in Modern Indian History·XIII

Series Editors Bipan Chandra Mridula Mukherjee Aditya Mukherjee

Copyright © Chandi Prasad Nanda, 2008

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.

First published in 2008 by

Published by Vivek Mehra for SAGE Publications India Pvt Ltd, typeset in 10/12 pt. Palatino at InoSoft Systems, Noida, and printed at Chaman Enterprises, New Delhi.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Nanda, C.P. (Chandi Prasad) Vocalizing silence: political protests in Orissa, 1930 42/Chandi Prasad Nanda. p. cm.·(Sage series in modern Indian history; 13) Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Protest movements·India·Orissa·History·20th century. 2. India·History·Autonomy and independence movements. 3. Orissa (India)·Social conditions·20th century. 4. Orissa (India)·Politics and government·20th century. 5. India·Politics and government·1919 1947. I. Title

HN690.O7N36 954'.133·dc22 2008 2008031357

ISBN: 978-0-7619-3634-3 (HB) 978-81-7829-781-1 (India-HB)

The SAGE Team: Rekha Natarajan, Ankur Agarwal, Mathew P.J. and Trinankur Banerjee

SAGE Publications India Pvt LtdB-1/I-1 Mohan Cooperative Industrial AreaMathura Road, New Delhi 110 044, Indiawww.sagepub.in

SAGE Publications Inc2455 Teller RoadThousand Oaks, California 91320, USA

SAGE Publications Ltd1 OliverÊs Yard, 55 City RoadLondon EC1Y 1SP, United Kingdom

SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific Pte Ltd33 Pekin Street#02-01 Far East SquareSingapore 048763

ForBapa and Bou

List of Abbreviations ixSeries EditorsÊ Preface xiPreface xv

ONE:

Phases of Swaraj Politics: Civil Disobedience Movement, 1930 34 1

TWO:

Structuring of the Left 55

THREE:

Mobilization, Resistance and Popular Initiatives: Peasant and Tribal Movements, 1935 39 60

FOUR:

Struggling against the Rulers: Popular Movements in the Princely States 147

FIVE:

Situating the Congress Ministry, 1937 39 225

Contents

SIX:

Return to Agitation: Signalling Quit India, 1940 41 248

SEVEN:

Making of Swaraj: The 1942 Movement 292

Conclusion 387

Bibliography 395

Index 407

About the Author 415

viii Vocalizing Silence

List of Abbreviations

ACC Accession NumberAICC All India Congress CommitteeAICSP All India Congress Socialist PartyAISA All India Spinning AssociationAISF All India Students FederationAISPC All India State PeopleÊs ConferenceASI Assistant Sub-inspectorBLS BalasoreCDM Civil Disobedience MovementCS Chief SecretaryCSP Congress Socialist PartyDCC District Congress CommitteeDKL DhenkanalDM District MagistrateF. No. File NumberFNR Fortnightly ReportHFM History of Freedom MovementHPD Home Political DepartmentIAR Indian Annual RegisterLC Linlithgow CollectionNPARI Nilagiri Praja Andolanara ItihasaOLAP Orissa Legislative Assembly ProceedingsOPAI Orissa Police Abstract IntelligenceOSPC Orissa State PeopleÊs Conference

PCC Provincial Congress CommitteePM Prime MinisterRJEE Report of the Joint Enquiry by the Revenue Commis-

sioner and IG (Police) Orissa into Eram FiringSBP SambalpurSl No. Serial NumberSupdt SuperintendentTA Travelling AllowanceTPRI Talcher Prajamandal Ra ItihasUPCC Utkal Provincial Congress CommitteeWWCC WhoÊs Who Compilation Committee

x Vocalizing Silence

The SAGE Series in Modern Indian History is intended to bring together the growing volume of historical studies that share a very broad common historiographic focus.

In the 50 years since independence from colonial rule, re-search and writing on modern Indian history has given rise to intense debates resulting in the emergence of different schools of thought. Prominent among them are the Cambridge School and the Subaltern School. Some of us at the Jawaharlal Nehru University, along with many colleagues in other parts of the country, have tried to promote teaching and research along somewhat different lines. We have endeavoured to steer clear of colonial stereotypes, nationalist romanticization, sectarian radicalism and rigid and dogmatic approach. We have also discouraged the „flavour of the month‰ approach, which tries to ape whatever is currently fashionable.

Of course, a good historian is fully aware of contemporary trends in historical writing and of historical work being done elsewhere, and draws heavily on the comparative approach, that is, the historical study of other societies, states and na-tions, and on other disciplines, especially economics, political science, sociology and social anthropology. A historian tries to understand the past and make it relevant to the present and the future. History thus also caters to the changing needs of society and social development. A historian is a creature of his or her

Series EditorsÊ Preface

times, yet a good historian tries to use every tool available to the historianÊs craft to avoid a conscious bias to get as near the truth as possible.

The approach we have tried to evolve looks sympathetically, though critically, at the Indian national liberation struggle and other popular movements such as those of labour, peasants, lower castes, tribal peoples and women. It also looks at colo-nialism as a structure and a system, and analyzes changes in economy, society and culture in the colonial context as also in the context of independent India. It focuses on communalism and casteism as major features of modern Indian development. The volumes in the series will tend to reflect this approach as also its changing and developing features. At the broadest plane our approach is committed to the Enlightenment values of rationalism, humanism, democracy and secularism.

The series will consist of well-researched volumes with a wider scope which deal with a significant historiographical aspect even while devoting meticulous attention to detail. They will have a firm empirical grounding based on an exhaustive and rigorous examination of primary sources (including those available in archives in different parts of India and often abroad); collections of private and institutional papers; newspapers and journals (including those in Indian languages); oral testimony; pamphlet literature; and contemporary literary works. The books in this series, while sharing a broad historiographic approach, will in-variably have considerable differences in analytical frameworks. The many problems that hinder academic pursuit in developing societies·for example, relatively poor library facilities, forcing scholars to run from library to library and city to city and yet not being able to find many of the necessary books; inadequate institutional support within universities; a paucity of research-funding organizations; a relatively underdeveloped publishing industry, and so on·have plagued historical research and writ-ing as well. All this had made it difficult to initiate and sustain efforts at publishing a series along the lines of the Cambridge History series or the history series of some of the best US and European universities. But the need is there because, in the absence of such an effort, a vast amount of work on Indian his-tory being done in Delhi and other university centres in India as also in British, US, Russian, Japanese, Australian and European

xii Vocalizing Silence

universities which shares a common historiographic approach remains scattered and has no „voice‰. Also, many fine works published by small Indian publishers never reach the libraries and bookshops in India or abroad. We are acutely aware that one swallow does not make a summer. This series will only mark the beginning of a new attempt at presenting the efforts of scholars to evolve autonomous (but not indigenist) intellectual approaches in modern Indian history.

Bipan Chandra Mridula Mukherjee

Aditya Mukherjee

Series EditorsÊ Preface xiii

This study examines the period between two crucial phases (1930 and 1942) of the national struggle in the context of Orissa. It is in this time span that the mass movement against colonialism not only consolidated itself as the Civil Disobedience Move-ment (1930 34) but also, more importantly, climaxed in the Quit India Movement (1942). Moreover, this period was marked by the structuring of the left-wing forces and an increase in their ideological weight in the movement. The period also saw the broadest participation of the peasants, tribals and other marginal sections of society in the anti-imperialist struggle. This study tries to deal with the interrelationships between the peasantry and tribals, on the one hand, and on the other, mass movements in the colonial context.

In the context of Orissa, this work attempts to read the com-plexities of the anti-colonial processes in their nature, depth and variety of patterns. The processes were informed with the ideology of anti-colonial resistance, and thus were crucial, being the product of the central contradiction of colonial India, that is, the colonial state pitted against the interests of the whole of the colonized people.

The historiographic framework of both neocolonialists and a section of the Left scholarship disclaim the legitimacy of such

Preface

processes, though from different perspectives.1 In our view, the interrelationship of the twin phenomenon of colonialism and nationalism needs to be located in the Indian context insofar as the colonial state was sought to be overthrown by the national movement, which evolved its strategy in the whole course of the anti-imperialist struggle. This strategy was based on the compre-hensive understanding of the nature of the colonial state. The colonial state being „semi-hegemonic‰ and „semi-suppressive‰ in character, the nationalist strategy accordingly was structured taking into account the „specific history of (subject) people and their psychology‰.2 In other words, the situation of imbalance, flowing from the very reality of an armed enemy (colonial state) confronting a militarily poor subject people, dictated the shape of the nationalist strategy in terms of prolonged efforts at inter-nalizing a counter anti-colonial ideology. This was a process of generating confidence among the masses·both politically and ideologically·and drawing them into the mainstream of the

1 In the scope of the present study, reference can be made to Judith M. Brown (Gandhi and Civil Disobedience: The Mahatma in Indian Politics, 1928 34, Cam-bridge, 1977) as representing the neocolonialist trend. This school emphasizes the „patron client‰ theories of the Congress and harps on its factional politics, grossly denying the existence of colonial exploitations and basically denying any ideological orientation of the movement. The type of understanding expressed in the initial attempt of R.P. Dutt (India Today, Calcutta, 1979) and ranging to Sumit Sarkar (Popular Movements and Middle Class Leadership in Late Colonial India: Perspectives and Problems of a History from Below, Calcutta, 1983), Gyanendra Pandey (The Ascendancy of the Congress in Uttar Pradesh 1926 34: A Study in Imperfect Mobilisation, New Delhi, 1973) and the „subaltern‰ historiography in the tradition of Ranajit Guha indicates the latter trend. The „subalterns‰ claim to de-elitise history by focusing on the saga of valiant resistance offered by the „marginal‰ sections of society, such as peasants, tribals and workers (who are grouped into the category of subaltern) against both the internal and external enemy, be it the zamindar, sahukar, the native raja, Congress leaders or the British agent (all of whom are referred to as elites). Thus, while broadly drawing a parallel between two streams within the national movement, viz. one represented by the „real‰ subaltern level of struggle and the other represented by „bogus‰ elite led national movement, all of these historians more or less seem to emphasize the inevitable betrayal of the popular struggles of the subalterns by the elite leadership. The latter, for them, was the bourgeois leadership represented by Congress.2 Bipan Chandra, The Long-term Dynamics of the Indian National Congress, New Delhi, 1985.

xvi Vocalizing Silence

Preface xvii

national struggle. It was in this long drawn-out process that colonial hegemony was equalled (Gandhi Irwin Pact, 1931), countered (Congress ministry, 1937 39) and finally defeated (Quit India Movement, 1942). The nature of Indian national struggle being a hegemonic one, it had a much longer time frame than the short and swift course of an armed struggle. Viewed from this angle, the historiographic analysis in emphasizing „the Gandhi/Congress/bourgeois leadershipÊs vacillation, concilia-tion, retreat, and co-option‰ throughout the movement misses the real import of a hegemonic struggle.3

Based on this understanding, this work explores both mass (Civil Disobedience and Quit India Movements) and non mass movement phases of the struggle to evaluate the viability of the strategy in both the phases, in terms of its potential for building a mass imperialist movement. In fact, the non mass movement phase of struggle under the given strategy was defined in terms of constructive activities and also by constitutional-political exercises by the leadership. A fuller treatment of this aspect of the movement awaits its recognition as an important area of research by historians for a coherent understanding of the national movement. This work tries only to fill the gap in this respect, to certain extent, in the context of Orissa. Similarly, our treatment of the individual satyagraha of 1940 41 attempts to adjudge the viability of the strategy in the context of war and the attendant Defence of India Rules (DIR hereafter).

The study of Congress ministry assumes importance because, as part of the strategy of the movement led by the Congress, it defined itself in terms of expanding the base of the movement through ameliorative agrarian legislations. It chiefly aimed at the expansion of nationalist hegemony and at the same time avoiding co-option into the imperial structure as envisaged by the 1935 Act.4 In fact, the ministry was utilized as another arena to weaken the colonial hegemony. Specific popular linkages were sought to be created through it in order to revitalize the Congress after the withdrawal of CDM.

3 Ibid., pp. 11 12. The hegemonic struggle is typical of the Gramscian situation of „war of position‰.4 Sumit Sarkar, Modern India, 1885 1947, p. 351. Sarkar characterizes the function-ing of Congress ministries as a steady shift to the Right, occasionally veiled by the Left rhetoric. Our study does not accept such characterization.

This work also deals with the peasant/tribal/state peoplesÊ movements in Orissa during the mid-1930s. It is suggested that, placed in the context of the radical ideological transformation of the movement through the activities of Nehru, Socialists, Communists, etc., these movements assumed militant postures. Furthermore, the Congress ministry helped to generate a space for the emergence and spread of such movements. Another re-current theme of this study is the patterns of popular response to and internalization of varied political and ideological initia-tives of the leadership.

As far as possible, a wide range of sources have been consulted. In fact, besides conventional sources, extensive use of home po-litical and revenue records, such as the fortnightly district-wise reports, intelligence reports, letters, notes and speeches, has been made. In addition to these, writings, poems, booklets, diaries and pamphlets of the participants in the struggle have been used. Besides, many regional as well as national newspapers and old journals have also been consulted.

Any formal acknowledgement of gratitude through words to Professor Bipan Chandra who supervised this work as a Ph.D. thesis, I am afraid, cannot possibly reflect my reverence for him. I look upon him first as my guru, philosopher and then as a guide. Being a guru and philosopher, endowed with wisdom and vast experience of global realities, he sought to transform and fine-tune my inner sensibilities apart from sharpening my cognitive ability to grasp history within the fold of social sci-ences. The intellectual ambiences of the early 1980sÊ JNU and Prof. Bipan Chandra have been the twin significant spiritus rectors for me. If at all, I possess certain confidence to face the „world out there‰ today, these two institutions have been of pivotal influence on me.

As I traverse down the memory lane, I vividly recollect how, as a graduate student of history, I was advised by the late Sanjeeb Rout to update my understanding of Indian history by going through NCERT textbooks. My repeated reading of these books not only made me sensitive to the craft of history-writing, but also inspired me to explore JNUÊs „world of history‰. And the rest that followed was a profound history for me·a history replete with a paradigm shift vis-à-vis life, society and people.

xviii Vocalizing Silence

Preface xix

Professors Bipan Chandra, Mridula Mukherjee and Aditya Mukherjee generated in me an intense interest in the re-evaluation of social history of Orissa. Long-term critical interac-tion with them has shaped the texture of this work in terms of ideas, perspectives and approaches. While allowing me absolute freedom to pursue my ideas, their consistent encouragement and valuable criticism have made me think coherently and overcome the inconsistencies in connection with this work. They, along with Usha Chandra, Sucheta Mahajan and Bodh Prakash, have solidly stood by me unhesitatingly during moments of desperation to ensure that life and time become as usually engaging. I am im-mensely indebted to them both intellectually and personally.

My debts to Professors Bhagban Singh Josh, Harbans Mukhia, Sabyasachi Bhattacharya and Romila Thapar are incalculable. Their lectures, comments and tutorial discussions at CHS have deepened my understanding of Indian historiography in par-ticular and philosophy of history in general.

The language of politics as voiced in my interviews with some of the frontrunners of the national movement of Orissa like (Late) Rajkrushna Bose, Sachi Routray, Sharat Patnaik, Biju Pattnaik, Govinda Mohanty, Malati Choudhury, Anil Ghose, Manmohan Mishra, Manmohan Choudhury and Mr Guru Charan Patnaik have certainly provided a distinct vigour to this work. I feel sincerely grateful to them.

This work in its post-Ph.D. form has been the site of the critical gaze of a number of professors, academics and scholars dur-ing those „influential years‰ dating since 1996. Thus, the ideas, views and arguments put forward in this work both directly and indirectly have been shared, supplemented, commented upon and contested by this collective. This includes Professors M.N. Das and Hermann Kulke apart from number of friends and scholars like Pritish Acharya, Lata Singh, Salil Mishra, Vishalakshi Menon, Biswamoy Pati, Bishnu N. Mohapatra, Georg Berkmer, Kiyoshi Sugimoto, Akio Tanabe, Jatin Nayak, Susbash Padhy, P.P. Mishra, Atul Pradhan, Ashok Patnaik, B.K. Mallick and Laxmikanta Mishra.

I am greatly indebted to the members and staff of Orissa State Archives (Bhubaneswar), Utkal Sahitya Samaja Library (Cuttack), Nehru Memorial Museum Library (New Delhi), National Ar-

chives (New Delhi), JNUÊs library and Sahitya Akademi Library (New Delhi) for their ready response and support during my research work without which this work would not have seen the light of the day.

Krishna has as usual cheered me on the oddest of my en-thusiasms. Neither the work nor the book would have been possible without her. My son Samyak, in his characteristic delightful distraction at times, removed pages from my hand-written drafts, while the work was in progress. I hope that the book which has survived his „child-like editing‰ will help him imagine the nation!

I gratefully acknowledge the invaluable help received from Su Deep Kohli, Rekha Natarajan, Payal Kumar, Rachna Sinha and Samprati Pani of SAGE team who tied up loose ends of the work through exchange of emails with superb dexterity. My special thanks are due to Ankur Agarwal for his meticulous editorial intervention.

The sole responsibility for any lapses, omissions and errors remains mine alone.

Chandi Prasad Nanda

xx Vocalizing Silence

Message of Purna Swaraj and the Popular Response

The Orissa Provincial Congress Committee (PCC) leaders who participated in the Lahore Congress included Nilakantha Das, Gopabandhu Choudhury, Harekrishna Mahatab and Niranjan Patnaik. Back from Lahore, the PCC organized a province-wide campaign for propagating the purna swaraj resolution. The PCC in its meeting at Cuttack on 19 January 1929, in the light of the Lahore resolution, decided to organize the observance of Independence Day on 26 January 1930. It also resolved to step up the campaign around the issues of untouchability, khadi and boycott of foreign goods in rural areas.1

The Independence Day celebration2 in Cuttack town on 26 January was marked by hectic activities by the leadership. The national flag was hoisted in the morning in many parts of the township, amidst chanting of nationalist slogans and songs. In the afternoon, a meeting was organized on the Kathjuri river bed. Nearly 5,000 people attended the meeting. A photograph

One

Phases of Swaraj Politics: Civil Disobedience Movement, 1930–34

1 The Samaja, 22 January 1930.2 The Samaja, 29 January 1930, 5 February 1930. The Samaja also reported the celebration of Independence Day in the districts of Cuttack, Puri, Balasore, Ganjam and Sambalpur.

� Vocalizing Silence

of Gandhi was placed on the pandal. Banchhanidhi Mohanty, a nationalist poet, sang nationalist songs. Gopabandhu Choudhury read out the purna swaraj resolution. In Puri, many PCC leaders were arrested while taking out a procession. College students in Cuttack observed a fast on that day. People of Choudwar assembled in a prayer meeting for the speedy liberation of the country. People in the Agra haat (Choudwar) also endorsed the purna swaraj message by raising their hands. At Jajpur, a pro-cession marched to Biraja temple and held a meeting there. At Kakatpur (Puri), a sankirtan party (also called kirtan, the collec-tive singing of devotional songs accompanied by music) led the procession and met in a meeting at Deuli Matha. The sankirtan party during its march through villages also sold khadi.

At Kalyanpur (Cuttack), people had their bath in the morn-ing and prayed to God. The flag was hoisted amidst cheers of “Hari bol” (“Take God’s name”) and the chanting of “Bande Mataram”. A procession carrying the photograph of Mahatma Gandhi was taken out at Boirasi village. At the meeting, people took an oath to wear only khadi. The residents of Kusupur (Ba-lichandrapur, Cuttack) marched around the village in a kirtan party and assembled for a meeting at the marketplace to listen to the “orders of Gandhi”. The inmates of Satyabadi Ashram (Puri) moved around the village selling khadi. The Bhubaneswar Youth Association took up the initiative in celebrating the day at Bhubaneswar. Flags were hoisted on the pinnacles of Lingaraj and Anant Vasudeva temples.

In a neighbouring village of Cuttack, a school teacher hoisted the flag on 26 January.3 A kirtan party in Sambalpur moved round seven villages raising slogans. The party explained the swaraj mantra and also asked people to give up eating beef and drinking alcohol. Similarly, seven to eight kirtan parties from various streets of Sambalpur town assembled at the local temple of Madan Mohan and performed kirtan. Those involved in the processions also carried cut-outs of Gandhi. People in large numbers joined them. Oriyas living in Calcutta went in a procession led by a sankirtan party, singing nationalist songs and assembled at a Shiva temple to offer puja on the day of

3 Home Political Department (HPD), Report of SP, Cuttack, 27 January 1930, Accession no. 264 (ACC–264).

Civil Disobedience Movement, 1930–34 �

Makar Sankranti on 14 January. The anti-liquor and pro-khadi messages were preached to the devotees at the temple. Some devotees took a vow to wear khadi. On the same day, the Oriyas of Gobinda Chandra Sen Lane, who used to perform Trinatha Mela (a puja performed in the name of the Trinity—Brahma, Vishnu and Maheswara—followed by sharing of prasad and smoking of ganja), refused to use intoxicants at the mela on that day. Similar activities were seen in the rural areas of Cuttack, Sambalpur, Puri, Balasore and Ganjam too.4 People in large numbers came in kirtan processions raising nationalist slogans, hoisted the tricolour at a central place and bowed to the swaraj flag respectfully. This was followed by a meeting where the purna swaraj message was explained to the audience. In many meetings in different parts of the district, khaddar or khadi was sold by Gandhi Ashram activists and the people were exhorted to take to spinning and weaving khaddar. Khaddar spinning demonstrations were organized in many meetings. The swaraj flag was hoisted in many places amidst blowing of conches and shouting of “Bharat ki jai” and “Om! Bande Mataram”. In Sam-balpur, at the base of the post holding the flag, was inscribed a message: “Keep patience, have faith, don’t fear the bullets”. A large number of people in the procession in Berhampur town wore the swaraj flags to cover their bodies.

The participation of women in the celebration was encourag-ing. In many meetings women activists demonstrated khaddar spinning and a few of them spoke on women-related issues. In the rural areas, women observed the day jubilantly just like the festival of Raja (an Oriya festival when no domestic chores like cooking or grinding are done by womenfolk). Later, the arrest of a number of leaders in connection with the independence day celebration was condemned in meetings. In a public meeting at Cuttack on 30 January, Jadumani Mangaraj strongly protested against the arrest of Subhash Bose, as well as Lingaraj Mishra and Harihara Das and many others in Puri, and the sentencing to death of Bhagat Singh and Batukeswar Dutt.5

4 The Samaja (27 January 1930, 5 February 1930) reported celebration of the Independence Day in many rural parts of the province.5 The Samaja, 5 February 1930.

4 Vocalizing Silence

The campaign for Gandhian constructive activities also picked up after the celebration of the Independence Day. In Choudwar, the pupils of lower primary schools observed Saraswati Puja (festival in honour of the goddess of learning) without seeking the assistance of a Brahmin priest. The pupils and the teachers got together and conducted the rituals themselves. At a public meeting on the same evening, Laxmi Narayan Sahu emphasized the necessity of removing untouchability and gender inequality by providing equal opportunities to women along with men. He also advised people to rely on village panchayats to settle their problems instead of going to the courts and to give up intoxi-cants so as to make a dent in the revenue of the government.6 In Ragadi village of Puri, a spinning competition was organized at the initiative of a local activist, Laxmidhar Mahapatra, to make people fearless against the police.7 Similarly, the students and youth of Kalyanpur resolved to put on khaddar during the celebration of Saraswati Puja. The villagers raised a fund for the welfare activities of the village, including making provisions for supplying khaddar to the sevakas (servitors) and the reader of the scriptures of the local temple.8

In Banki, Congress volunteers like Jagannath Mishra and Golak Maharana begged in different villages to collect funds to be utilized for spinning khaddar, which was to be distributed to the helpless widows and the poor. Banki, in fact, turned out to be an active centre of khadi work. These volunteers also organized a women’s conference.9 The nationalist press kept emphasizing the necessity for carrying on constructive activities as a preparation for the mass struggle around civil disobedi-ence.10 A women’s conference organized at Cuttack on 14 Feb-ruary decided to form a sub-committee which would work for women’s education and the rights of women. Leading activists like Sarojini Chaudhury, Rama Devi and Lalita Devi took the initiative of organizing the conference.11 Malati Choudhury, another leading activist, toured many villages and explained

6 The Samaja, 12 February 1930.7 The Samaja, 26 March 1930.8 The Samaja, 12 February 1930.9 The Samaja, 5 March 1930.10 The Samaja, 19 February 1930, 12 March 1930.11 Ibid.


to the women about the need to spin khaddar.12 A ryot confer-ence was organized in Polasara (Ganjam) under the initiative of Biswanath Das, Gorachand Patnaik and Godavarish Mishra on 15 February.13 The peasants of Parlakhemundi, Tekali and Manjusa, numbering around 1,500, participated in the confer-ence. Godavarish Mishra exhorted the peasants to organize themselves to launch a fight against the rajas, zamindars and middle proprietors and pointed out that the interests of peasants and the propertied classes were irreconcilable.

In Bargarh (Sambalpur), a huge public meeting was organized on 16 February, defying the prohibition imposed on meetings. The meeting condemned the repressive policy of the govern-ment in arresting leaders like Subhash Bose, Lingaraj Mishra and Harihar Das. Besides, Laxmi Narayan Mishra advised the people to use khaddar, give up intoxicants and fight against untouchability.14 L.N. Mishra and Chandra Sekhar Behera also mobilized the tribals and the Dalits of Sambalpur district and advised them to give up alcohol. In Bagalpur (Cuttack), under the leadership of Gaur Charan Das, the local youth opened a boarding school with the objective of popularizing construc-tive activities, particularly issues like removal of illiteracy and untouchability and propagation of khaddar.15 Congress volunteers were enrolled from different villages. The intensity of the khaddar campaign was really remarkable. For example, Gadadhar Dutt of Cuttack set an example. For his marriage, all his relatives wore khadi; the decoration of the marriage pandal was also made of khaddar. He went in for a simple wedding, and refused dowry and use of “gas lights and bands”.16

In fact, the PCC sought to consolidate its mass base by strengthening constructive activities. In an appeal to the people, Mahatab pointed out the need to have a wide network of con-structive activities on the basis of which the non-violent war against the British would commence.17

12 The Samaja, 19 March 1930.13 Ibid.14 The Samaja, 26 February 1930.15 The Samaja, 5 March 1930.16 The Samaja, 12 March 1930, 19 March 1930, 2 April 1930.17 The Samaja, an appeal for men and money issued by Mahatab, president, PCC, 19 February 1930.


At the same time, four members of the Bihar and Orissa Legislative Council, namely Nanda Kishore Das, Narayan Bira-bar Samant, Nilakantha Das and Godavarish Mishra, resigned their seats. Similarly, Biswanath Das resigned from the Madras Council.18 However, Nilakantha and Godavarish re-entered the legislature again, violating the Congress mandate.19

Students displayed remarkable interest in the movement against the British. Defying the authorities, many students re-fused to pay respect to the Union Jack. The students of board-ing schools of Cuttack skipped their meals on 26 January and raised money which they donated to the Gopabandhu Fund as a gesture of respect to “the first leader of the National Movement in Orissa”. The hostellers of Ravenshaw College had taken the lead in organizing the Independence Day celebration among the student community. They also raised subscriptions for both the Gopabandhu Fund and the Leprosy Fund.

The Salt Satyagraha Phase

Gandhi’s decision to hold the Dandi March for breaking the Salt Law had a special appeal to Orissa, particularly the coastal belt. This was primarily because salt trade was an ancient trade in Orissa, absorbing labour and capital of the region. The manu-facturing of salt in Orissa was a pre-colonial phenomenon and it was an important source of income until the British imposed

18 All India Congress Committee (AICC) Papers, FNG-1 (ii), 1930.19 The Samaja, 12 February 1930, 19 February 1930, 12 March 1930. Interestingly, Godavarish Mishra justified his move to re-enter the legislature on the grounds that he wanted to strengthen the Khurda constituency (the area that he represented) politically in view of the “swaraj war”. The people of Khurda, as he pointed out, had not yet been able to participate in the Civil Disobedience Movement as they were facing problems of starvation and floods. This, he thought, he would be able to redress by representing the people in the legislature and initiating some government measures for those people. In his view, small struggles should already be won by the people before they are prepared for larger struggles like the swaraj movement. He was of the view that conditions in Orissa were not ripe for the civil disobedience struggle. On the other hand, he felt that he could carry on the struggle by remaining inside the legislature. He also appealed to the other members of the legislature to strengthen their own areas through constructive activities for the swaraj struggle.


a salt monopoly.20 The salt issue, in fact, had bothered the na-tionalist leadership of Orissa for quite some time. Gopabandhu had highlighted the problem in the Bihar and Orissa Legislative Council in 1918.21 Besides, Mahatab had suggested that salt tax could be taken as an issue for a popular movement during Gandhi’s visit to Orissa in 1925.22 The idea of Salt Satyagraha was again advanced by Mahatab to Gandhi during the latter’s visit to Orissa on the eve of the Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM).23 In fact, people in the coastal districts had registered their protest against the Salt Law by violating it in many instances prior to the Salt Satyagraha. This is illustrated by Table 1.1.24

Table 1.1 Number of Violations of Salt Law

Year Cuttack Puri Balasore

1927–28 83 150 461928–29 40 55 46

The PCC met on 16 March at Balasore and endorsed the plan to launch the Salt Satyagraha in Orissa. Gopabandhu Chou-dhury was appointed as the Dictator for the overall conduct and organization of the movement. Inchudi in Balasore was selected as the site for the breaking of the law. Mahatab was kept in charge of organizing the movement in Balasore.25

The preparation for CDM and Salt Satyagraha with a vigorous campaign and collection of volunteers took shape around March. The PCC in its meeting at Cuttack on 28 February resolved to launch a non-violent movement on the issues of Salt Law and chowkidari tax. It also resolved to stand by and support any movement based on local issues in any part of the province,

20 G. Toynbee, A Sketch of the History of Orissa 1803–1828, Calcutta, 1873, p. 70. Also see The Samaja, 5 March 1930.21 Bihar and Orissa Legislative Council Proceedings, 13 September 1919.22 Harekrishna Mahatab, Gandhiji O Odisha, pp. 81–87.23 Harekrishna Mahatab and S.C. De, eds, History of Freedom Movement in Orissa, Vol. III, Cuttack, 1957, p. 85.24 The Report on the Administration of the Salt Department in Bihar and Orissa during the Years 1927–1931, Cuttack.25 HPD, Fortnightly Report (henceforth FNR), Second half of March, 1930.


if it was to be carried on non-violently. It deputed leaders for organizing different districts of the province with instructions to them to raise Congress volunteers for the movement.26 On 12 March, a public meeting was organized in Cuttack town on the Kathjuri river bed. Prominent activists of the PCC addressed the audience.

The audience were exhorted to state confidently that purna swaraj was India’s demand. Non-violent civil disobedience was marked by the enthusiastic participation of school students. It was reported that even the government servants and school teachers attended the meeting “covering their faces with a cloth” to avoid detection by the police.27 Similar meetings were orga-nized in Puri and Sambalpur by disregarding the ban imposed on such meetings. On 12 March, the students of Sambalpur District School boycotted classes and said their prayers at the temple for the success of Gandhi in the ensuing salt battle. They hoisted the swaraj flag in the school and took a vow to wear khaddar. The school authorities rusticated a few students and prohibited the students from reading newspapers.28 L.N. Mishra was arrested on 17 March, when he, along with other District Congress Committee (DCC) leaders, took out a procession in Sambalpur town giving a call for hartal for the next day. Through meetings and processions, the repressive policy of the govern-ment was condemned by the leaders and funds were raised for the proposed satyagraha.

On 23 March, before addressing a public meeting at Cut-tack, Gopabandhu Choudhury and Purna Chandra Bose were served prohibitory orders. In response, 74 people, including four government servants, enrolled themselves as satyagrahi soldiers in protest meeting that followed. Malati Choudhury, who was present in the meeting, donated her gold bangles to the satyagraha fund.29 The press also played an active role in the campaign for the movement. The Samaja reported on 26 March of a youth league among the Muslims with the objective of rendering service to the people and popularizing the idea of

26 The Samaja, 5 March 1930.27 The Samaja, 19 March 1930.28 The Samaja, 26 March 1930.29 Ibid.


khaddar spinning along with campaigns for literacy and physi-cal exercise.30 The Gandhian ashrams in many places took the lead in mobilizing people. The Alaka Ashram of Jagatsinghpur organized a conference of Congress activists to train the work-ers about the conduct of satyagraha.31 On 16 March, at the initiative of the activists of Utkal Sadhanashrama, a meeting of the wage-earners of the Sumandi salt factory in Ganjam was organized. The audience was called upon to give up alcoholic drinks, and boycott foreign clothes and British courts.32 Many rural-level meetings were organized at Sergarh, Aska, Russel-konda, Rambha, Chhatrapur, Ichhapur and other places. In a meeting at Puri on 30 March, the selected satyagrahis of Puri district were garlanded by the people.33 The people also prayed to Lord Jagannath for their success. In the meeting, money was collected for the satyagraha fund and eight people got themselves enrolled as satyagrahis.34 A similar meeting was organized at Kakatpur on 28 March. People from different villages came out in procession, singing nationalist songs. A group of eight rich men of the locality signed the satyagraha pledge form and got themselves recruited as satyagrahis. This created quite a stir in the locality.35 In Godipatna village (Choudwar), a youth conference was organized.36 On 31 March, in a largely attended public meeting at Cuttack town, the prominent leaders of PCC including Gopabandhu Choudhury appealed to the youth and students in particular to join the Salt Satyagraha.37 By the begin-ning of April, the PCC had released clear-cut instructions to the “satyagrahi soldiers” regarding their duties. The PCC bulletin on the “Duty of satyagrahi soldiers” observed:

It has been decided to begin this Civil Disobedience in the coastal tract of Balasore district. The period from 6 April to 13 April will be observed as National Week in Orissa. The first batches will remain prepared and take up the March when required. The Satyagrahis

30 Ibid.31 Ibid.32 Ibid.33 The Samaja, 2 April 1930.34 Ibid.35 Ibid.36 Ibid.37 Ibid.


should carry very few things with them. The articles to be taken are: two pieces of dhoti, 2 pieces of chaddar, one white half shirt, one jug, a bamboo stick of 5 feet, one piece of rope, and one Gita/Ko-ran along with adequate materials required for spinning Khaddar for at least 15 days. The District Committees will provide all these materials. It is hoped that the villagers concerned would arrange for the food of the Satyagrahis. The food should constitute at the best, rice, dal [cereals] and curry. Sweetmeats should be avoided. Chuda [beaten rice], mudhi [puffed rice] and coconut will also do. It is ideal to shelter the satyagrahis in open and shadowy places of the village. The journey hours begin at 6.30 a.m. and a distance of five to six kms should be covered in the morning shift. If required, another five to six kms should be covered. The satyagrahis should observe the rules of Ashram on the way. The same should devote time for prayers and spinning both in morning and evening—and should also maintain their daily diary of events. They should not carry valuables, including cash, while on the March. However, they can carry a timepiece to know the exact time. Before the March begins, the exact date and place for the organisation of Civil Dis-obedience as well as the route for March for the different groups will be advertised.38

The detailed instruction by the PCC was given wide coverage in the press. With the selection of the site for the inauguration of Salt Law violation at Inchudi in Balasore, the preparatory campaign assumed strong fervour there. Under the initiatives of Mahatab and Surendranath Das, 12 volunteers were trained to clean up tanks and reservoirs in Inchudi, Srijanga and other neighbouring villages of Balasore.39

On 6 April, Gopabandhu Choudhury and Harihar Das led the first batch of satyagrahis from Cuttack Swaraj Ashram to Inchudi. A “forward volunteer group” was formed comprising a few activists, who piloted the satyagrahi batch by organizing mass meetings and campaigns en route. Nearly 5,000 people assembled in the meeting jointly organized by the Cuttack DCC and the Lawyers’ Association to flag off the first batch of satyagrahis on 5 April. The meeting was largely attended by students, teachers, lawyers and people of “all classes, castes and

38 Ibid.39 Harekrishna Mahatab, ed., History of Freedom Movement in Orissa, Vol. V, Cuttack, 1957, pp. 3–27.

Civil Disobedience Movement, 1930–34 11

communities”. The first batch of 17 selected satyagrahis was greeted by the audience with flowers and cheers of victory. On 6 April, the satyagrahis began their journey for Inchudi early in the morning, amidst chanting of couplets from the Gita, and garlanding by women activists. They went round the town in a large procession followed by “a large wave of crowd” and greeted by people on the streets, before leaving Cuttack town.40 The batch on its way to Inchudi also detoured through the rural pockets; camps were organized at selected points in the rural tracts to accord welcome to the satyagrahis and to hold meet-ings. In the camp at Singmapur (Bahugram, Cuttack) the people from nearby villages received the satyagrahis with sankirtan and music. The rural womenfolk, both old and young, came forward to greet the satyagrahis by offering flowers, sandal paste, vermilion, paddy, khai (puffed rice) and duba (a kind of soft grass considered auspicious)—items associated with wor-ship. The satyagrahis then settled down under a mango grove of Singmapur village. In the evening, a meeting was held in which more than 1,000 people gathered despite strict warning by the police. A subscription totalling Rs 51 was collected from people in the meeting and the purse was presented to Gopabandhu Choudhury. A separate meeting of women followed and a col-lection of Rs 21 was presented to the satyagrahi fund.

The next day, the marchers left for Kendupatna. They walked approximately 5 miles per hour. The enthusiasm of the march-ers often made the people believe that the Salt Law would be abolished and swaraj would be attained. To the cheering crowd at Salipur, Gopabandhu advised people to take to spinning, dis-cussing the political situation of the country and devoting time for reading the Gita. At Kendupatna, they were again greeted by people amidst slogans of “Gandhi ki jai”, “Utkalsena ki jai” and “Bande Mataram” and the beating of drums. Gopabandhu gave a demonstration of spinning; he also read out and explained to the marchers in Oriya an article written by Gandhi in the Young India, in the manner of a “Rishi explaining to his disciples the scripture”. The local Congress committee organized a meet-ing in the evening in which nearly 1,500 people from several

40 The Samaja, 16 April 1930, 9 April 1930.

1� Vocalizing Silence

villages gathered and greeted the marchers with flowers. The satyagrahi league of Kusupur village requested the marchers to let them join in their march but they were advised to join the next batch. Harihar Das explained to listeners how the country was being exploited by the British through its conspiracy: sale of alcoholic drinks, ganja, foreign clothes, motorcars. Besides, he pointed out how British courts and bureaucracy were help-ing to perpetuate the misery of the people. The people in their enthusiasm jeered at the policemen present at the spot without the slightest trace of fear. The marchers were “worshipped” by a Brahmin priest at Khandasahi, followed by the usual greetings extended by the people. An old woman of 85 joined others in greeting the marchers.

Gopabandhu was arrested at Chandol on 8 April and then the arrest of Purna Chandra Bose followed. In a large meeting held at Chandol to condemn the arrest of Gopabandhu, many people, including old men, enrolled themselves as volunteers. Contributions were also raised for the satyagraha fund. A pro-test meeting was organized in Kendrapara and many people got recruited as satyagrahis there. The meeting was followed by a total hartal in Kendrapara. The marchers then proceeded to Jajpur under the leadership of Harihar Das. In a meeting at Jajpur attended by a large number of people, subscriptions were raised for the satyagrahi fund. The satyagrahis reached Balasore on 12 April and began their last lap of journey to Inchudi on the same evening, passing through villages. In Sundarigram, they were received by the local landlord Ramnarayan Chaud-hury. Large decorative archways were erected and shuva kalasas (earthen pots filled with water with coconut placed over them) were placed on the village roads traversed by the marchers. The brides of the villages greeted the marchers by offering ritualistic ovations. On 13 April morning, Harihar divided the marchers into three groups under respective captains, and at exactly 8 a.m. began the symbolic production of salt at Tundura village by picking up a handful of salt.

Right from 12 April, people coming in large numbers from rural as well as urban pockets had gathered in Inchudi to witness this “war”. Harihar Das was arrested for collecting salt, thus breaking the law. The other volunteers also followed Harihar and courted arrest. Amidst great cheering of the crowd watch-

Civil Disobedience Movement, 1930–34 1�

ing the “war”, the activities continued throughout the day and gradually more and more people crowded the site. The “war” ceased around evening and the remaining satyagrahis returned to their camp amidst cheers of victory. On 12 April, such promi-nent activists as Surendranath Das and Kalyanji Jivaramji were arrested while attempting the manufacture of salt at Tundura.

Kalyanji, a rich businessman from Bombay, left his busi-ness and came to live in Sabarmati Ashram. He had donated Rs 2 lakh for the khaddar campaign. In fact, he settled down in Bhadrak (Balasore district) in 1927 and opened a branch of Gandhi Seva Sangha to popularize Gandhian constructive activities. The arrest of these two leaders evoked mass sympa-thy. In popular perception, Surendranath Das—“the crownless king”—was as highly regarded as the Patel of Bardoli (Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel). The popular sentiment which surfaced after the conduct of “satyagraha war” was summed up by The Samaja on 13 April as follows:

In the village, people are at one with the views and advice of the Congress and Gandhi. They have developed so much of disgust for the Government officials that they refuse to talk to them. Even when they are dying, they would not give them a drop of water to drink. These people are boycotting the Government people to such an extent that they even refused water to the representatives of The Samaja and the Asha, suspecting that they were Government people.

After the arrest of the first batches of satyagrahis, new groups were formed to proceed to Inchudi. One such group, styling itself as “Louha Stambha Bahini” (“Iron Pillar Brigade”), started its march from Balasore town to Inchudi. Another batch under the title Patitapabana Bahini, evoking a religious metaphor, started from Puri on 13 April. The marchers went in a procession and paid their obeisance to Lord Jagannath. They covered many villages on the way to Inchudi. As before, meetings were orga-nized on the way, funds collected, and volunteers enrolled for the satyagraha. At Chandanpur, the marchers were greeted by the burning of foreign clothes. At Satyabadi, the local zamindars and mukaddams (headmen of villages or castes) also greeted the marchers amidst chanting of national songs and sankirtan. People took off their foreign clothes on the appeal of the satyagrahis


in the meeting at Satyabadi. Even the eight-year-old son of a deputy magistrate threw off his garments for burning.41

On 9 April, after the arrest of Gopabandu, the second batch of Satyagrahis proceeded from Cuttack. During their march to Inchudi, they were received by the villagers with redoubled enthusiasm, meetings were held, and funds raised for the satya-grahis.42 A batch of satyagrahis from Khurda, including school students, decided to proceed to the nearby sea coast to break the law by producing salt. The batch was provided financial assistance of Rs 100 by the zamindar of Jaanala.43

The youth, particularly school and college students, showed increasing interest in the movement. About nine college students of Berhampur left their college to participate in the movement. The M.A. students of Ravenshaw College boycotted their exams in response to the struggle.44 Even the wife of a government servant insisted on joining the batch of satyagrahis despite the unwillingness of her husband. Four members of the staff of the deputy commissioner attended the “Gandhi meeting”, openly incurring adverse CCR (confidential character roll) and transfer to far-off places. One Pramathnath Sen resigned his service at the Cuttack Collectorate. P.K. Das, a deputy magistrate at Puri, who was present at a meeting, did not report either the proceedings or the names of organizers of the meeting to the government. This disadvantaged the prosecution of the leaders.45

After the arrest of L.N. Mishra, the other activists of Sambalpur under Bhagirathi Patnaik and Dayananda Satpathy organized processions and meetings defying the imposition of Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code. This resulted in the arrest of both Patnaik and Satpathy on 11 April. Rama Devi arranged accommodation and food for the wives, children and relatives of the satyagrahis, who had left them at Alaka Ashram (Jag-

41 Ibid.; Surendra Nath Patnaik, Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Itihasa, Cuttack, pp. 74–76.42 The Samaja, 16 April 1930.43 The Samaja, 9 April 1930.44 Ibid.; HPD, Report of J.A. Hubback, 25 April 1930; Board of Revenue Records, District Magistrate (DM’s) Report, 27 May 1930, Sl No. 338.45 Board of Revenue Records, “Commissioner, Orissa Division to DM Puri”, 25 May 1930, Sl No. 338; Board of Revenue Records, “Chief Secretary to Commis-sioner, Orissa Division”, 20 May 1930, Sl No. 338.


atsinghpur) to join the satyagraha. Funds were raised from the people of the province to manage the camp. About a hundred women enrolled themselves at Cuttack as volunteers to picket the wine and foreign cloth shops in the first week of April. In the regular public meetings organized at Cuttack after 13 April, the participation of women was a marked feature.

In response to the arrest of L.N. Mishra, Bhagirathi Patnaik and Dayananda Satpathy, other activists of the district immediately constituted a satyagraha committee46 to organize the struggle for the district. The people of Sambalpur defied the ban on political meetings in the district for two months. The students of Angul High School, backed by a faction of the teachers, took up political propaganda and organized a meeting against the headmaster of the school.47 We come across references to the mobilization of the “outcastes”48 by the Patitapabana Mission in many areas of Ganjam. Jaymangal Rath, Antaryami, Ghanashyam Behera and Kumudini Devi—the promoters of the association—organized the people of Dandasi, Sundhi and Kaibarta castes of Ganjam into welfare activities such as the formation of cooperative societies. The so-called “outcastes” of Kottapalli and Pudadiha in Puri were also mobilized along similar lines.

In Eram (Balasore), under the presidentship of zamindar Radhanath Padhi, the local activists resolved in a meeting on 4 April to be ready for the manufacture of salt along the adjacent coastline and wait until “Gandhi’s order”. It was also decided to send a shanti sena—a peace corps—to Balasore from Eram.49 However, Inchudi remained the nerve centre of intense activi-ties concerning manufacture of salt. A batch of satyagrahis from Gujarat too reached Inchudi.50 A women’s delegation under the leadership of Rama Devi and Malati Devi also arrived at Inchudi and manufactured salt.51 The satyagrahis in several batches broke the Salt Law and courted arrest for several days.

46 Board of Revenue Records, DM’s Report, 27 May 1930; The Samaj, 16 April 1930.47 Board of Revenue Records, Weekly Confidential Diary of SP, Angul, 22 April 1930/1 May 1930, Sl No. 139.48 The Samaja, 9 April 1930.49 Ibid.50 Utkal Dipika, 26 April 1930.51 The Samaja, 23 April 1930.


The other marked feature was that the manufactured salt was taken to the markets of Cuttack and Balasore for sale.52 One big consignment of such salt was seized in Balasore town on 17 April.53 Another such centre in Balasore district was Sar-tha, where many activists were arrested while manufacturing salt.54 By May, several new centres for salt manufacture were opened in the coastal tract of the province. Under the initia-tive of Malati Choudhury and Bhagyabati Patamahadei, the former Rani of Kujanga, the local activists offered satyagraha by manufacturing salt. The participation of nearly 500 women salt satyagrahis under the leadership of the rani was a remark-able affair.55 Narayan Birabara Samanta, the leading activist of Kujanga, organized a massive campaign for salt manufacture in Kujanga and Paradip areas and recruited volunteers for the purpose. In Puri, Astaranga became the centre for salt manu-facture, besides Khudi, Singheswari and Latra. Leaders of the district like Mohan Das, Jagannath Rath and Nilakantha Das (who had by this time given up his seat in the legislature, after re-election) organized the satyagraha in these spots.56

Huma Salt Factory57 at Ganjam was yet another centre of hectic nationalist activities. The Satyagrahis of Ganjam, who had returned from Inchudi towards the end of April, prepared this spot for Salt Law violation. Their campaign led to increasing instances of manufacturing of salt. In the meeting organized in Berhampur and Gopalpur, the “contraband” salt was sold to the people. Under the leadership of Niranjan Patnaik, 23 satyagrahis marched from Berhampur and reached Humma on 6 May, covering the rural areas. On the way, they organized meetings and raised subscriptions. People also supported them by providing food and money. This group continued to manu-facture salt at Humma until the satyagrahis were arrested on

52 Ibid.53 HPD, FNR, Second half of April 1930.54 The Samaja, 23 April 1930.55 Patnaik, Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Itihasa, p. 78; Utkal Dipika, 14 June 1930; HPD, Cuttack SP Report, 22 April 1930.56 Patnaik, Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Itihasa, p. 78; The Samaja, 14 May 1930.57 D. Behera, “Civil Disobedience Movement in Ganjam District”, Orissa History Congress Proceedings, Berhampur, 1977, pp. 158–61.


19 May. A batch, which was determined to “raid” the factory, was eventually arrested. People followed the arrested leaders chanting nationalist slogans and songs. The participation of youth in the salt movement was noteworthy. In fact, it was the young satyagrahis who had planned the “raid” on the factory.

The pattern of response to the Salt Satyagraha was quite active and varied. At certain places, “thorns and pieces of broken glass were mixed in the salt with the hope that police would get their hands cut”. In Eram village, nearly 700 women participated in a procession that included 2,500 people and violated the Salt Law. Some of the women were also beaten by the police. Here, people also participated in a large procession carrying mounds of salt for selling “by chanting nationalist songs and blowing conch shells”. People also offered “the contraband salt to the police on duty”. The villagers also provided the Congress karmees (workers) of Bihar and Madras with “food and shelter”. With the commencement of the national week, meetings were held almost daily on the Kathjuri river bed near Cuttack. The trend further picked up after 13 April. In all these meetings, Balasore salt (the salt manufactured and carried away from Inchudi) was sold to the people. Balasore salt, which had assumed a sense of nationalist and religious significance in popular perception,58 fetched Rs 140 at a particular meeting. The salt campaign remained a dominant preoccupation of the satyagrahis during April and May. The authorities had to recruit 200 more constables and a few officials on temporary basis in the “disturbed” zone of Balasore district.59 Besides, the campaign of local villagers to boycott the police and withhold the supply of provisions to them continued to be very strong. This had in fact demoralized the police force and “in certain cases rural police men resigned”. In one case, there was even a raid on the police. This took place when the police attempted to disperse salt makers by force at Balasore in May. The authorities had to procure the aid of armed police to break the cordon and seize the salt.60 The district magistrate (DM’s) report on the incident was as follows:

58 HPD, Report of SP, 22 April 1930; HPD, Report of Hubback, 21 April 1930, ACC-267.59 HPD, FNR, Second half of May 1930.60 HPD, FNR, First half of May 1930.


Illicit manufacture of salt in pursuance of the CDM having been started at Athilabad and its neighbouring villages in May last, a posse of constables under a Head Constable was posted at Athilabad to keep peace and arrest the offenders. On 11 May 1930, the police arrested two of the salt manufacturers, and there was a hostile dem-onstration by a mob of some 300 villagers, but the police were not actually molested. At 9 p.m. the same evening, a mob of about 600 villagers collected in front of the police camp and shouted, “These policemen are sitting on our noses, get into their house, beat them and throw away their things.” They then pulled down the fencing of the compound, broke a khatia [wooden cot] and brought out police uniforms kept in the house. Just then, the head constable called out for his gun on which the mob took to their heels with some of the uniforms. The Head Constable arrested five of the mob inside the house of one Sadhu Charan Mahapatra, who himself was one of the accused. The boy Sadhu Charan Mahapatra (14 years) has been ordered for detention in Reformatory School for 4 years.61

We have also reference to a fight between the police and the seller of “Swadeshi salt of Inchudi” in the Balasore court com-pound. The incident took place on 15 April when one Kasi Barik went to the court compound to sell the contraband salt. Many people came and purchased the salt from him. A sub-inspector of police (SI), passing by, saw the incident and tried to seize the remaining quantity of the salt but Kasi offered resistance. When a constable came to the aid of the SI, Kasi called out to the people. Then many people, mostly the mukhtears (petty lawyers) of the court rushed to the spot, assaulted the police-men, “rescued” Kasi and took away the salt already seized by the police.62

Once released, the arrested leaders proposed to undertake the march to Inchudi again. After his release, Gopabandhu planned to march to Inchudi leading the sixth batch of satyagrahis.63 The arrest of Rajkrushna Bose, Gobinda Mishra and Jadumani Mangaraj evoked mass protest. On the day of the trial of Bose in Cuttack, a huge crowd gathered in the court. The so-called

61 HPD, DM’s Report, Balasore, 26 March 1931.62 HPD, Report of Balasore Magistrate, 11 September 1930, ACC-307; HPD, DM’s (Balasore) Report, 27 March 1931.63 HPD, “Extract from D.O. (Demi Official) No. 32-T/Confidential”, 21 April 1930; HPD, Report of Hubback, 21 April 1930, ACC-267.


“swarajists”64 prevailed over nearly 3,000 people assembled in the haat (weekly market) to “invade” the compound of the court on 24 April, the day of the trial of Jadumani Mangaraj. The shopkeepers closed their shops, and the people in the market moved in a procession. When the news reached that Manga-raj was convicted, the crowd with national flags followed the prisoner to the jail. This resulted in a lathi charge by the police in which nearly 500 people were injured. Narayan Birabara Samanta, the leading activist of Kujanga, who was planning to “extend the salt manufacturing activities to the coastal areas of Cuttack district”, was locked up on 8 May. This led to a massive popular protest through the observation of hartal in Kujanga, Tirtol and Erasama areas.65

The news of the arrest of Gandhiji on 5 May66 also evoked enormous protest in terms of demonstrations and meetings. Students boycotted their examinations at some places. By May, a large number of satyagrahi volunteers had been put behind bars. Nationalist newspapers like The Samaja and the Prajatantra were gagged. Bhagabata Prasad Mahapatra,67 a landlord of Bhadrak, and a member of the Bihar and Orissa Legislative Council, resigned his seat in protest against the mindless repression by the authorities.

Kujanga, which had emerged as a prominent centre of the Salt Satyagraha, witnessed a vigorous phase of the campaign in June. On 4 June, in a largely attended meeting at Naliapal, Narayan Birabara Samanta exhorted the audience to assemble at Darida on 7 June to collect saline earth for manufacture of salt.68 On 7 June, Maguni Rath addressed a meeting at Gandakipur to break the Salt Law.69

The roster of satyagrahi participants in the different districts was a bulky one. In this context, the observation that the promi-nent leaders of the Quit India Movement got schooled by “salt

64 HPD, Report of Special Branch, Bihar and Orissa, 10 May 1930, ACC-267.65 HPD, FNR, First half of May 1930; Patnaik, Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Itihasa, p. 78.66 The Samaja, 14 May 1930.67 Utkal Dipika, 31 May 1930.68 HPD, Report of SP, Cuttack, 17 June 1930, ACC-267.69 Ibid.

�0 Vocalizing Silence

politics” seems to be quite correct.70 The radical nationalists of the mid-1930s, who are referred to in the subsequent chapters, had steeled themselves in this salt struggle.

The vacuum created by the arrest of the top leadership was filled up by the cadres who took up the challenge with innovation and enthusiasm. New groups of satyagrahis were formed, who intensified the campaign. The campaign also included publica-tion of reports on the “brutality of the police”71 committed on the satyagrahis and arrest of the prominent leaders. The Samaja, the Prajatantra and the Utkal Deepika played a crucial role in this regard. We have also referred to the different forms of protest which emerged at popular levels in response to the call for breaking the Salt Law. These included “raids” on police camps and salt factories. The enthusiastic participation of youth and women remained a marked feature of the movement.

The movement that started in January got dampened by the end of June due to the approach of rains. This comparative lull in the activity of salt manufacture was sought to be compensated by the flowering of the intense campaign of swadeshi and other patterns of popular response in the context of the CDM. We will now examine the pattern of popular response in the phase spanning from July 1930 to the end of 1931.

Pattern of Protest, July 1930–March 1931

As the salt movement petered out by June with the onset of rains, the PCC planned to renew the movement from December when the climate would again permit the manufacture of salt. However, a new form of satyagraha emerged in certain land tracts of Balasore in the form of the non-payment of chowkidari tax and the demand for its abolition. The people in rural Bala-sore with their intense mobilization over salt politics came to regard the tax as oppressive. The general anger against the tax first surfaced in Srijanga village.72 The movement took off when

70 Harekrishna Mahatab, Sadhanara Pathe (Oriya), Cuttack, 1972, p. 128.71 HPD, FNR, Second half of April 1930.72 For the developments at Srijanga, the following sources are significant: HPD, “Judgment on Srijanga Case”, undated, ACC-286; Who’s Who Compilation

Civil Disobedience Movement, 1930–34 �1

Bhagirathi Das (president of a chowkidari panchayat) did not issue receipts to more than half the people who had paid the tax. This led to the protest of the villagers of Srijanga against the illegality involved and they resolved that they would not pay the tax until they were given receipts. The local activists like Goura Mohan Das and Narayan Prasad Das held meetings over the issue and encouraged people not to pay tax since it had been “forbidden by the Congress people”. As a result, people refused to pay the tax. The villagers also harassed the chowkidars by refusing them water, destroying their crops and intimidat-ing them in other ways. A police party reached Srijanga on 11 July. The villagers greeted them with a hartal and by holding a meeting attended by 300 people. The police party faced a total boycott, food provisions were withheld from them and they were refused accommodation.

In a subsequent meeting, the villagers decided to offer re-sistance to the police if they tried to arrest them. However, the SI met the “leaders”, who made specific allegations against the president of the panchayat. The SI promised to look into the grievances of the villagers. He asked the villagers to pay the chowkidari tax the very next day. On 12 July, when the SI arrived with the president for collection of the tax, not a single person turned up for payment even though they were sent for. As a result, the police decided to move inside the village to realize the tax by the attachment of property. On the way, the police arrested five persons, identified as “leaders” by the president. When the arrested were brought to the police camp stationed in the village, “conch shells” were blown by the villages from many parts of the village and soon a 700-strong “mob” collected. The mob first demanded the release of the prisoners. When the police refused, it led to the forcible “rescue” of the leaders and

Committee (WWCC), ACC-56, Report of SP, Balasore, 15 July 1931, Report of the DM, Balasore, 13 March 1931; HPD, “Mahatab’s Letter to Chief Secretary (Bihar and Orissa), Hallette”, 27 April 1931, 8 May 1931, 17 May 1931, 16 June 1931, ACC-307; HPD, “Representation of Balasore Bar Association”, 22 May 1931, ACC-307; HPD, “Letter of Revenue Commissioner to Chief Secretary, Orissa”, 19 January 1931; AICC Papers, “F. No. G-2 Report of Repression Committed in Utkal during CDM”; Patnaik, Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Itihasa, p. 84; Mahatab and De, History of Freedom Movement in Orissa, Vol. III, p. 90; Utkal Dipika, 6 August 1930.

�� Vocalizing Silence

assault by lathis on the police party, including the SI, chowkidars and daffadars (officers placed over chowkidars) as well as the president, causing them serious injuries. The mob also snatched away and broke the lathis of some of the policemen.

Following the incident, an additional police force was posted at Srijanga and the adjoining villages. The armed troops unleashed a virtual reign of terror. They attacked the villagers, “outraged women and defiled places of worship”. A punitive fine of Rs 6,000 was imposed on Srijanga and the adjacent villages. How-ever, popular protest against the imposition of additional police tax also emerged and a campaign was carried on mobilizing people not to pay the tax. Despite all the precautions, the actual collection of “dues” could not commence before 4 January 1931. The unwavering opposition to authority by the villagers seemed to persist even after the incident. By the end of September, the authorities could arrest only two of the 72 accused. It is also important to note that Mahatab undertook the campaign for the release of the convicted persons in the Srijanga case.

As noted earlier, the PCC had endorsed as early as in March support for any non-violent movement against chowkidari tax. The outbreak of violence made the PCC suspend the no-tax campaign. However, the leadership’s solidarity with the people of Srijanga was quite strong. Protesting over the Srijanga issue, Bhubanananda Das and Laxmi Narayan Sahu resigned from the membership of Central Legislative Assembly. They organized meetings in various districts to narrate the story of repression by the police in Srijanga. PCC leaders like Rama Devi, Malati Devi, Surendra Patnaik and Bhagabat Prasad visited Srijanga and held meetings. In the aftermath of the Srijanga incident, many inhabitants left the village to avoid repression. So, leaders like Bichitrananda Choudhury, Trilochan Panigrahi and others were deputed to Srijanga by the PCC73 to reassure the people.

There were reports of a similar case from Khersai village in July.74 An armed force of 44 constables moved toward the village in July to undertake the attachment of property of the villagers. On 3 July, in response to the blowing of conch shells,

73 Patnaik, Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Itihasa, p. 84.74 Indian Annual Register, Vol. II, July–December 1930, p. 232.

Civil Disobedience Movement, 1930–34 ��

when a crowd got closer to the police, they opened four rounds of fire to disperse the “mob” and went back to the thana (police station).

We have also a reference to the strained feelings between the Raja of Kanika and his refractory tenants. The tenants of Chandbali took offensive measures against the raja by letting their cattle trespass into the reserved land of the estate. The tenants’ move towards refusal of rent also surfaced during the August–November phase, forcing the raja to apply for legal power to “issue certificates under Public Demands Recovery Act to realize the arrears of rent”. The tenants of Kanika protested against the “illegal enhancement” of rent.75

In June 1930, the PCC decided to carry on other kinds of nationalist programmes, such as picketing of excise shops, boycott of foreign cloth and popularization of khaddar. Accord-ingly, Congress committees decided to launch different courses of action depending on the conditions prevailing at different places. The drive to enroll Congress volunteers was stepped up. The overall orientation in terms of propagating the principles of satyagraha went on with the organizational drive to recruit volunteers. Swaraj Ashram (Cuttack), Utkal Swaraj Ashram (Berhampur) and Mahatab’s Ashram at Balasore remained the nerve centres for such activities.

Picketing of wine shops was a common feature everywhere. The uniqueness of such protests lay in the participation of women and children. The Banara Sena, a corps of school chil-dren, also took part in such activities.76 A graphic account of the Banara Sena, as furnished by a contemporary nationalist, makes interesting reading:77

To picket before excise shop in Cuttack, a number of students both from semi-urban and rural areas gathered at Cuttack. These children picketed before excise shops and requested the customers not to purchase alcoholic drinks. Despite police caning and arrests, they resisted and forgot the pain by singing poems composed by

75 HPD, “Kanika Raja Affairs”, F. No. 290 of 1930, 20 August 1930, 4 Septem-ber 1930, 4 November 1930. Also, telegram of Chakradhar Behera on behalf of Kanika tenants to Governor, Patna, 26 November 1930.76 Patnaik, Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Itihasa, pp. 79–84.77 Ibid., p. 85.


the nationalist poet Bira Kishore Das. One such poem, sung by the Banara Sena read:

“Cane as much you wish, we have already braved death; Can you equal our swadeshi spirit through your repression?”

After being arrested, the Banara Sena children were taken to Chandaka forest of the Mahanadi valley where they were let off. Once a group was arrested, other boys filed in from villages to enroll themselves in the squads and join the picketing. They had to face difficulty in getting food and accommodation due to the ban on Swaraj Ashram. They moved throughout the town for arranging food. Businessmen and lawyers extended sympathy to them and fed them in their houses. They used to sleep on the verandahs of shops or in the compound of Cuttack Town Hall. When the authorities realised that flogging would not do, they sent the Sena volunteers to the jail which they did with enthusiasm. Many students who had left their studies to join the squad were imprisoned. Students like Gokul Mohan Ray Chudamani, Sudhir Chandra Ghosh, Surendranath Dwivedi, et al (the radical nationalists of mid-1930s) were arrested.

The picketing of excise shops gathered momentum over the period. There is a reference to an incident regarding the attempt by the police squad to arrest the picketers before an opium shop in Cuttack. When ordered to break open the cordon made around the shop by picketers, the constables refused to carry out the orders of the police officer.78 A large number of palm trees were cut down in order to dissuade the people from preparing coun-try liquor. For instance, half a dozen palm trees were chopped off in Ghumusar and Aska taluks of Ganjam.79 Picketing before foreign cloth shops was another noticeable trend.

The boycott campaign against foreign cloth had in fact started in 1929. In March 1929, a consignment of foreign cloth was burnt on the Mahanadi river bed of Cuttack. This was again repeated during the PCC conference at Balasore in the same month.80 In January 1930, lawyers of Cuttack boycotted British cloth under the leadership of Janakinath Bose,81 father of Subhash Bose. It

78 HPD, FNR, Second half of January 1931.79 Behera, “Civil Disobedience Movement in Ganjam District”, p. 163.80 HPD, FNR, First half of March 1929.81 Nivedita Mohanty, Oriya Nationalism: Quest for a United Orissa 1866–1936, New Delhi, 1982, p. 12.


is reported that the campaigners “coerced cloth dealers not to sell foreign cloth by threats of fire and social boycott”.82 In June 1930, a Hindi leaflet titled “Khuni Firman” (“Bloody Manifesto”) was circulated in Sambalpur, which urged upon the cloth mer-chants of Calcutta to stop import of foreign cloth.83 Another leaflet, circulated around August in Sambalpur, threatened that the lives of the pro-government shopkeepers and their eldest sons would be in danger.84 The spirit of boycott was also ex-pressed in other spheres as well. Janakinath Bose relinquished his colonial title of Roy Bahadur.85 We have already indicated how many leaders resigned their seats as a protest against the Srijanga incident as well as the government’s policy of repres-sion. Several “Congress panchayats” for arbitration and settling of disputes were formed in Cuttack, Puri and Balasore, as a part of the broad constructive programme of the Congress.86 A Congress court was also instituted at Cuttack in October.87 Political meetings were organized, and Congress Committees at district, sub-division and village levels held demonstrations to keep up the spirit of the satyagraha. In fact, the official report, reviewing the trend of political activities, admitted the “effective hold of Congress organizations”.88 Nehru Day was celebrated on 16 November. Excerpts from Nehru’s speech were read out in many parts of Cuttack, Puri and Balasore districts by organizing meetings.89 In Cuttack, a number of activists were lathi-charged for organizing the day.90 One Nabakishore Parida of Cuttack was convicted and fined for reading out excerpts from Nehru’s speech in a meeting held in November. He had also described one police officer present there as a slave and one who sets fire to his own house. Similarly, in a meeting held in September, Peary Shankar Ray had exhorted the students to “revolt” and take revenge on the government.91 In a protest meeting against

82 HPD, FNR, Second half of December 1930.83 HPD, FNR, Second half of June 1930.84 HPD, FNR, First half of August 1930.85 Mohanty, Search for Oriya Nationalism, p. 12.86 HPD, FNR, Second half of June 1930.87 HPD, FNR, Second half of October 1930.88 HPD, FNR, Second half of November 1930.89 Ibid.90 Patnaik, Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Itihasa, p. 88.91 HPD, Release of Political Prisoner, F. No. Nil of 1931, ACC-309.


police atrocities held on 28 November, it was decided to form a committee to keep in touch with the public as well as the government, in order to protect the rights and interests of the former.92 Bhagat Singh’s execution was another incident which evoked the sympathy of the common people. Protest meetings were held at Cuttack and Puri in March 1931.93 In response to the resignation of Congress members from the Bihar and Orissa Legislative Council, a by-election was conducted in December. Lingaraj Mishra and Malati Devi were arrested while picketing before the voters persuading them to boycott the election.94 Even after the arrest of the top leaders, the movement was continued by individual non-cooperation activists who “continued to stir up trouble though not with much organised effort”.95 The lead-ers who had escaped arrest adopted the method of “operating from background through the instrumentality of volunteers”.96 As late as in February 1931, the official report noted, “though the movement in Orissa is on downgrade the local leaders who are adventurists [sic] would be reluctant to see an end to their activities”.97

Another prominent aspect of the movement was the wide circulation of pamphlets, booklets and literature of nationalist orientation. We have a reference to the mass singing of the song Bhangur Gan composed by Kazi Nazrul Islam in a public meeting at Cuttack as early as in April 1930.98 We also have a reference to the proscription of two booklets, viz., Swaraj Pala99 and Palasi Abasane, in 1930. While the former was compiled by Nityananda Mahapatra of Bhadrak and published from the Prajatantra Press, Palasi Abasane was authored by Mahatab. Bhagirathi Das, a Congress activist of Binjharpur, was prosecuted for holding a meeting at Amangalbad on 13 June 1930. His offence was that

92 Mahatab, History of Freedom Movement in Orissa, Vol. V, p. 4.93 HPD, FNR, Second half of March 1930.94 Patnaik, Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Itihasa, p. 87.95 HPD, FNR, Second half of August 1930.96 HPD, FNR, First half of December 1930.97 HPD, FNR, First half of 1931.98 HPD, “Prosecution of Manisen for Reading from a Proscribed Book”, F. No. 206 of 1930, 17 May 1930, ACC-273.99 HPD, Report of Governor in Council, 20 August 1931. The booklet could not be traced.


he had read out excerpts from Palasi Abasane to “500 people” in the meeting.100 Similarly, Bidroha Bina,101 an anonymous work, and several songs of the nationalist poet Bira Kishore Das were proscribed. Bir Bidrohi by Ram Prasad Singh102 and Ahwana by Kuntla Kumari Devi103 and Khatta-Mitha Chatani were proscribed in August.104 Golaknarayan De was prosecuted for his pamphlet Lawlessness in Balasore in January 1931.105 Similarly, another book, Lunamara Gita106 (“Songs of Salt-making”), containing poems on Gandhi’s Dandi March and the Inchudi March of the PCC leadership, circulated by Nityananda Mohapatra, was also proscribed. A booklet called Arat Mahima107 (“Glory of Spinning”), authored by Upendranath Panda and published from the Prajatantra Press, was also banned. These specimens of critical and satirical literature sought to delegitimize the imperialist regime and in turn helped consolidate nationalist consciousness at popular levels.

The nationalist press also played its due role in propagating nationalist consciousness. In fact, both The Samaja and the Pra-jatantra shot up to the position of being the leading nationalist newspapers in the course of the movement. On 6 April, The Samaja became a daily and the Prajatantra launched its regular publication from 13 April. The former, inheriting the legacy of Gopabandhu, and the latter remaining directly under Mahatab’s editorship, played a crucial role as the leading nationalist newspapers of Orissa. During the peak of Salt Satyagraha, the Prajatantra often used to be published twice a day. It remained a strong mouthpiece of the Balasore DCC in particular. Security (guarantee) from the two was demanded on several occasions during this phase of movement for their anti-British venom.108

100 HPD, Report of SP, Cuttack, 7 August 30, ACC-288.101 Ibid.102 Ram Prasad Singh, Bira Bidrohi (Oriya booklet), Cuttack, 17 May 1930.103 Kuntala Kumari Devi, Ahwana (Oriya booklet), Delhi, 12 May 1930.104 HPD, FNR, Second half of August 1930.105 HPD, FNR, First half of January 1931.106 HPD, “Balasore DM’s Report on vernacular newspapers of 1930”, ACC-300; HPD, FNR, First half of July 1930.107 HPD, “Balasore DM’s Report on vernacular newspapers of 1930”, ACC-300.108 HPD, FNR, First half of December 1930.


Security was also demanded from the Lokaseba Press of Rajk-rushna Bose in Cuttack for its nationalist campaign.

As informed earlier, another wave of Salt Satyagraha com-menced around December 1930, with the climate permitting the manufacture of salt. Golaknarayan De was declared as the “Dictator” to ensure the continuance of the movement in the absence of the top leaders of the PCC, who had all been ar-rested.109 De appealed to the people to resume the production of salt. By December, the colonial administration had banned all Congress units of the province and launched massive arrests of volunteers in its bid to forestall any fresh campaign on the salt issue.110 Despite this, the Salt Satyagraha in Balasore district picked up. Due to the ban on the organization, the Congress headquarters of the district was shifted to a French enclave known as Pharasidinga. In fact, to avoid arrest, quite a few sa-tyagrahis of the district had sneaked into Pharasidinga as early as in July and had even established a Congress Ashram there.111 Under the leadership of the Sardar of Balasore (Surendranath Das), who functioned from Pharasidinga, the salt manufacturing activities at Inchudi again got organized and coordinated around December–January.112 This phase was in low key and was largely confined to the nerve centre of Inchudi. In other centres like Latra, Krushnapur and Kakatpur, however, salt manufacturing activities continued to be undertaken. In any case, due to the massive arrest of leaders and volunteers and province-wide ban on the Congress organizations, including satyagraha committees, the pace and extent of the movement slowed down by January 1931. Golaknarayan De was also prosecuted for condemning the repressive policy of the government and bringing out the pamphlet Lawlessness in Balasore in January 1931.

109 The Samaja, 19 November 1930; HPD, FNR, First half of January 1930.110 The Samaja, 17 December 1930.111 Board of Revenue Records, Report of Balasore DM to Commissioner, Orissa Division, 25 July 1930; Report of Commissioner, Orissa Division, to Chief Secretary, 28 July 1930, 15 September 1930, 22 August 1930.112 The Samaja, 21 January 1931; Patnaik, Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Itihasa, p. 70.


The Postpact Phase: Popular Response

The CDM of 1930–31 was suspended with the truce between Gandhi and Irwin signed on 5 March 1931. The truce has been sometimes seen as a sort of betrayal of the movement by the Gandhian leadership.113 But, in the Gandhian notion of politics, the non-mass phase of the movement that followed the mass phase was equally important in terms of the consolidation of the nationalist hegemony. The crucial aspect was the pattern of response to the truce and the developments thereafter that characterized overall politics.

The Gandhi–Irwin Pact was generally looked upon as a vic-tory in most parts of Orissa. The popular perception was that Congress had scored a big triumph against the colonialists. When PCC leaders like Gopabandhu Choudhury and Nilakantha Das reached Balasore Railway Station after their release from Haz-aribag jail, a jubilant crowd was ready to welcome them. They addressed a meeting there and proceeded to Srijanga to address another meeting amidst much popular enthusiasm. Similarly, the released leaders were received by a huge crowd at Cuttack railway station on 15 March. People from the rural areas had assembled at Cuttack station, playing drums and trumpets to welcome the leaders.114 In a meeting organized at Cuttack to receive the leaders the same evening, Gopabandhu Choudhury urged the people to double their force against the British gov-ernment, should the peace negotiations fail, and observed that boys and girls should be employed in picketing while adults should devote themselves to village reconstruction.115 In another meeting held on 12 May at Bari village in Cuttack district, Rajk-rushna Bose stressed on the idea of “parallel government” with “swaraj police, schools and treasuries”. He, too, emphasized the need to have youth leagues.116

A leaflet circulated in Balasore in April pointed out that because of the agreement between Gandhiji and the Viceroy,

113 From R.P. Dutt, India Today, Calcutta, 1979, to the protagonists of the “sub-altern school”, many share this conviction.114 Patnaik, Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Itihasa, p. 90.115 HPD, Report of DM, Cuttack to Commissioner, Orissa, 23 March 1931, WWCC-61.116 Ibid.


the people of the sea coast could now manufacture salt unop-posed and that the collection of punitive tax had been stopped. It also intimated that peaceful picketing of foreign clothes and wine shops would be carried on by the volunteers. Finally, it urged people to carry out the constructive programme of the Congress, form panchayats, and maintain unity among different communities.117 The official report of March for Balasore noted that there was “general rejoicing” over the announcement of settlement between the Viceroy and Gandhiji, and went on to add that public picketing of foreign salt and shops selling alcoholic drinks was going on.118 The official report from Puri for the same month observed that the release of Gandhiji and the Congress leadership had been received well by the “enlightened people” of the district. It also added that there was no appreciable fall in the CDM activity in the district as bands of young satyagrahis were “carrying on their campaign undeterred”.119 Yet another report from Puri remarked that the recognition given to the Congress and some of its activities by the terms of settlement had enhanced the difficulties of local authorities in dealing with the congressmen and that the propaganda for social reforma-tion and economic uplift as carried on by the Congress workers was inspired by political motives to disseminate Congress ideas among the masses.120

Reviewing the general trend of popular response, the official report noted that “in Cuttack, the release of political prisoners was followed by a fair amount of jeering at the police”. It went on to report that a speaker explained that Gandhi had abandoned an enquiry on police excess as the police had been pardoned by the Congress. The speaker also stated that European officers had fled away (on leave) being afraid of the proposed enquiry.121 In Srijanga (Balasore), the constables were approached by a group of people to enquire as to why they had not yet left Srijanga as

117 HPD, Report of DM, Balasore to Commissioner, Orissa, 9 April 1931, WWCC-61.118 HPD, Report of DM, Balasore to Commissioner, Orissa, 9 March 1931/23 March 1931, WWCC-61.119 HPD, Report of DM, Puri to Commissioner, Orissa, undated, 1931, WWCC-61.120 HPD, Report of DM, Puri to Commissioner, Orissa, 23 May 1931, WWCC-61.121 HPD, FNR, Second half of March 1931.


the preparation of salt had become permissible in view of the “Congress success”.122 In Sambalpur, L.N. Mishra organized an “unlicensed procession” upon his release, and spoke in a meet-ing blaming the Viceroy for deceiving Gandhi in the supposed pact. However, he highlighted that Gandhi had won.123 We have also a reference to the circulation of a pamphlet announcing the “victory of Gandhi” in Angul.124 And an official report noted that there was “an attempt to stir up” the tribals in the belief that “Gandhi raj” had been established in certain tribal tracts of Orissa. In fact, there is a reference to the arrest and conviction of six congressmen in Angul around August 1931 for constructing a swaraj ashram on government land, defying the government order with the objective of carrying on “non-cooperation move-ment” and anti-British campaign.125

As has been observed by contemporary nationalists, the im-pression which got structured into popular perception was that the British had been crushed to a considerable extent and that the truce was of a temporary nature.126 Besides, it was widely believed that the Congress had succeeded in forcing the gov-ernment to accept its demands for the rights of peaceful picket-ing and salt manufacture. Reflecting on the rousing welcome extended to the leadership released from the jails, a prominent poet of the period observed, “a released leader was like a hero coming back from the jail.”127 No wonder, the Chief Secretary to the Government of Bihar and Orissa in his letter to the Com-missioner, Orissa, observed that “as a result of Irwin–Gandhi settlement, many Congress leaders regard the settlement as an opportunity to reorganise their position and prepare themselves for a greater movement in future.”128

122 HPD, “Alleged breaches of settlement of 5th March 1931 in Bihar and Orissa”, F. No. 35/5/31.123 Ibid.124 HPD, FNR, Second half of April 1931.125 Board of Revenue Records, “Letter of Deputy Commissioner, Angul to Su-perintendent of Cuttack Jail”, 14 October 1931, Sl No. 133.126 Refers to both Mahatab, Sadhanara Pathe, p. 6 and Patnaik, Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Itihasa, p. 90.127 Interview with Kalindi Charan Panigrahi at Cuttack, 15 November 1985.128 HPD, “Letter of Chief Secretary (Government of Bihar and Orissa) to Com-missioner, Orissa”, 9 June 1931, WWCC-61.


The Swing towards a Constructive Programme

The leadership which was hailed so popularly strove to func-tion with a high degree of enthusiasm. This enthusiasm was even more marked at the cadre base of the movement. The local leadership displayed a fair amount of response and innovation in organizing constructive activities to ensure continuity in the non-mass-movement phase following the truce in March 1931. The concentration on the various aspects of the constructive programme was in the direction of intensification of campaign for the spread of anti-colonial ideology through rural social reforms, propagation of khaddar, prohibition, the organization and manifold activities of Gandhian ashrams, and formation of seva dals and their various activities.

In several meetings held in the rural areas of the coastal dis-tricts of Orissa, leaders explained the objectives of the Congress in terms of a programme of rural social reforms, propagation of khaddar and prohibition as well as organization of Gandhian ashrams.129 The Balasore DCC chalked out a programme of ac-tion for the satyagrahis in terms of strengthening village orga-nizations, establishment of Congress offices in villages, raising of subscriptions, boycott of foreign articles, anti-intoxication drive and strengthening of village panchayats.130 In many rural-level meetings in Balasore, Congress volunteers explained to the masses the meaning of swaraj and called upon them to be ready for the next “Civil War” [sic]. They also asked people to spin, boycott intoxicants and to take up social reforms relating to women, for example, education of women, widow remar-riage and abolition of purdah system.131 On 2 and 3 August, the All Orissa Women’s Conference was organized in Balasore under the presidentship of the poet Kuntala Kumari Sabat. The conference emphasized unequivocally the need for boycott of foreign goods and reformation of women’s position in society.

129 HPD, FNR, Second half of May 1931.130 HPD, Report of DM, Balasore to Commissioner, Orissa, 19 April 1931, WWCC-61.131 HPD, Report of DM, Balasore to Commissioner, Orissa, 9 May 1931, WWCC-61.


Thanking the women participants of CDM, it further resolved to form a Provincial Women Karma Mandal in Orissa. The women delegates were exhorted to join the Congress, abandon purdah and strive for the eradication of untouchability.132 Similarly, a training camp was organized in October under the aegis of Gandhi Karma Mandir of Balasore. The camp offered training to volunteers on different aspects of constructive programmes. Besides, a special drive was taken up for enrolling volunteers for training.133 The Gandhi Karma Mandir floated by Mahatab was founded on the model of the Sabarmati Ashram taking up reconstruction as well as literacy campaigns.134 The official report on the developments in Balasore said that the overall intention of the Congress workers was “to utilise the settlement for rallying Congress forces for a battle which will be rendered in future”.135

Similarly, the official report for Puri during June pointed out that Congress workers were consolidating their position through constructive programmes and by manufacturing salt on the shores of Chilika Lake. It further noted that women were taking a larger share in the movement, and that a considerable number of sarbarakars (officers who collected dues for the rul-ers) had started showing sympathy for the Congress.136 The SP Puri reported, “The Congress workers are very active through-out the District whose object is to agitate the masses so as to prepare them for the next phase of struggle.”137 In his report to the Chief Secretary, Bihar and Orissa, the Commissioner of Orissa mentioned that the Congress workers, while trying to conform strictly to the terms of the Gandhi–Irwin Pact of 1931, were also consolidating their position in the villages through the propagation of the constructive programme.138

132 HPD, Report of DM, Balasore to Commissioner, Orissa, 9 August 1931, WWCC-61.133 HPD, Report of DM, Balasore to Commissioner, Orissa, 23 October 1931, WWCC-61.134 Mahatab, History of Freedom Movement in Orissa, Vol. V, p. 14.135 HPD, FNR, Second half of April 1931.136 HPD, Report of DM, Puri to Commissioner, Orissa, 11 June 1931, WWCC-61.137 Quoted in Mahatab, History of Freedom Movement in Orissa, Vol. V, p. 7.138 Quoted in Mahatab, History of Freedom Movement in Orissa, Vol. V, p. 9.


In Cuttack, the Orissa wing of the Hindustani Seva Dal, chris-tened as the Utkal Gopabandhu Sevaka Bahini,139 was launched. It organized a month-long training camp from 6 September. The volunteers—19 men and two women—who graduated from this training camp were called sainiks (soldiers).

The successful experiment of the training camp encouraged the organizers to open new centres of Gopabandhu Sevaka Bahini at other places in Puri, Balasore and Cuttack. On 29 November, a public meeting was organized in Puri where male and female volunteers of Gopabandhu Seva Dal demonstrated foot drill, swordplay, flag hoisting and namaskaras. Two such camps were organized in Puri under the initiative of Acharya Harihar Das.140 This, in fact, caused anxiety to colonial authori-ties, who contemplated drastic action against the activities of the Seva Dal. On 30 December, when the Seva Dal volunteers took out a procession in Puri town, they were served with prohibitory orders. The next day, when the volunteers again marched around in a procession under the stewardship of Bal-sarvar (a member of Hindustani Seva Dal who took charge of a month-long training camp in Orissa from 6 September 1931) and Mahatab, the police obstructed them, snatched away the lathis and arrested Balsarvar.

In Balasore, similar dals (groups) were organized. One such organization was Lal Paik Dal (formed on the lines of the Red Shirt Movement launched by Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan in North-West Frontier Province). The idea was mooted by the Sardar of Balasore, Surendranath Das, and endorsed by Gopabandhu Choudhury.141 The objective of the group was to train the Lal Paiks for preserving peace and order. The Lal Paiks were to offer public services like extinguishing fire, saving people from drowning and helping people during epidemics. They donned red Gandhi caps and red shirts and half-pants. In June 1931, the Lal Paiks numbered about 200 in Balasore district. More

139 HPD, Report of DSP, Cuttack to DM, Cuttack, 9 October 1931; HPD, FNR, First half of October, WWCC-61.140 AICC Papers, F. No. F.1, PCC to AICC, 6 December 1931.141 HPD, “Extract from C.L. Phillips (Commissioner, Orissa), fortnightly DO”, 12 June 1931, 25 June 1931; HPD, “Extract from Confidential Diary of the SP, Balasore”, 22 June 1931.


such units were also opened in other parts of the province. The Cuttack SP’s report in June said, “Congress workers wear red shorts and yellow shirts, white caps and coloured belts, which seems to show that they belong to the Lal Paik Dal organisa-tion.” Commenting on this development, the official report for June observed:

These Red Paik volunteers are evidently meant to run parallel to army organisation of the Government and have been started with the real object of making them stand by the Congress against any power of the country in emergency.142

Reflecting on the increasing pace of formation of “institutions and training camps” in Orissa, an official report went on to say that apart from the ashram at Balasore, there were two camps in the district. In one of the camps, 28 volunteers had been trained. In Cuttack, 27 youngsters were under training, whereas 25 at Kendrapara and 22 at Jajpur were being trained.143

The picketing of wine shops and the campaign for boycot-ting foreign goods also continued. For instance, on 24 March, L.N. Mishra, Bhagirathi Patnaik, Sukha Gonda and others took out an unlicensed procession in Sambalpur town, by beating of drums, carrying national flags and chanting “Gandhi ki jai”, and announced that picketing of foreign cloth shops and wine shops would commence from 25 March.144 Since the organizers of the demonstration had defied the official order by taking out an “unlicensed” procession, they were arrested. The cloth made by the Bengal Nagpur Cotton Mill owned by M/s Shaw Wallace & Co. became a serious target of boycott.145

142 HPD, “Extract from C.L. Phillips (Commissioner, Orissa), DO”, 12 June 1931, 25 June 1931; HPD, “Extract from Confidential Diary of SP, Balasore”, 21 June 1931/22 June 1931. A copy of complaint submitted to Balasore, SI, 5 July 1931, by one P.C. Mohanty, “Extract of Resolution Passed by Anjuman-i-Muhatiz-i-Islam Tanzeem Committee on 24 July 1931”.143 HPD, FNR, First half of December 1931.144 HPD, “Extract from the Dainik Prajatantra, Balasore”, 26 May 1931, ACC-330.145 HPD, “Extract from the Dainik Jajpur”, May 1931, ACC-330. Also see HPD, “Extract from the Dainik Prajatantra, Balasore”, 21 June 1931, ACC-330; HPD, “Extract from The Samaja”, 7 October 1931, ACC-330.


The campaign to boycott Raja chhap cloth, manufactured by the mill, was relatively intense in Cuttack and Balasore. For instance, during November and December, the local godown of the Raja chhap cloth was picketed in Cuttack. The Congress volunteers stopped the carts carrying the clothes to the respec-tive shops from the godown. The leader of the picketing party in Cuttack was Sibachand, a Marwari shopkeeper of the locality with “Congress sympathies”.146 Women volunteers were arrested when they moved about the town holding placards demanding the boycott of Raja chhap clothes.147 Some of the women pick-eters were also jailed. Fines had not been effective in dealing with them since they had no property. A similar trend existed in Balasore. Here, the boycott of the Raja chhap clothes led to the immediate arrest of the picketers on every occasion. The Congress volunteers who had contemplated picketing of Raja chhap cloth at Balasore during Dussehra in October 1931 had to drop the idea as the local agent for this cloth was a Moham-medan and the organizers were afraid that the issue might take a communal turn.148 The campaign against the company was so organized and widespread and the threat was so disturb-ing that it prompted the management of the company to issue a statement that “they were practically an Indian firm, and did not use any foreign yarn either in the body of the cloth or the border”.149 It also pointed out that the mill was “staffed throughout by Indian supervisors and workers including two Assistants”. Further, they sent a representation to Bombay Mill-owners Association, drawing attention to the widespread campaign against their product.150

Through the post-March 1931 period, the leadership protested strongly against any atrocities perpetrated by the police. For example, the Sambalpur DCC registered a complaint to the PCC

146 HPD, “Extracts from C.L. Phillip’s fortnightly DO”, 23 December 1931, ACC-330.147 HPD, “Extracts from C.L. Phillip’s fortnightly DO”, 25 February 1932, ACC-330.148 HPD, “Extracts from C.L. Phillip’s fortnightly DO”, 23 December 1931, ACC-330; HPD, “Extracts from fortnightly DO of DM (Balasore) to Commissioner”, 23 February 1932, ACC-330.149 HPD, “Extract of ‘A Contradiction’ by Bengal Nagpur Cotton Mills Ltd”, ACC-330.150 HPD, “Letter of Managing Agents F. C. Fytte, on behalf of Shaw and Wallace & Co. to Secretary, Bombay Mill-owners Association”, 13 October 1931.


about police excesses vis-à-vis Congress-sponsored activities. In response, Mahatab on behalf of the PCC “ordered a public en-quiry” against the deputy commissioner of police in Sambalpur and asked him to be present. Mahatab, in his letter to the deputy commissioner of police, noted that the alleged high-handedness of the executive authorities was “not compatible with the letter and spirit of Gandhi–Irwin agreement as well as the conduct of Congress workers with reference to the said agreement”.

The authorities reacted by arresting L.N. Mishra, on whose request the enquiry had been proposed. Protesting against the action, he went on a hunger strike in jail. The official comment over the issue was that “Congress still assumes to itself the position of a parallel Government … a position which had been supposedly accorded to Congress leaders by the agreement” (i.e., the Gandhi–Irwin Pact).151

It was proposed that the 46th session of the All India Congress Committee (AICC) be held at Puri in 1932. In view of this, the activities of various volunteer groups were intensified. A total of 160 cadets including 35 women were trained in different centres of Cuttack, Puri and Balasore. It was planned to raise the number to 1,000 by the end of 1931 with the assistance of Hindustan Seva Dal. The PCC also requisitioned Hindi pracha-rakas and teachers from the United Provinces (Uttar Pradesh post independence) and Bihar to teach Hindi to the cadres.152 However, these activities were severely repressed by the authori-ties. Condemning the repression, Mahatab wrote to Vallabhbhai Patel, “The prohibitory orders have created much resentment in the province and these are very humiliating.” He also expressed the urgency and necessity of beginning a defensive CDM in Orissa.153 The proposed AICC session in Orissa was cancelled due to the renewed ban on the Congress organization by the government. However, the PCC had put in a lot of organiza-tional effort in the preparation of the session. It had enrolled volunteers and raised funds. A sum of Rs 80,000 was expected

151 HPD, FNR, First half of June 1931; Mahatab, History of Freedom Movement in Orissa, Vol. V.152 AICC Papers, F. No. F.1, “Gopabandhu Choudhury to AICC”, 25 November 1931.153 AICC Papers, F. No. F.1, “Mahatab to Patel”, 7 December 1931.


to be raised before the session.154 The PCC also declared in No-vember that it would secure admission of untouchables to the temple of Lord Jagannath in the face of stiff opposition from the local panda (priest) community.155 The Puri DCC also proposed to screen off the nude images on the walls of Puri temple and pressed the raja to bear the cost.156

The Civil Disobedience Movement: 1�� Onwards

A fresh phase of CDM was resumed in January 1932 and it persisted till 1934 in the face of the heavy repressive police action resorted to by the colonial authorities. This phase was, as usual, marked by hartals, political meetings, conferences, boycott of foreign cloth, picketing of wine shops, propagation of khaddar, underground ashram activities and circulation of nationalist literature. In the very beginning of this phase, the leaders as well as volunteers were re-arrested. Once again there were efforts to organize the movement in Pharasidinga, the French enclave in Balasore district. The leadership as well as the volunteers had thus gone underground by camping in Pharasidinga and coordinating the movement in the district. Congress volunteers came to Balasore daily in singles in plain clothes for organizing processions and picketing. A large group of such volunteers was dispatched to tour the rural pockets of the district to raise funds and enrol fresh recruits for the move-ment. Women volunteers were also engaged in this drive, mostly in the rural areas. Besides, owners of rice mills raised money from the customers for the Congress fund.157 A cyclostyled leaflet, issued in the name of one Goura Mohan Das, earlier involved in the Srijanga chowkidari tax issue, was released from Pharasidinga and widely circulated in Balasore town.158 The local volunteers were trained in the ashram there and returned to

154 HPD, FNR, Second half of October 1931.155 Mohanty, Oriya Nationalism, p. 103.156 AICC Papers, F. No. F.1, “President AICC to Secretary, PCC”, 14 December 1931.157 AICC Papers, F. No. F.1, “President AICC to Secretary, PCC”, 23 January 1932.158 Ibid.


the spot after their release from the jail. Some “terrorist” activists from Midnapore were also present in the ashram. They went out to the Balasore town to join the volunteers in the campaign of boycott and picketing. The “disturbances” in Balasore town were officially attributed to the activities at Pharasidinga.159 The nationalist newspaper Prajatantra carried appeals of Congress leaders and spelt out programmes and activities of the Congress in its regular editions and distributed them free of cost in the rural areas with a view to building up the momentum of the movement.160 The underground leaders at Pharasidinga stepped up their pamphlet campaign around March to counter the anti-Congress propaganda unleashed by the administration. These pamphlets, which were smuggled into the Balasore town in large quantities, appealed to the people not to take part in execution of warrants for realization of fines imposed on political prison-ers. One such pamphlet from a series titled Ranabheri published details of the progress of the movement in Balasore town and prompted people to take revenge and to join the CDM.161

Under the overall direction from Pharasidinga, the picketing of shops continued in the district.162 The ashramites of Pharasidinga celebrated the beginning of the salt campaign on 12 March by collecting bags of contraband salt and attempting to take out processions in the streets of Balasore town.163 However, many of the volunteers were arrested while organizing the meeting. The ashram at Pharasidinga got a facelift with the construction of a new building around the courtyard to avoid any detection by the police about the activities of the ashramites.164 The Sardar of Balasore, Surendranath Das, who camped in Pharasidinga, coordinated the CDM by giving necessary directives. He con-tinued publishing cyclostyled bulletins titled Ranabheri from Pharasidinga, exhorting people to take to the movement. They also gave extensive coverage to the police brutalities in the district. People from Balasore district extended food and shelter to the inmates of Pharasidinga Ashram. Subhadra Devi, wife of

159 WWCC, FNR, 23 January 1932, ACC-61.160 Ibid.161 Ibid., 9 March 1932.162 Ibid., 23 January 1932.163 Ibid., 23 March 1932, 23 April 1932, 23 May 1932, 23 July 1932.164 Ibid., 23 March 1932.


Mahatab, and a few female relatives of the Sardar were arrested while secretly carrying food to the ashramites.165

The movement in varied forms picked up in Balasore under the guidance of the underground leadership as well as innovative planning at the local/rural levels. On 18 March, when a political prisoner of Bhimpur (the village of Sardar) died in the Balasore sub-jail from a severe attack of cerebral malaria, the Congress volunteers demanded the jail authorities that the dead body be handed over to them to be taken in a procession. But the demand was turned down.166 Due to the relative inaccessibility of Baliapal, the movement assumed vigorous momentum there.167 Here, as in many rural parts, the Congress propaganda was vigorous. An armed police party was sent to Baliapal to arrest the local lead-ers as well as the absconders. The police party was approached by a kumbhar (maker of earthen pots) named Ananda seeking remission of rent. He complained that some men of Manikum in Balasore had boycotted his annual supply of earthen pots due to the campaign of Congress volunteers against him as he was siding with the government.168 Around April, the official report referred to a “tendency” in the saline tracts of Baliapal police station “to abuse the concessions granted by Government” by trading in salt with the inhabitants of non-saline areas under the overall supervision of Congress volunteers.169

Similarly, in north Balasore, particularly in the jurisdiction of Jaleswar police station, Congress activities gained momentum around October 1932. The volunteers in this area picketed shops selling foreign cloth and went to the extent of resisting arrest.170 During the Dussehra festival, some volunteers snatched away clothes from the shops and threw them in the streets. This ac-tion of the volunteers was objected to by the Muslim workers, who assaulted the volunteers. It is important to note that many volunteers from Midnapore (near north Balasore) joined the local volunteers in organizing the movement. The popular sympathy

165 Ibid., 23 August 1932.166 Ibid., 23 March 1932.167 Ibid.168 Ibid., 23 April 1932.169 Ibid.170 Ibid., 9 October 1932.


for volunteers in this area was such that in some cases people assaulted the chowkidars and the constables and forcibly rescued the arrested volunteers.171 The volunteers were often sheltered in the village temples and fed by the shopkeepers.

The movement in the locality assumed such strength that it necessitated a flag march by the army. The campaign and the pace of the movement shifted to the rural areas and particularly to the saline tracts of the Balasore district around May 1932. Thus, Bhogarai, Baliapal, Remuna, Bhimpur, Singla, Jaleswar and Soro remained fairly active in carrying forward the struggle. During May, the villagers of Bhimpur raised a protest over the seizure and removal of the house property of the Sardar, who had camped in Pharasidinga.172 Around August, Congress vol-unteers attempted to recapture the Bhimpur Ashram, already seized by the authorities, and tried to hoist the national flag over the court building of Bhadrak. In the latter case, the students of Bhadrak High School had also joined in. This led to quite a few arrests, including rustication and fining of the students. Interestingly, the volunteers who had engineered the incidents were all below 15 years of age.173 Volunteers from other parts like Bhadrak and Baliapal went to Remuna for picketing the shops there. The volunteers also raised subscription from the cloth merchants and enrolled new recruits for the movement.174 On 15 August, two men and six women volunteers attempted to recapture the Nari Ashram of Balasore. When the police tried to arrest them, the women inmates offered resistance and this necessitated the appointment of tribal women to forcibly remove them.175 An official report in September claimed that Congress volunteers were displaying “disorderly tendency” in tearing the uniform of the constables who arrested them.176 Another report stated that the “looting of foreign cloth shops as well as throw-ing stones on police officials” was “gaining ground among the Congress volunteers”.177 We also come across evidence of the

171 Ibid., 9 December 1932.172 Ibid., 9 May 1932.173 Ibid., 9 August 1932.174 Ibid., 23 June 1932.175 Ibid., 23 August 1932.176 Ibid., 9 September 1932.177 Ibid., 22 September 1932.


building up of an underground ashram at Nuapur. Here, some volunteers built a secret headquarters using bushes as shelter. The raid by the police on the secret ashram yielded Congress flags, a large stock of food as well as reams of paper.178 There is also a reference to the beating up of a police informer by the residents in Manikum of Balasore town.179 Thus, the movement was kept significantly alive at the local levels by a vigorous drive of leaflets and pamphlets issued by the underground leadership in Pharasidinga and other places. Many leaflets were also smuggled from Midnapore to Balasore and extensively circulated in North Balasore, bordering Bengal.

We have already observed that how Ranabheri continued to be issued from Pharasidinga by Surendranath Das, detailing police atrocities on volunteers as well as carrying instructions to organize the movement in different forms. Around October, Ranabheri advised the people to destroy British goods instead of boycotting them.180 It also exhorted the volunteers to vio-lently resist and fight the police while facing arrest.181 There is a reference to the prosecution of a “fairly well-to-do resident of Manikum in Balasore town for acting as a secret “post office” in receiving and distributing secret consignments of unauthor-ised news sheets” (perhaps Ranabheri).182 At Remuna, copies of leaflets were kept secretly in the hollow trunk of a tree to avoid detection by the police. The villages collected the copies from there.183 Similarly, in Bhogarai, a leaflet carrying a threat to an SI was found pasted on a tree.184

An important aspect of the sustenance of the movement at the popular level in Balasore was the support extended by the Midnapore Congress through a regular supply of volunteers to assist and reinforce the cadres of the volunteers in Balasore. In a way, this also gave a violent tinge to the campaign.185 In fact, a large number of volunteers from Contai (Bengal) came

178 Ibid., 23 October 1932.179 Ibid., 9 December 1932.180 Ibid., 22 December 1932.181 Ibid., 9 November 1932.182 Ibid., 22 November 1932.183 Ibid., 23 October 1932.184 Ibid.185 Ibid.


to picket the drug shops at Jaleswar as early as April 1932. This gave an added momentum to the movement.186 The increasing pace of the movement at Midnapore affected the usual supply of foreign sugar and kerosene to north Balasore. This resulted in shortage in areas like Bhogarai.187

With the release of Mahatab in July,188 the movement again registered an upward swing. Mahatab not only engaged himself in the anti-untouchability movement but also got into regular touch with the underground leadership at Pharasidinga. With his release, the picketing of foreign shops picked up momen-tum. We have a reference to the release of “lithographed letters, printed and published at the Revolution Bulletin press, signed by Subhadra Mahatab” in July. These letters were sent to police officers and magistrates of Balasore. The letters urged these of-ficials to give up their jobs and “side with Congress”.189 Copies of Congress notices were pasted on the compound wall of Balasore police station in December 1932.190 The notice appealed to the people to boycott British goods. A “procession of boys” came out in Balasore town with flags and placards carrying this notice. The boys were detained at the police station and one Kali Das Bhutik Gandhi was prosecuted for organizing the procession. The vigorous campaign by volunteers had a noticeable effect. For instance, around December, an official report admitted that foreign sugar and red kerosene were still scarce. It also added that India-made cloth was gradually driving out “foreign made cloth from the market”.191 Another report in August admitted that the decrease in sale of foreign goods was due to economic depression and the reluctance of the people to buy foreign goods as an indirect result of continued Congress activities.192 The volunteers also organized many processions for observance of various “days”. For example, while observing the death an-niversary of Motilal Nehru, a group of volunteers attempted to take out a procession and throw acid on the foreign cloth stalls

186 Ibid., 9 April 1932.187 Ibid., 9 November 1932.188 Ibid., 7 July 1932.189 Ibid.190 Ibid., 22 December 1932.191 Ibid.192 Ibid., 9 August 1932.


in Balasore town.193 However, the police successfully foiled their attempt. Again, a “procession of children” marched on to Balasore jail for the observance of “Prisoners Day” during 3 and 4 July. On reaching the jail, a boy tried to hoist a Congress flag on the court building. He was arrested. Undeterred, another boy came forward who tried to deliver a letter issued by the “Dictator of the Balasore War Council” to the sub-divisional officer (SDO) to close his court and resign his job. He was also arrested.194

Similarly, “Flag Day” and “Gandhi Day” were enthusiastically observed in many parts of the district. During the “Gandhi Day” celebrations, a huge crowd took out a procession in Bhadrak, making it difficult for the police to control and disperse it.195 Gandhi’s arrest on 4 April 1932 evoked massive popular protest throughout the district and many of the participants in the proces-sion on that day were children.196 During the observance of the “Flag Day”, “Ordinance Day”, and “Gandhi Day”, the authorities resorted to massive arrests of leaders and volunteers.197

As indicated earlier, the volunteers received financial help from the business community and rich people of the district. At places, even zamindars joined picketing of shops. In November 1932, an official report said “Congress volunteers seem to be well fed and well clothed which indicates that they must still be receiving a fair amount of secret sympathy and support from the general public.”198

Another important aspect of the movement was the campaign against untouchability. Mahatab, after his release from jail in April, devoted special attention to the issue. He visited many areas of the district and organized meetings on the issue. In a meeting at Bhadrak, he advocated the idea of allowing the depressed classes to the inner sanctum.199 During October, Ma-hatab led a group of outcastes to his temple and made them touch the idols, but he had to face the boycott of his family by orthodox Hindu elements.200 Under his initiative, a night school

193 Ibid., 22 November 1932.194 Ibid., 7 July 1932.195 Ibid., 9 March 1932.196 Ibid., 9 April 1932.197 Ibid., 8 June 1932.198 Ibid., 22 November 1932.199 Ibid., 9 October 1932.200 Ibid., 23 October 1932.


for outcastes came to function in Bonth area.201 On 18 December, two sankirtan parties moved around Balasore town and a meet-ing was organized where the high caste Hindus did the work of “untouchables” to encourage the latter.202

The other significant development of the movement was an increasing participation of the school teachers and district board contractors.203 In a report focusing on the “part played by school teachers in CDM”, the district inspector of schools wrote to the DM that school teachers were joining the Congress and also instigating others to join the CDM. Through their in-fluence, he pointed out, even female volunteers were enrolled and villagers were joining the CDM. Some teachers left their jobs without intimation to the sub-inspector of schools. On the instigation of one Nilambar Das of Soro, two young teachers left their work to take part in Congress activities.204 Another report by SDO of Bhadrak pointed out that as the local board and district board were dominated by the Congress, it was not always possible to take action against the teachers appointed in board-aided schools.205 In fact, in a case relating to the dismissal of Baburam Dutta, Headmaster, Jogai UP School, Baliapal, the DM of Balasore observed in October 1932 that the headmaster had carried on “propaganda in furtherance of CDM” by hold-ing a meeting on 28 February 1932 in the local girls’ school and distributing Congress leaflets. The DM went on to comment that the headmaster was one of those secret workers of the coastal area of Baliapal thana who were responsible for the increased Congress movement in that inaccessible area in previous Feb-ruary and March. Many of the Congress workers at that time were teachers of the district board schools, while contractors under the district board thought that they could safely indulge in Congress activity in view of the Swaraj District Board and gain the approbation of the chairman and vice-chairman, who had Congress sympathies. The DM, while rejecting the petition of the headmaster for reinstatement in service, noted that the

201 Ibid., 22 November 1932.202 Ibid., 22 December 1932.203 Ibid., 23 March 1932.204 HPD, “Letter of District Inspector (DI), Schools, Balasore to DM, Balasore”, Letter No. 28-C, 28 May 1932, WWCC-61.205 HPD, “Letter of SDO, Bhadrak to DM, Balasore”, 9 July 1932, WWCC-61.


headmaster was “unreliable and should not be allowed to come in touch with the school boys or regain his former position of influence … He has made no efforts so far to help us in check-ing the CDM.”206

If the prosecution of persons is an index of the intensity of the movement, then 1,294 persons were prosecuted in Balasore in connection with CDM. Besides, many more were absconding or had gone underground. Characterizing the nature of local leaders who were in the forefront of the struggle in Balasore during this phase of CDM, an official report observed that pro-cessions and meetings were held with dominant participation of women and boys, and all these were deliberately and skilfully organized by the leaders who were still at large and remained in the background. The main object of the movement, the report pointed out, was to gain sympathy of the general public by provoking clashes with the police and also by women and boys courting arrest in large numbers. The conviction of even a few volunteers in each demonstration also led to a rapid increase in the number of prisoners. The report further warned that if the campaign continued as such, jail accommodation would become a problem.207

The overall swadeshi spirit in terms of boycott of foreign clothes and picketing of excise shops remained distinctly domi-nant trends of the movement throughout this phase in other districts also. The campaign for boycott of Raja chhap cloth, a trend continuing since 1931, was intensified in 1932. Leaflets, circulated both in Cuttack and Balasore, gave a list of articles indicating Indian and foreign brands and appealed to people to “buy Indian”.208 The agents for Raja chhap cloth were asked to seal their stocks.209 The picketers adopted the method of pick-ing up foreign clothes from a shop on the pretext of examin-ing them and then throwing them in the mud.210 As late as in March 1933, we have a reference to the upsetting of a cartload

206 Board of Revenue Records, “DM’s (Balasore) letter to Commissioner, Orissa”, 2 October 1932, Sl No. 145.207 HPD, FNR, Second half of January 1932.208 HPD, FNR, First half of March 1932.209 HPD, FNR, First half of September 1932.210 Ibid.


of foreign clothes in Cuttack by seven Congress volunteers.211 As observed earlier, the sale of foreign clothes remained acutely poor. The India League Delegation which went round the prov-ince to watch the important centres of boycott and picketing noted with admiration the method adopted by the satyagrahis to block the movement of British cloth (carried through carts) by lying down on the streets. The delegation noted with surprise that even though the satyagrahis resisted the Marwari business community (the dominant community of cloth merchants), the community vehemently condemned the atrocities perpetrated on the satyagrahis.212

Boycotting post offices, mostly organized by school students, was another trend.213 In certain cases, postboxes were damaged by “acid, spirit and smoldering tobacco” during the Postal Week Observation (May 1932) in Cuttack and Balasore.214 Volunteers also picketed excise shops in the haats. On 5 August, while picketing the Bargarh haat, four volunteers were arrested. A procession followed the arrested picketers after a serious lathi charge. The arrest of picketers resulted in a “steady stream of arrests”.215 In Cuttack, a “Cuttack District War Council” was founded in July. The “raiders” occupied the chairs and dais and destroyed official papers amidst shouting of slogans.216 On 18 July, another batch of eight satyagrahis entered the DM’s court and demanded that the charges of administration be handed over to them. Official records were also destroyed.217 On 23 July, a group of volunteers attempted to reoccupy the Congress ashram at Cuttack seized by the administration.218 The police dispersed the volunteers and in the scuffle that ensued 11 volunteers sustained injury. Next day, the attempt was repeated but the police arrested the volunteers.219 A batch of satyagrahis in Cuttack served a notice on the magistrate that they would capture the Cuttack Swaraj

211 HPD, FNR, Second half of March 1933.212 Cited in Patnaik, Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Itihasa, p. 111.213 Mahatab, History of Freedom Movement in Orissa, Vol. V, p. 18.214 HPD, FNR, Second half of May 1932.215 HPD, FNR, First half of September 1932.216 HPD, FNR, Second half of July 1932.217 Ibid. 218 Ibid.219 HPD, FNR, Second half of July 1932.


Ashram.220 Thus, they came to picket the ashram on 23 July but they were severely lathi-charged. Undeterred, fresh batches of satyagrahis continued to picket the ashram for five consecu-tive days. The police atrocities and large-scale arrests of the volunteers were strongly resented by the people of the town. A protest meeting was organized on 27 July to condemn the police action. Meanwhile, the collector instructed the police to stop arresting the satyagrahis, and lifted the ban under Section 144 imposed in the area near the ashram. Mr Singhasharma, the collector, who had showed sympathy to the satyagrahis, was immediately transferred from Cuttack. The protest meeting or-ganized under the presidentship of Banabehari Palit, a pleader and zamindar of Cuttack, demanded an immediate enquiry into the incident of lathi charge on volunteers at the Swaraj Ashram by the police.221

As observed earlier, one of the remarkable aspects of the movement was the campaign undertaken through pamphlets, leaflets, bulletins and wall writings. Pharasidinga remained one of the major sites for publication of much of the national-ist literature. We have already mentioned the role of Ranabheri news bulletins, issued from Pharasidinga, carrying appeals and instructions to the people to carry forward the movement. The nationalist poet Birakishore Das authored two brilliant pieces in the form of booklets during this phase. The concluding lines of a long poem of the booklet, titled “Rana”, would translate as follows:

Two lakh of white men will be blown into the sky by the breath of 35 crore of men. Let the flame of destruction blow fiercely in the country. Let fetters and handcuffs come, let aeroplanes, guns, poison-ous balls, canons be brought. The nation will present its breast with the courage of lions. Let terrible oppression come and destroy the country. Let death come and let gallows come with all their might. May the nation attain freedom by sacrificing itself.222

These booklets, secretly printed in thousands, were sold and distributed in many parts of the province. Another popular

220 Patnaik, Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Itihasa, pp. 108–11.221 HPD, “Resolution of Public Meeting Held at Cuttack on 27 July 1932”, ACC-482.


poem was “Swaraj Taranga” authored by Kasinath Barik, and printed at the Prajatantra Press, Balasore.223

Pamphlets remained a very popular form of agitation and protest. According to an official report, nearly 10,000 copies of Ranabheri had been seized by the police towards the end of 1932.224 It is interesting to note that to avoid heavy vigilance by the Brit-ish police, the bulletins/leaflets were smuggled to the townships of Cuttack and Balasore by mango-sellers and grass-sellers. In Cuttack, the girls of an orphanage helped in the circulation of bulletins under the guidance of their headmaster.225

However, the movement in this phase, as before, was severely repressed by large-scale arrests and prosecution. The leadership as well as cadres and volunteers were arrested while celebrating various days, organizing meetings or taking out processions. For instance, the attempt to hold the meeting of the PCC on 12 June to re-affirm the Delhi Resolution was prevented by a large-scale arrest of the top leaders. Followed by this, the members of the Puri DCC were severely lathi-charged in one of the meetings on 18 June.226 In Balasore, volunteers were arrested in large numbers during organization of processions, meetings and cel-ebrations of the days. Ranabheri continued to focus on the police atrocities in the district. Around September, during the visit of the India League Delegation to Orissa, the league was shown evidence of the police excesses resorted to in many instances. Mahatab accompanied Miss Whitley of the league during this visit to Orissa. Miss Whitley refused to talk with the officials after listening to the reports of the police terror perpetrated on the satyagrahis and the Congress organization.227 In its bid to thwart the momentum of the movement, the authorities seized many vital Congress ashrams and Congress offices of the dis-tricts, including the rural branches.228

222 HPD, Rana Dunduvi (booklet), Calcutta, 1932.223 Kasinath Barik, “Swaraj Taranga” (pamphlet), Balasore, 1 January 1932.224 HPD, FNR, Second half of December 1932.225 Patnaik, Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Itihasa, p. 104.226 HPD, FNR, First half of June 1932.227 HPD, FNR, Second half of September 1932. Also see: Extracts from Desakatha, 26 April 1932, 1 May 1932; The Advance, Calcutta, 25 October 1932.228 HPD, “List of Congress Ashrams Seized”, F. No. 127/1932. The ashrams included: Cuttack: Swaraj Ashram (Cuttack), Alaka Ashram (Jagatsinghpur),


Constructive Activities

The movement showed signs of petering out by early 1933. The underground activities organized from Pharasidinga headquar-ters in Balasore slowed down with the arrest of its major leader Surendranath Das in February 1933. However, this slowdown was substituted by a fair degree of hectic constructive activities in terms of anti-untouchability campaign, propagation of khadi and setting up of ashrams. Mahatab revived the Gandhi Karma Mandir at his village Agarpara to popularize khadi activities.229 A Gandhian, Jivaramji Kalyanji, established a khadi organization at Bhadrak and propagated spinning. Iswarilal Vyas and Puru Bai, a couple of other veteran Gandhian workers, assisted in its organization. Vyas donated Rs 1 lakh to the PCC for khadi work.230 Gopabandhu Choudhury founded a khadi organization at Bari. Rama Devi, Shobha Devi and Susila Devi along with Binod Kanungo and Surendranath Patnaik actively helped in organizing the centre.231

Harijan Day was observed in Cuttack under the presidentship of Mr Andrews on 4 September 1932. The meeting demanded the scrapping of the separate electorate system for the Harijans and wanted reservation of 29 seats for them instead of seven as provided in the official scheme.232 The Harijan Sevak Sangh of Orissa was formed in 1933 under the initiative of Balunkeshwar Acharya, Rama Devi, Lakshmi Narayan Sahu and others.233 As observed earlier, Mahatab had involved himself with Harijan work; he had even allowed entry of Harijans to his own temple at Agarpara. The anti-untouchability campaign was mostly taken up by the released Congress leaders. Funds were raised to finance the campaign.234

Balikuda Ashram (Jagatsinghpur); Puri: Puri Swaraj Ashram, Puri Congress Committee Office, Congress Reception Committee Office, Kadua Ashram, Sakshigopal; Balasore: Nari Ashram (Gopalganj), Basta Ashram, Bhimpur Ashram, Prajatantra Press Building; Sambalpur: Bargarh Congress Office.229 Patnaik, Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Itihasa, pp. 119–131.230 Ibid.231 Ibid.232 HPD, FNR, First half of September 1932.233 Patnaik, Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Itihasa, p. 114.234 HPD, FNR, Second half of April 1933.


The campaign assumed serious proportions in Puri, as there was a ban on the entry of Harijans into the temple of Lord Jagan-nath. The raja of Puri expelled some pandas and fined others for their sympathy with the anti-untouchability movement.235 The reaction to the anti-untouchability campaign was manifested through the formation of an association by the rajas of Puri and Sonepur for the purpose of opposing “any legislation that does away with untouchability”.236

Around this period, Gopabandhu Choudhury retired from ac-tive Congress politics and opted for constructive activities. Due to his vigorous and consistent efforts, khadi institutions came to be established in many rural areas like Barang, Aul, Erasama (Cuttack district), Delanga (Puri district), Bhandari Pokhari and Jaleswar (Balasore district).237 The heightened campaign over anti-untouchability had an electrifying effect. The sweepers of Cuttack Municipality assembled in a meeting on 12 August and “took oath” to stop work until their grievances were redressed. The demands they put forth were:238

(a) The pay cut by Re 1 per month must be given back to them.

(b) Houses should be allotted for each of the female sweep-ers.

(c) Dismissed hands must be reinstated. (d) Sweepers were not to be engaged as coolies.

On 13 August, under the “instigation of some non-cooperators”, they picketed the municipality and prevented the sweepers from joining work. Fifteen of them were arrested, followed by another nine on 14 August. A large crowd of strikers followed the arrested sweepers to the thana. On 14 August, sweepers went to the thana in large batches to “watch further proceed-ings against their leaders”. Bhabagrahi Pati, a local Congress leader, and Nagendra Narayan Rai, a pleader and former edi-tor of Deshakatha, continued to exhort the sweepers to be firm

235 HPD, FNR, Second half of July 1933.236 HPD, FNR, First half of May 1933.237 Patnaik, Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Itihasa, pp. 130–131.238 HPD, SP’s Report on Sweepers’ Strike in Cuttack, 14 August 1932, ACC-373.


and continue with the strike. Private sweepers also joined the strike. In response, the authorities, in an emergency meeting on 14 August, decided to grant a pay hike of 10 annas for female sweepers and 8 annas for male sweepers per month. They also announced the withdrawal of the cases against the sweepers and appointed a seven-member sub-committee to consider their other grievances. The sweepers called off the agitation with the warning that they would resume the strike after a week if their other grievances were not redressed.

At this stage, Gandhi’s “Orissa Walk” from 5 to 9 May 1934 helped intensify the anti-untouchability campaign. During Gandhi’s tour, meetings were organized throughout the province to greet him, where he advised people to concentrate on village reconstruction programme and Harijan uplift along with pro-motion of khadi. Refuting the notion that the suspension of the CDM and the subsequent resort to reform activities amounted to a defeatist position, he observed in a meeting at Balasore,239 “If a commander, while moving at the thick of the battle faces a river or mountain, he takes some time to cross it; how it can be said that the commander has got defeated?” Explaining the purpose of constructive activities he said, “It is a vital part of the total programme for complete independence as it helps in shaping the political consciousness.” Citing an example, he said, “If a lion comes to stay with a herd of sheep, then the sheep would come to imbibe the fearlessness of the lion.”

Youth participation in both the phases of the CDM, as has been observed earlier, remained at a significant level. We can make a few observations here. Many of the students who had left school during the early 1930s and were steeled through salt politics became hardcore nationalists, socialists or communists in their later life. When the movement seemed to be leaderless, the vacuum was filled by the youth leadership in the shape of volunteers, picketers or leaflet/pamphlet circulators.

A special feature of the CDM during its various stages was the active and increased participation of women. In fact, the PCC was headed by Rama Devi in 1930. Thus, a remarkable political consciousness came to be built up among both urban and rural women owing to the growing spirit of anti-colonialism.

239 Patnaik, Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Itihasa, pp. 130–31.


The Movement and Tribal Consciousness

Attempts were made by the nationalist leaders to organize the tribals of the hilly tracts around their existing grievances such as bethi (forced labour), oppressive forest laws and the exploitation carried out by the muttahdars. In the course of the CDM, popular protest along these lines was brought into focus. For instance, in Koraput, Radhakrishna Biswasray resigned his government job and participated in the Salt Satyagraha. Biswasray enrolled 500 Congress members in Koraput. A batch of satyagrahis also joined in for a salt campaign under his leadership.240 On 19 August 1930, a huge gathering of 5,000 people assembled at Jeypore to protest against Biswasray’s internment. But the police dispersed the crowd by lathi-charging them. Biswasray was interned on the grounds that he had organized the Congress committee in the “Vizagpatnam Agency”, which meant disturbing the “country world”.241 Similarly, the Kandhas (members of an ethnic tribe) of Kalyansinghpur confronted the police when the latter issued warrants on their refusing to pay kists (instalments) to the Raja of Jeypore.242

We also have a reference to one Narasingha Sahu, who ac-tively organized the Kandhas in the Bissemcuttack taluk. The headquarters of his organization centred around Kudipi and the neighbouring villages. He even took out a procession of the Kandhas. The police prohibited him from addressing any meeting and served orders accordingly. In reply, he waved a Congress flag and stated that he took orders only from “his Government” (meaning Gandhi). However, while the police tried to arrest him, he left for Parvatipur. Later, he again came back to the agency and continued to mobilize the tribals on popular issues. He preached Gandhian constructive activities by cultivating cotton and establishing a khaddar shop. How-ever, the authorities seemed determined to banish him from the tribal tract.243

240 S.S. De, Who’s Who of Freedom Fighters in Orissa (Koraput, Ganjam Baud-Phulbani Districts), Cuttack, 1969.241 AICC Papers, “New Settlement Papers”, F. No. T-11.242 HPD, F. No. F5/41/31.243 HPD, “Detention of Narasingha Sahu of Jeypore, Subudhi Patro of Luhagudi under the Ganjam and Vizagapatnam Act”, F. No. 36/VI/1930, 1929.


We have yet another reference to the grabbing of inam lands (lands given as gifts), held by an affluent muttahdar named Gangadhara Patro, by Subudhi Patro in Luhagudi. The authori-ties deported Patro from the agency.244

Patro was also involved

in the mobilization of Kandhas. There is also reference to the wandering of one Kabi Hari Das, a Paika (feudal warrior) who claimed spirituality. He had religious appeal and mobilized the people of Parvatipur of the Vizagpatnam Agency.245 The authorities tried to arrest him but he escaped only to reappear in Narainpatna in June 1931. This time too the authorities made an abortive attempt to arrest him. Hari Das, meanwhile, had already acquired considerable tribal following and was also given support by the people of a village called Garidi, namely Konkoda Domboru Naiko, Jaisingh Lakhono Naiko, Balram Sondhi, Kadraka Chachri Bisamjji and others. While these people were planning to organize a minor rebellion around September 1932, Hari Das and some others were arrested. They were released four years later in 1936. Some activists managed to escape into British Orissa.246 In short, the colonial policy was to stop any kind of Congress activities in these areas that might disturb the status quo of administrative relationship between the tribals and the government. Thus, intense repression was carried out to curb any attempt at tribal mobilization. However, the course of the CDM had brought about the politicization of tribals in the nationalist channel.

244 Ibid. 245 R.C.S. Bell, Orissa District Gazetteers—Koraput, Cuttack, 1945.246 HPD, F. No. 44/55/1936.

The post-Civil Disobedience phase marked the strengthening of the Left movement in Orissa. The crystallization of the Left trend within the Congress movement also helped activate the peasant and tribal movements. Following the formation of the Congress Socialist Party (CSP hereafter) in Gaya in May 1934, the Orissa unit of the CSP was formed on 5 June 1934.1 The prominent activists of this unit were Prananath Patnaik, Nabak-rushna Choudhury, Malati Choudhury, Bhagabati Panigrahi and Surendra Dwivedi. Prananath Patnaik and Sarat Patnaik went to Benares to study at Kashi Vidyapith after the Gandhi–Irwin Pact (1931). Guru Charan Patnaik also joined the Kashi Vidyapith in 1934. The Kashi Vidyapith offered a platform to learn about various perspectives ranging from Gandhism to communism and terrorism. Many prominent nationalists like Narendra Dev, Joglekar and Lal Bahadur Shastri would give lectures on various subjects. Those young activists, who had steeled themselves in the heat of the Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM), had been initiated to the Marxist ideology in the Vidyapith. They also formed a group called Young Communist League in Benares itself.2 With the formation of the CSP, a weekly newspaper called

Two

Structuring of the Left

1 Gokul Mohan Raychudamani, “Odishare Communist Partyra Janma”, in Prananath Patnaik, ed., Odishare Communist Partyra Janma (Oriya), Cuttack, 1985, pp. 24–25.2 Interview with Sarat Patnaik. Patnaik, Odishare Communist Partyra Abhyudaya, pp. 4–5.


Sarathi was brought out. Edited by Nabakrushna Choudhury, it had a broad socialist perspective and basically intended to politicize and unite the peasantry and working class. Two to three workers of the Sarathi Press were the first in Cuttack town to go round in a procession holding placards to solemnize May Day in 1933.3

The socialists also started publishing a weekly journal named Krushak (“Peasant”) in 1938. This journal championed the cause of peasants and offered a direction to the peasant movement of the province. In March 1939, the Krushak had a circulation of around 2,000 copies. Its perspective was that of a non-violent anti-imperialist struggle to attain purna swaraj under the ban-ner of the Congress movement. It sought to mobilize peasants on those lines. Malati Choudhury, Sarangadhar Das, Bhagabati Charan Panigrahi and Surendra Nath Dwivedi were involved in the editing of this journal.4

Alongside these developments, a group of students of Raven-shaw College got together and floated a literary-cum-cultural forum in November 1935.5 The forum was styled Nabajuga Sahitya Sansad and had eight members. The initiative for the organization of such a forum came from Ananta Charan Patnaik and Bhagabati Charan Panigrahi. The objective of the organiza-tion was to “disseminate progressive, revolutionary and radical ideas” among the associates of the forum. The forum marked the germination and spread of the communist movement in Orissa. The Nabajuga forum, in its bid to initiate the trend of mass literature in Orissa, started publishing literary supple-ments. Rakta Sikha (“Flame of Blood”), a booklet released by the forum in 1939, explained the objective of the forum in its preface as follows:6

However, S. Dwivedi, in his book Quest for Socialism: Fifty Years of Struggle in India, New Delhi, 1984, contends that the Utkal Samyavadi Sangha (Utkal Socialist Workers Association) got formed around 1933, after the withdrawal of CDM.3 S. Dwivedi, Quest for Socialism: Fifty Years of Struggle in India, New Delhi, 1984, pp. 29–30.4 Krushak, 25 November 1939; Home Political Department (HPD), S. Dwivedi to B. Das (Prime Minister, henceforth PM), 24 March 1939, ACC-1122.5 HPD, “A Note on Youth Movement in Orissa up to 1.1.1938”, Report by IG of Police, Orissa to Chief Secretary, 17 January 1938, ACC-893.6 Guru Charan Patnaik, ed., Rakta Sikha (Oriya booklet), Cuttack, 1939.


The mass movement in Orissa is spreading very fast. But, it is a pity that mass literature has not been able to keep pace with the mass movement. Rather, it has lagged behind. There is a need to have a distinct perspective to guide any mass movement in a proper direction. Keeping this in view, the Nabajuga literary volumes have been created. These volumes will bring the message of the New Age to all the anti-imperialist forces and help the latter to clear their perspectives about the struggle.

With distinct communist overtones, Rakta Sikha contained several poems by young communists like Ananta Charan Patnaik and Sachi Routray. For instance, one of the poems exhorted: “Oh! Proletariat! March on to achieve socialism, and shed your blood smilingly under the banner of Red flag.” In another poem, named “Sarbahara” (“Proletariat”), Ananta Charan Patnaik wrote: “We will take our due, labourer community, we will bring the bloody morning after killing the dark nights.”

Similarly, Sachi Routray, in his poem “Ame Manishara Yuga Anibu” (“We will Bring About the Age of Man”) wrote: “... Crores of minds are agitated, crores of fists are raised up, the peasants and labourers are conscious, they will bring the Age of Man”. Eulogizing the Russian Revolution, he wrote in his poem “Biplabara Janmadine” (“The Birthday of the Revolution”):

Bring your Red soldiers, Fly the bloody flag,Sharpen your weapons on the skeleton of oppression,Forget your sympathy, forgiveness; be strong,Play with bullets, it is very enjoyable.

Under the aegis of the forum, Bhagabati Charan Panigrahi edited a monthly journal called Adhunika (“The Modern”).7 The forum also sought linkage with the All India Progressive Writers’ Association. Nehru, during his visit to Orissa in 1936, addressed the forum. By 1937, the membership of the Nabajuga association had increased and it included many student activists of Ravenshaw College such as Sachi Routray, Bijoy Chandra Das, Biswanath Pashayat and Nilamani Routray. Besides, the forum also started exerting influence on the All Utkal Students’

7 Ibid. The monthly circulation of Adhunika stood at 250 in 1935. However, Ad-hunika merged into a fortnightly, Pragati (“Development”), in 1936.


Conference. The latter, which had hitherto worked with its basic objective of encouraging scholastic and athletic activities among students, shifted its focus to the arousal of political consciousness in the youth of the province under the impact of the Nabajuga activists. The communist trend under the banner of Nabajuga as well as Orissa Students’ Conference became more vocal around 1937. For example, protesting against the treatment meted out to political prisoners in Andaman, Ananta Charan Patnaik, in a meeting at Cuttack (22 August 1937), observed that Gandhism had dampened the spirit of the youths, otherwise they would have by now done what the students of Spain and Japan were doing. He also maintained that unless there were shooting and bloodshed, a country could not attain freedom. So he exhorted students to learn handling arms. He called upon them to create such a situation that the Congress ministry would be forced to resign.8

Ravenshaw College became the hotbed of preaching of Com-munist ideology.9 An official enquiry about the communists and the communist literature in the province reported in October 1935:10

Several issues of the National Front publication have been found in Orissa … The publication is subscribed by about 36 persons … Re-garding the political views of persons like Ananta Charan Patnaik, Biswanath Pashayat, Bijoy Chandra Das, Ashok Das, Baidyanath Rath … they are all close associates and that they more or less share the same opinions. Ashok Das could probably be more cor-rectly described as a revolutionary of Jugantar views. Even so, the difference is not of great value. The leader of the group is Bhagabati Charan Panigrahi assisted by Ananta Charan Patnaik. Ananta is known to be in frequent correspondence with P. C. Joshi, the well-known communist of Bombay, who sends him typed propaganda literature for dissemination in Orissa. Ananta is the local agent for the National Front and supplies the paper with information about agitation in the state.

With respect to Ananta Charan Patnaik, perusal of some of his reported speeches shows his continual opposition to the

8 Ibid.9 For example, refer to Desakatha, 29 July 1938.10 HPD, “Extract from Secret Letter from I.G. Police, Orissa:, 1 May 1939, ACC-1156.


capitalists and the fact that he included among those capitalists the “present Hon’ble Ministers” was clear proof that his views were far more “Left” than those of the average socialists. Messers Bhargava and Massani did not believe him to be a socialist, the former actually calling him a “Red” and the other asking him “point blank [sic]” whether he was not a communist.

The distancing between the socialists and communists became sharp around 1938. In fact, in a discussion with Satindranath Guha (ex-detenue, that is, former political prisoner; from Ben-gal) in May 1939, Baidyanath Rath had pointed out that Naba-krushna Choudhury (CSP) had “recently” become inactive and therefore they were trying to find a platform leader for the socialists and the communists.11 He also told him about the plan of the communist group to organize students and peasants and agitate against the Congress ministry. Rath further revealed that he had received instructions from his associates in Bengal to capture the revolutionary “brains” in Orissa and utilize them in this work. This aspect of the growing differences between the Congress socialists and communists has been dealt with in a subsequent chapter.

Another notable trend within the Left movement was the politics of the Forward Bloc. The communists in Orissa wanted to organize a Forward Bloc platform in Orissa around 1939, but shied away from it.12 This was due to the fact that Forward Bloc came to be dominated by the “rightist” leadership represented by Nilakantha Das and Godabarish Mishra. We will touch upon this aspect in our discussion of the period 1940–41.

11 Ibid.12 Ibid.

The Pattern of Peasant and Tribal Mobilization

The period following the Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM) witnessed a major thrust to the organization of peasants and the tribals of British Orissa as well as of princely states. The satyagrahis, once released from the jails by 1933, not only ad-dressed themselves to the campaign of constructive activities but also strove to organize the peasantry and the tribals. Besides, a sizeable section of the youth who had steeled themselves in salt politics came under the impact of the broad Left ideologi-cal sway of Nehru, the socialists, the communists and Subash Chandra Bose. Thus, the released Congress activists as well as these radical youth fanned into villages and helped form kisan (peasant) committees. They also organized peasant meetings and prepared drafts highlighting the peasants’ demands.1 However, in 1933, the organization of the peasantry was mainly confined to the coastal tracts. As observed earlier, after his release, Mahatab

Three

Mobilization, Resistance and Popular Initiatives: Peasant and Tribal Movements, 1935–39

1 G.M. Raychudamani, “Odishare Communist Partyra Janma”, in Prananath Patnaik, ed., Odishare Communist Partyra Janma, Cuttack, 1985, pp. 24–25.

Peasant and Tribal Movements, 1935–39 61

prioritized anti-untouchability and other Gandhian constructive activities. He wrote to Nehru that along with his friends, he had taken a vow not to participate in law-making institutions until the grievances of the peasantry were redressed and their exploitation by the landlords and the capitalists was fought out. Mahatab organized the peasants in Balasore to secure remission of rents towards the fag end of 1933.2 The flood of 1933 that ravaged Orissa provided an immediate spur to the radical na-tionalists and the socialists to take to activities concerning the organization of the peasantry in the coastal tracts of Cuttack, Puri and Balasore.

In 1933, we come across a reference to the issue related to the cutting of timber from the reserved forests of Patia estate by the tenants who came under the rule of the new landlord, the raja of Kanika. They resented denial of permission to take fuel from the raja’s forest, a privilege, which they claimed, they had enjoyed under the ex-raja of Patia. The new landlord rejected the claim of the tenants, saying that the settlement records did not offer the tenants any right to free fuel and timber. The raja also requisitioned for police force to guard the reserved forest. He nevertheless agreed to pay in cash for any kind of bethi (forced labour) which the tenants did for the previous raja for the privilege of free fuel and timber from forests; but, ad-ditionally, he would charge tolls for timber cutting.3 As noted earlier, a trend of forest satyagraha in terms of jungle cutting emerged in certain pockets during the prolonged course of the CDM. Thus, the case in Patia reflected the popular response to the larger movement of Civil Disobedience.

In February 1934, a peasants’ conference was organized in Cut-tack at the initiative of the Utkal Congress Socialist League, where various aspects of tenancy laws were discussed by Godabarish Mishra. He advised the peasants to appeal to the government to seek remission of rent in the event of crop failure instead of getting directly into conflict with the landlords.4

2 HPD, Fortnightly Report (FNR), First half of September 1933.3 HPD, “Kanika and Patia Raja Affairs”, F. No. 183 of 1933, 1 August 1933, Accession no. 400 (ACC-400).4 Sailaja Rabi, ed., Malati Devi: Chaudati Chitrapata (Oriya), Cuttack, 1989, pp. 15–26.


The initiative of the Utkal Kisan Sangha led to the orga-nization of a kisan conference at Cuttack in June 1935. The conference was presided over by Mohanlal Goutam, secretary of the UP Kisan Sangha and joint secretary of the All India Socialist Party. The conference was attended by 200 people, including 60 peasants. Goutam, blaming intermediate landlord-ism as the root cause of the miseries of the tenants, pointed out that the system dated back to the East India Company and it did not exist during Sher Shah’s time. He clearly spelt out the need to abolish the zamindari system. The conference adopted 13 resolutions concerning the condition of the peasants. The major demands were: (i) writing off rent arrears, (ii) persons having uneconomic holding to be exempted from paying rent, (iii) revenue reduction by 50 per cent, (iv) reduction of water cess and (v) complete liquidation of agricultural debts of the poor. Goutam also formally announced the launching of the Utkal Kisan Sangha. Prominent socialists such as Nabakrushna Choudhury and Malati Devi had been instrumental in the or-ganization of the conference.5

By 1936, the organization of peasantry had acquired a remark-able thrust. For example, tenants in Khallikote and Athagada estates of Ganjam demanded remission of rent to the tune of 0-5-4 in rupee (where the first number stands for the amount in rupees, the second for that in annas, and the third for that in pais), in view of depression in the amended Section 39A of Madras Estates Land Act.6 The rent, particularly in villages like Pondithalgam, Konkai, Phasidhi, Singadapalli, Voidalpur, Ba-kutgam, Pituapalli and Sullobondha in the estates, had, in fact, been hiked by nearly 50 per cent to 100 per cent. The tenants had also withheld the payment of nearly 50 per cent of the rent due to the estate by March 1936. The estate, on its part, pressed for the payment of rent and, in certain cases, resorted to coercive methods. In response, the peasants petitioned the estate and of-fered to relinquish their holdings. The tenants were organized by local leaders such as Jujisti Panda of Koirasi, Kellai Santra and Natabara Porai of Vodialpur. The local leadership also got in touch with Provincial Congress Committee (PCC) leaders like

5 HPD, Special Branch Report, F. No. 167 of 1935, 17 June 1935, ACC-467.6 HPD, Special Branch (CID) Report, F. No. 74 of 1936, 10 June 1936, 17 June 1936, 18 June 1936, ACC-553.


Godabarish Mishra and M.G. Patnaik, an advocate of Berhampur. Funds were raised by the peasants to meet the expenditure of their struggle. They organized several meetings—on 27 April at Pandithagam, on 8 May at Firkapalli, on 18 May at Nuagodo—to discuss various issues and chalk out the course of action. On 9 May, the estate officials who came to Pandithgam village for rent collection were severely assaulted.

Around July 1936, one Babaji Bhimsen Das of Rahama (Cuttack) organized the peasants of Tirtol area on the issue of “illegal” realisation of fees from people by the subordinate officials of the sub-registrar’s office in every sale deed.7 A signature campaign of the peasants against the issue was taken up and the matter was reported to the higher authorities, notwithstanding the threats given to Bhimsen by the officials as well as local police and goons. The issue was finally brought to the notice of the sub-registrar, who suggested a compromise. The illegal grati-fication was scaled down to 4 annas per sale deed instead of 1 rupee and 14 annas. He also gave an assurance that he would not stand against “the kisan and Congress movement”. An en-couraged Babaji Bhimsen wrote to Nabakrushna Choudhury: “Public opinion had been effectively channelised over the issue; peasants had been encouraged due to a successful redressal of their grievances on their own initiative.”

The All India Kisan Sabha held at Lucknow in April 1936 was attended by PCC leaders such as Mahatab, Nabakrushna Choudhury, Surendranath Dwivedi, Lingaraj Mishra and Bhagi-rathi Mohapatra. Nehru’s visit to Orissa during 10–12 November was another crucial development in the context of the peasant movement. He addressed a total of 21 meetings in the districts of Cuttack, Puri and Ganjam. The meetings were organized mostly in rural places. In all the meetings, Nehru talked about the organization of kisans, and made merciless attacks on the zamindari system, justifying its abolition. He defined swaraj as a form of government in which people would have all the power and all action would be taken in consultation with the people.8 Nehru’s tour of Orissa encouraged the socialists and

7 HPD, Special Branch Police Report, 4 April 1936, ACC-571.8 HPD, 4/38.36, “Speeches by Nehru in Orissa”, cited in Biswamoy Pati, Resist-ing Domination: Peasants, Tribals and the National Movement in India, 1920–50, New Delhi, 1993, p. 133; HPD, “Report of IG Police on Political Events”, 18 January 1937.


gave a push to the peasant movement by stirring the popular perception of a new order of society in the shape of socialism.

In the wake of Nehru’s visit to Orissa, the second session of Utkal Provincial Kisan Conference was organized in Puri on 15 November 1936. Swami Sahajananda of Bihar presided over the proceedings of the conference attended by 3,000 peasants. Committees were formed to resist the oppression of zamind-ars and a proposal to boycott the government in case war was declared was also endorsed.9 The very next day, a group of peasants approached the sub-divisional officer (SDO) of Puri and demanded the withdrawal of salt tax, strengthening of embankments, and stopping of the oppressions of local zamin-dars.10 The conference had no doubt given a meaningful turn to the perception of peasants.

There is more evidence to suggest that Nehru’s visit hastened the activities of the socialists/communists. A peasants’ confer-ence was organized in Calcutta on 29 November 1936,11 and a pamphlet called “Oriya Peasants’ Conference” was circulated among the Oriya workers in Calcutta industries stating the objective of the conference:

To strengthen, invigorate and help in revolutionising the fast de-veloping peasant movement in Calcutta and elsewhere the peasant movement at home, the Oriya speaking peasants now working in different industries of Calcutta and its suburbs have decided to meet in a conference at Albert Hall on 29 November 1936 and to press for their immediate class demands.

The pamphlet was issued under the signature of Sarat Chandra Patnaik, Gurucharan Patnaik and Aparti Charan Naik.

It is in the context of increasing activities around mobiliza-tion of peasantry, by both PCC leaders and peasant activists

9 Who’s Who Compilation Committee (WWCC), ACC-33, pp. 35–37, cited in Pati, Resisting Domination, p. 133.10 HPD, FNR, 18 November 1936.11 Interview with late Sarat Chandra Patnaik, Cuttack. I am thankful to him for giving me a copy of the pamphlet. Late Mr Patnaik was the chairman of the reception committee of the conference. In fact, he, being an avowed commu-nist, emphasized that the communists in Orissa had already started organizing the peasants over the immediate class issues around 1936 which the Congress tended to underplay.


that the rajas, maharajas and landowners got together and floated different political parties in their bid to counter peas-ant militancy. The ensuing election of 1937 provided them the immediacy for such groupings. Thus, the All Orissa National Party was mooted in July 1935.12 The constitution of the party spelt out its objectives as the attainment of swaraj through constitutional means: this, however, would be attained without a fight against British colonialism. It promised to “respect and preserve the legitimate rights and interests of all classes of the people in the province” and “promote friendly relationship between landlords and tenants” and to support “the equitable adjustment of rent and revenue in view of the falling prices”. Similarly, the United Party was formed in 1936.13 The intent of such groupings was to restore “order” arising due to the politics of the PCC and kisan sangha.

In the context of the mobilization of the peasantry during 1936–37, new literature emerged seeking to impart a fresh vi-sion to peasant consciousness. For instance, the second edition of a booklet named Chasabhai14 (“Ryot Brothers”) was published in 1936 and was proscribed in no time. Gangadhar Mishra of Puri, in his poems, addressed the peasants of Orissa, bemoan-ing their deplorable condition. Essentially a critique of feudal oppression, his poetry also located the miseries of the peasants in the existing colonial structure. Exhorting the peasants, one of the poems said:

Once the peasants’ unity based on Provincial Kisan Sangha is at-tained, a new vigour will emerge. The oppressive forest laws which prevent the collection of fuel required by the peasants, as well as bethi, zulum [oppression] of the zamindar … will end. The [new] Government will look into the oppressions of the moneylender, the burden of the loan will be eased. The new laws will be based on popular opinion; and then only [will] commence the Rama Rajya.

Another booklet by the same poet titled Daridra Nian15 (“Flame of Poverty”) detailed how the peasantry, the backbone of the coun-try, was sucked by the rich moneylenders, zamindars, pleaders

12 HPD, F. No. 252 of 1935, 22 September 1935, ACC-484.13 WWCC, ACC-33.14 Gangadhar Mishra, Chasabhai (Oriya booklet), 1936, Puri, ACC-651.15 Gangadhar Mishra, Daridra Nian (Oriya booklet), ACC-651.


and mukhtears (petty lawyers), who lived happily while the former groaned under the burden of poverty without having even the bare necessities of life. The poem called upon the peasants to unite, rise and stand against the oppressive system of the rich. It incited people to rebel against the existing system of govern-ment and to fight for the system prevalent in Russia.

The PCC met under the presidentship of Harihar Das in March 1936 and passed a resolution to organize the peasantry and work for the removal of untouchability.16 At Mahatab’s initiative, a peasant conference was organized in May 1936. In the conference, peasants were urged not to pay salami (“saluta-tion”, a complimentary present) to zamindars. Mahatab was then the president of Provincial Kisan Sangha. The conference also advocated the need for the formation of agricultural marketing organizations and debt reconciliation banks.17

On 14 August, the Utkal Provincial Kisan Sangha18 appointed a sub-committee consisting of Mahatab, Nabakrushna Choud-hury, Rajkrushna Bose, Lingaraj Mishra and Malati Choudhury to enquire into the grievances of the peasants and submit their report to the PCC. The All India Kisan Day19 was celebrated in many parts of the province on 1 September 1936. Resolutions were passed demanding the reduction of rent, amendment of the Tenancy Act and relief to cultivators from indebtedness, and Harijan uplift and peasant meetings were organized in different areas on that occasion. A report of the Puri District Congress Committee (DCC) on Congress activities during 1936 mentioned holding of peasants’ meetings as well as organizing the peasant movement and enrolling Congress members as their activities. Incidentally, the Puri District Krushak Sangha was formed in 1936.20

The PCC, in the course of the mobilization of peasantry, increasingly acquired a broad Left ideological orientation. In the process, the kisan sangha and the PCC, as well as their respective leaders, got closely identified in the pre-1937 phase.

16 Harekrishna Mahatab, History of Freedom Movement in Orissa, Vol. V, pp. 23–27.17 Ibid.18 Ibid.19 Ibid.20 WWCC, “Orissa Police Abstract Intelligence (OPAI)”, Vol. II, No. 12, 24 March 1937, p. 45, ACC-36.


It is in this context that the election manifesto of the PCC was released, which was by any standards a radical one. The mani-festo contained the following declarations:21

(a) Abolition of permanent settlement affecting zamindaris of Kanika, Parlakhemundi, a number of smaller landlords in Parlakhemundi, Ganjam and Cuttack and the very important zamindari of Jeypore;

(b) Remission of arrears of rent and land revenue; (c) Reduction of all rents and water rates by half; (d) Graduation of rent on the line of income tax: families with

an income of less than Rs 250 a year to be excused alto-gether;

(e) Amendment of tenancy act in various respects to the detri-ment of landlords;

(f) Forests to be thrown open to neighbouring villages; (g) Securing a living wage for labourers; (h) Death duty on property over Rs 20,000 and succession duty

as well; (i) Free primary education; (j) Relaxation of the Salt Law; and (k) Religious endowment funds to be diverted to the upkeep

of schools and dispensaries.

It is worth observing that under the overall pressure exerted through krushak sangha activities, the PCC was made to incor-porate demands like abolition of zamindaris in certain estates and complete remission of rents and taxes for all whose annual income did not exceed Rs 250 and a debt moratorium for five years by releasing a supplementary election manifesto.22

The Election Campaign

Though formally launched on 13 September 1936, the electoral campaign of the PCC had already picked up momentum around June 1936. The peasants’ meetings, especially those held in the

21 P.N. Chopra, ed., Towards Freedom, 1937–47, Vol. I, New Delhi, 1985, pp. 113–14.22 Ibid.


rural areas, were used as platforms for the PCC’s election pro-paganda. In these meetings, the necessity for forging both anti-colonial and anti-feudal struggles were highlighted. In contrast, the two principal non-Congress parties—All Orissa National Party and United Party—harped on the point that “Congress is out to wreck the Constitution (1935 Act), and thus can’t do any good to the people in the Assembly.”23 The candidates of these parties sought to “bribe the voters in the form of cash and promises”. The campaign by the nationalist press against these tactics was also very sharp.24

On the other hand, the PCC’s electoral campaign was steered through mass meetings and the press. For example, The Samaja, The Asha, the Utkal Dipika and the Lokamata carried the Congress message to the peripheries of the province.25 Besides, the PCC’s election propaganda was also carried on through sankirtan par-ties and the release of leaflets. PCC candidates in Jeypore estate promised to the people the abolition and reduction of many customary feudal levies,26 such as (i) abolition of plough tax (a tax of 4–12 annas which every ryot pays for getting wood from the forests for his plough); (ii) payment against bethi work by the ryots for the estate; (iii) to weed out corruption of the estates’ subordinate officials, who most often exploited the tribals and ryots. These promises caught the immediate imagination of the tribals. Thus, the PCC’s campaign generated high hopes among the tribals in Koraput.

The Post-election Phase

Peasant and Tribal Mobilization and Nature of Popular Protest

In the election of 1937, the PCC swept the polls by winning 36 out of 37 contested seats, registering 80 per cent votes in the constituencies it won. The opposition and the independents

23 The Samaja, 2 January 1937, 7 January 1937.24 Ibid.25 HPD, Annual Report of Revenue Commissioner on Newspapers, 6 February 1937, ACC-618.26 HPD, DM’s Report, F. No. 24 of 1937, 21 January 1937, ACC-654.


had shared 10 seats each,27 while 32 of the defeated opposition candidates lost their security deposits.28 The report on Orissa Kisan Sangha submitted by Malati Choudhury pointed out that from the 36 elected Congress members to the Assembly, seven belonged to the Utkal Krushak Sangha.29 There was an immediate reaction of the zamindars against the peasants. Attempts were made in certain places to “collect from the peasants the amount spent in the elections by the zamindars”.30 In some places, some zamindars “forced the tenants to pay sunia bheti (gifts on the occasion of the New Year’s Day) in a month’s time”. At some places in Puri, tenants were even “socially ostracized by the zamindars”. This development sharply focused on the need to have peasant associations in every zamindari.

In March 1937, the Utkal Congress Socialist Party met under the presidentship of Sudhir Ghosh and decided to pressurize the Congress to accept their demands should the latter accept office. The demands relating to peasants were

(a) 50 per cent reduction of rent and revenue; (b) abolition of landlordism without compensation; (c) cancellation of all debts of peasants and working class;

and (d) codification and amendment of tenancy laws in such a way

as to make the tillers of the soil the sole proprietors of the land.31

Mahatab, presiding over a peasants’ conference32 in Bhu-baneswar, held on 20 March, emphasized on the need for the uplift of the peasantry through village reconstruction work. This was followed by a discussion among local activists such as Raghunath Mohapatra and Digamma Srichandan on the same day, and it was resolved to organize krushak sanghas, to comprise five members in each union, supply newspapers to

27 The Samaja, 30 January 1937, 1 February 1937.28 S.N. Majumdar, Report on the General Election in Orissa, 1937, Cuttack, 1937, p. 14.29 WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. I, 24 February 1937, p. 28, ACC-36.30 The Utkal Dipika, 18 February 1937; Lokamata, 10 February 1937.31 WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. II, No. 11, 17 March 1937, p. 43, ACC-36.32 WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. II, No. 13, 3 April 1937, p. 52, ACC-36.


each village to educate the peasants and undertake activities on village reconstruction. In the meeting at Badiragpur (Balasore) on 28 March, it was agreed upon that peasants’ unity was nec-essary to resist the oppressions of the zamindars. The Congress membership enrolment drive focused on persons 18 years of age to be members.33

In April, a meeting was held at Krishnaprasad (Parikud estate) to discuss the grievances against the raja.34 PCC leaders and prominent socialists like Mohan Das, Prananath Patnaik, Jagabandhu Singh (MLA) and Lingaraj Mishra addressed the peasants and motivated them not to concede to the illegal exac-tions by the raja but to report them in the appropriate law courts. A committee was formed to probe into the alleged atrocities. It highlighted many of the issues and sought for their redressal by the raja. Some of the important issues were

(a) levying of fines on persons working in Bengal or Rangoon

to earn their livelihood every time they return to the es-tate;

(b) false allegations against the tenants with encroachment on anabadi (uncultivated) lands, forcing them to pay fines known as “decimal chanda” without giving any receipts for the same;

(c) subsequent to the death of any member of a joint family, threats were held out to the survivors of dispossession of their share of the property, thereby realizing heavy amount as nawaris fee or intestate tax;

(d) charging of 6 annas in the rupee as mutation fee on any transaction of land, as against the prescribed 4 annas al-lowed under rule;

(e) imposition of illegal fines on both parties involved in local disputes;

(f) realization of fines from persons cutting down trees and bamboo from the raiyati (leased) land; and

(g) impounding of cattle by the raja even when they grazed in fallow and pasture lands, causing no damage to any

33 Ibid.34 HPD, DM’s (Puri) Report, 9 April 1937; HPD, “Secretary, Parikuda Enquiry Sub-committee of Utkal Krishak Sangha to Raja Parikuda”, 24 April 1937, ACC-780.


standing crop and their being freed after exacting heavy fines from the owners.

A local kisan activist called Ram Chandra Patnaik distributed

leaflets containing a poem focusing on the oppression of the raja. The mobilization of the peasantry along these lines ultimately led them to make a petition to the colonial authorities against the raja’s exploitation. In response, the SDO conducted an en-quiry. The report of the enquiry admitted that the raja was in the habit of realizing various kinds of unauthorized taxes, but ruled out any drastic action against him, apprehending that it would give a fillip to the peasants’ movement. However, the report advised the raja “to understand his tenants, to help them in their difficulties and to enlist their affection … in particular to try and see the signs of time”. The report also instructed the raja to stop realization of intestate tax and Bengal/Rangoon tax and to forbid his amlas (officials) from realizing illegal exactions.

On 16 June, some tenants requested the raja to give up the exactions of salami realized annually and “not to get kabuliyats [agreements by tenants to pay rent to the landlord] executed afresh annually from those tenants whom he had allowed to cultivate his nij-chas lands [cultivated lands held directly]”. This was turned down by the raja, following which the tenants held out threats against him.

Girijabhusan Dutta toured extensively the rural pockets of Angul in May and June 1937 and attacked the system of bethi which made people work without wages for government-spon-sored activities. He exhorted the peasants to withhold labour from the government-sponsored construction of village roads and cooperative grain-golas.35 He held that the government was responsible for the cost of such work and it should meet the cost by curtailment of expenditure on army or civil services. He also undertook a persistent campaign for the repeal of the notorious Angul Laws Regulation, which legitimized the practice of bethi. In a meeting at Poktunga near Angul, Dutta stressed the need to form kisan sabha units in every village so as to step up the

35 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 10 April 1937, 25 May 1937/10 June 1937, ACC-625; Board of Revenue Records, Report of Angul SDO to Cuttack Collector, 7 June 1937, Sl No. 162; HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 10 April 1937, ACC-625.


rent-reduction campaign, along with the demand for the repeal of Angul regulation. Biswanath Das also advocated a reduction in the rate of interest charged by the cooperative bank. This campaign in Angul resulted in peasants’ refusing rent and at times disrupting “court process”.36 In Kendrapara, Patkura and Tirtol (Cuttack) peasants were organized under the leadership of Jadumani Mangaraj, Loknath Mishra, Dadhibaman Das and Srihari Biswal. The tenants of Pandua estate of Tirtol after re-solving in a meeting to approach the authorities submitted a petition demanding remission of rent and suspension of realiza-tion of dues of cooperative societies. Similarly, in the peasants’ meeting at Agra haat, Choudwar, on 7 April, Rajkrushna Bose severely condemned the demand of salami and taxes from the peasants on festivals and other occasions by the zamindar of Dalijora estate. The action of the Mandal estate in clamping prosecution against tenants on charges of timber cutting was also condemned.37

Malati Choudhury, who presided over the Cuttack District Krushak Conference held at Anakhia, Gobindapur, on 30 April, made it very clear that Utkal Krushak Sangha must always remain a “separate body” and should on no account be subordinated to the Congress, which, according to her, was basically composed of “landed elements and capitalists”. She was critical of Nilakan-tha Das, who was in favour of the policy of merging the kisan sangha with the Congress. In her speech, she observed that if at any time a revolutionary change was to be introduced, the initiative is sure to come from “peasants with hungry stomach”. She emphasized on the need to build strong class organizations. Another speaker, Goura Chandra Das, however, held that the Congress and the kisan sangha stood for one another though these were two different organizations. He went on to add that the miseries of the peasants would not be redressed without a change in the present system of administration. Therefore, peasants should side with the Congress. The meeting passed a resolution which stated that peasants must continue their class struggle united with other oppressed classes and try to

36 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 10 April 1937; HPD, “OPAI”, Vol. II, No. 21, 3 June 1937, p. 82.37 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 24 May 1937.


strengthen the Congress to enable it to continue the struggle for “political freedom”.38

In Ghumsur (Koraput), 300 peasants coming from 30 villages got together in a meeting under the leadership of Nilakantha Patra and Radhakrishna Biswasray, MLA. The meeting condemned the exactions of Jeypore estates’ officials. The collector of Koraput was asked to take note of “feudal levies like bethi, gadam, mamall and rasad” and take steps to prevent them. The meeting also condemned the action of the estate, which had issued notices of suits for arrears of rent against the ryots who had refused to do bethi and beggari (a form of forced labour).39

The Puri District Peasants’ Conference, held at Balanga on 17 April, was attended by nearly 2,000 peasants from different rural pockets of the district. The conference was opened with “Chasi Gita” (songs of the peasants), which focused on the plight of the peasantry. The conference put forward demands like remission of land revenue at the rate of 0-8-0 per rupee, and stopping of illegal exactions. The peasants were urged not to pay rent to zamindars and mahajans without obtaining rent receipts and to boycott the zamindar’s kutchery for arbitration of any dispute in the village. The peasants were also advised to organize primary krushak sanghas in every village.40

The tenants of Kanika estate were organized by forming Praja Swatwa Raksha Sangha (Association for the Protection of Ten-ants’ Rights). The sangha collected funds to fight suits leveled by the raja against the tenants. Chakradhar Behera, Congress MLA, spearheaded the movement in Kanika.41 Towards the end of April, encouraged by kisan meetings in the interiors of Srijanga, Rasalpur and Kaida, about 50 tenants from the estate of Radha Prasanna Das met the collector and alleged that the zamindar had refused to give them rent receipts.42 In fact, there was a virtual identification of Congress activity with those of krushak sangha activities in the entire district of Balasore and krushak sangha meetings got organized from Congress platforms.43 The

38 Ibid., 15 May 1937; HPD, “OPAI”, Vol. II, No. 17, 3 May 1937.39 The Samaja, 30 April 1937.40 HPD, FNR, Puri, 24 April 1937, ACC-629.41 HPD, FNR, Balasore, 24 April 1937, ACC-630.42 HPD, FNR, Balasore, 9 May 1937.43 HPD, FNR, Balasore, 21 May 1937.


Congress leadership in these meetings stressed on the fact that the krushak movement was by no means divorced from the Con-gress Party’s programme. In Sambalpur, an extensive campaign went ahead under the initiatives of Laxmi Narayan Mishra, B.N. Joshi and Nityananda Bohidar. They appealed to the peasants in the rural areas to enroll as Congress members.44

Reviewing the trend of kisan sangha activities, Chief Secre-tary (CS) Mansfield observed, “The Congress has completely absorbed the Kisan movement, controlling all its activities”.45 Thus, the PCC sought to forge linkage with the peasantry and broadened its social bases in many new areas of the province. It also remained critical of the claims by krushak sanghas to be considered as separate units away from the Congress.

By May, we come across several instances of Congress-spon-sored enquiry committees to probe the cases of oppression by the landlords, officials and the police. In some cases, individual Congress members also conducted enquiries. For instance, com-mittees were formed in Rajnagar and Pattamundai to inquire into the allegations against the circle officer of Kanika and the manager of Utikan, respectively, for allegedly harassing the tenants for their pro-Congress attitude. Similarly, Mangaraj petitioned the ministry regarding the violence perpetrated by the officials of Aul estate on the peasants at Derabis haat where they had gathered for a krushak sabha meeting. Upon Mangaraj’s petition, the authorities conducted an enquiry.46 In Chandaka estate, a 12-member enquiry committee was formed to list peasant grievances and report the same to the council of the estate.47 This trend was also evident in the Jeypore estate. R.K. Biswasray, MLA, toured the district to enquire into the grievances of tribals on using forests. The tour of Biswasray in fact encouraged the tribals to take to activities like tree-felling from the reserved forests. Nearly 5,000 tribals under the leader-ship of Biswasray met the collector and complained about the “auctioning of fishing rights in tanks and the produce of mango

44 HPD, FNR, Sambalpur (SBP), 8 April 1937/24 April 1937.45 HPD, Report of the Chief Secretary, 14 June 1937, 28 June 1937.46 HPD, “Petition by J. Mangaraj to Law and Order Minister”, 26 May 1937. Also, the report of enquiry (ACC-835); Board of Revenue Records, “Letter of Mansfield (CS) to DM”, 29 May 1937, Sl No. 163.47 HPD, “OPAI”, Vol. II, No. 21, 3 June 1937, p. 82.


groves on communal land”. The other illegalities of bethi, rasad, abwab, and plough tax were also focused upon. There was also protest against the corruption of the subordinate officials of the estate. In response, the maharaja of Jeypore undertook a tour of Rayagada, Bissam Cuttack and Kalyansinghpur and offered a minor concession to the tenants in the shape of “postponement of dates of kists (instalments)”.48

In Khaira (Balasore), allegations were made against the local police for obstructing the organization of a Congress meeting. The police had warned the tenants against attending the meet-ing and a local Congress activist had been chargesheeted for organizing the meeting. An enquiry committee was formed by the Balasore DCC comprising Nanda Kishore Das, MLA, Madhusudan Mohanty and Krishna Prasad Mohanty to probe the allegation.49

The peasants of Jarada (Angul) sternly resented the action of the chaprasi (peon) of the SDO when he “rebuked and insulted” the tenants for bringing five cartloads of wood instead of eight required under SDO’s parwana (directive).50 They also protested against the compulsion exercised by the officials for supply of a cartload of wood at the government rate of 3 annas in con-trast to the market rate of 12 annas. The privileges enjoyed by the officials thus came to be questioned at the popular plane. The Samaja demanded an enquiry into the practice of bethi in Angul. As noted earlier, G.B. Dutt had taken up the campaign questioning the legitimacy of “Angul Laws”. When bethi was put into operation during the governor’s visit to Angul, Dutt demanded the immediate payment of the outstanding wages to the people and made it an issue. Due to his massive efforts, seven branches of krushak sanghas came to function in Angul sub-division. Surendranath Dwivedi, Secretary, All Utkal Krushak Sangha, undertook a campaign in these centres, explaining the objectives of a krushak sangha.

In Puri, a peasants’ association called “Loka Sabha”51 (“Peo-ple’s Association”) was formed under the initiative of Sarala

48 The Samaja, 1 June 1937; HPD, Collector’s Report, Koraput, 8 May 1937, 9 June 1937, ACC-678.49 HPD, “OPAI”, Vol. II, No. 19, 17 May 1937, p. 73, ACC-622.50 The Samaja, 24 May 1937, Report of CS to DM, Cuttack and DM to CS, 4 April 1937, ACC-790.51 HPD, “OPAI”, Vol. II, No. 19, 17 May 1937, p. 74.


Devi, Lingaraj Mishra and Sadhu Charan Das, which intended to “appeal to zamindars for redressal of the just grievances of the peasants”. In a meeting of the sabha held at Delang haat in May, the basic demands of krushak sangha were declared to be the demands of the Loka Sabha also. On 22 May, a vil-lage-level peasants’ meeting held at Gramdihi (Chandaka) set up a 12-member committee to formulate the grievances of the peasants for submission to the council.52

After almost a month-long mobilization of peasants in Sam-balpur, the Kisan Conference was launched at Jharsuguda on 10 May.53 The conference advocated the remission of rent, relaxation of forest restrictions, abolition of abwabs and cut in the salaries of officials and police. Mahatab, Biswanath Das, L.N. Mishra, Bodhram Dube, Prahalad Rai Lath, B.M. Joshi and Rabishankar Shukla (from Raipur) addressed the peasants. The conference was conspicuous by the participation of Gandas (a community of people who had a low status in the caste hierarchy).

In May, the Ganjam Ryots Association elected Biswanath Das as president to study the conditions of the peasants in most parts of the Ganjam zamindaris.54 The Pattamundai Peasants’ Conference, held on 14 May, presided over by the socialist leader Nabakrushna Choudhury, was attended by 3,000 peasants.55 In a meeting held at Mukundapur, Balasore, on 18 May, Nilakantha Das blamed colonialism for the poverty of the people and attacked landlords for illegal exactions from tenants.56 Interestingly, in a peasants’ meeting at Phuljharia (Balasore), Nanda Kishore Das attacked the “Congress zamindars” who were “still realising illegal taxes from the tenants in spite of their profession”. This was, in a way, a veiled attack on Mahatab.57

In the context of the peasant movement, the month of June 1937 was crucial as the difference of perception between the PCC and krushak sanghas vis-à-vis peasant issues developed a sharper chasm, as reflected in the Puri District Political Con-ference (5–6 June) and Banpur Peasants’ Conference (15 June).

52 HPD, “OPAI”, Vol. II, No. 21, 3 June 1937, p. 82.53 HPD, FNR, SBP, 8 May 1937, 23 May 1937, ACC-627.54 HPD, Report of Chief Secretary, 29 May 1937, ACC-631.55 WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. II, No. 19, 17 May 1937, p. 75, ACC-37.56 HPD, “OPAI”, Vol. II, No. 20, 24 May 1937, p. 77; HPD, Report of DM to CS, 23 June 1937, ACC-712.57 HPD, FNR, Balasore, 9 June 1937, ACC-630.


In the district political conference held at Chandanpur, Malati Chaudhury advocated for a separate identity for krushak sanghas while working within the framework of a broad anti-imperialist front of the Congress. In contrast, Nilakantha Das (representing the moderate nationalist or even “right-wing” strand of lead-ership within PCC) talked of “watchful supervision” for the peasant movement under the Congress banner and rejected any claim for a separate organization of the peasants away from the Congress. The difference led to the boycott of the conference by the socialists. The DM’s report on the position of Nilakantha Das observed:

The party of Nilakantha Das which contains some landholders, is apprehensive that if the Krushak Sangha was not kept under their watchful supervision, the peasant movement might get out of control to the detriment of all the property owning classes.

The differences led to the boycott of the conference by the socialists.58

The Banpur Peasants’ Conference59 held on 15 June was at-tended by 1,500 peasants. Mahatab presided over the meeting, which was addressed by Rajkrushna Bose, Lingaraj Mishra and Godabarish Mishra. Bose explained the objective of the peas-ant movement as “helping the Congress in the attainment of swaraj”. Appealing to the audience to form peasants’ associa-tions in every village, he justified the formation of a separate peasant organization away from the Congress, stating that the former would be exclusively confined to guard the interests of the peasantry and to redress their sufferings whereas the latter was basically an all-class organization which meant to achieve political freedom of the country. Mahatab also stressed on the need for a separate identity for peasant organizations as it would “enlighten the peasants about their demands”. He ruled out the possibility that the cause of the Congress would be hampered by having such separate oganizations. He vehemently criticized the attempts by a section of such Congress leaders as Nilakantha Das and others to merge the krushak sanghas into the Congress

58 HPD, FNR, Puri, 9 May 1937, ACC-629; HPD, “OPAI”, Vol. II, No. 22, 10 June 1937, p. 86.59 HPD, Report of CID, 15 June 1937, ACC-712.


and described such attempts as dictated by vested interests to enjoy certain privileges.

The attempt by a police sub-inspector (an SI) and a jamadar in Balasore to rape the daughter of one Pahali Jena on 18 August sparked off strong resistance among the locals.60 The policemen were severely assaulted. The local Congress activists took up the issue actively. A departmental enquiry was instituted on the complaint lodged by Pahali Jena against the SI. Dissatisfied with this, Pahali made a petition to the government with the conviction that every matter ought to be reported to the “Government” (the existing Congress ministry) directly and the latter would ask the district authority for an impartial enquiry and report. Thus, in the popular perception, the Congress government emerged as the “saviour”, which dispensed impartial justice. Following the incident, the anti-police feelings ran high in the district. Mahatab intervened and issued a press release which said:

It is imperative that they (the police) should become servants of public and not their masters … The hope is entertained that the mentality of police officers would change as a result of especially the Congress accepting Ministry but the present police rule of Bala-sore gives little indication of the regard for Departmental rules … But the people should be fearless. They should see if they have got any power under the constitutional reforms. There would be no oppression if the people be brave.61

The PCC leadership as well as the local leaders organized several meetings regarding the incident. On public demand, an enquiry into the incident was conducted by the Inspector General (IG) of police. The popular mood against the police was so hostile that the leadership had to explain to the people in the meetings that “henceforth the police would behave like servants of public and the people should also be co-operative with them in detecting crimes and maintaining peace and order.”62

Further, the decision of the Congress to accept office embold-ened the resolve of the tenants.63 The kisan meetings held in the rural areas of Balikuda (Cuttack), Parikud and Patia (Puri

60 HPD, Report of IG (BLS), 31 August 1937.61 The Samaja, 23 August 1937.62 Amrit Bazaar Patrika, 28 August 1937.63 HPD, FNR, BLS, 9 May 1937, ACC-630.


district), and Olang (Balasore) during June exhorted the peas-ants to resist zamindars’ oppression and to demand remission of rent. They also invited peasants to enlist themselves as Congress activists.64 In a meeting of the Chhatrapur Ryots Association (Berhampur, 16 June), Dibakar Patnaik advised the peasants to “help the Congress to get Swaraj”. He also explained that the Congress Party was identical with the Ryots Party and was al-ways working for the benefit of the latter. Biswanath Das talked of remission of land tax as in Madras. Peasants were advised to “form taluk and firka association” and were promised that “the Congress would help them” in this regard.65

Congress Ministry and the Voice of Popular Protest

The PCC, under the leadership of Biswanath Das, decided to form a ministry. The ministry assumed office on 19 July after the dissolution of the interim ministry installed on 1 April under Krushna Chandra Gajapati, the raja of Parlakhemundi. This political development considerably heightened the popular anticipation of the emancipation of peasantry in terms of rent reduction, increase in the rights of the peasants and curtailment of the powers and privileges enjoyed by zamindars and the landed aristocracy.66 This perception further derived legitimacy when Biswanath Das, in a public meeting at Puri, assured the gathering that the ministry would do its best to realize its pro-peasant commitment.67

In the changed context, the emboldened leadership strove hard to organize the peasantry and the tribals. For instance, there is a reference to the suggestion for appointing “Gandhi gumastas” for every 25 villages to whom the villagers could report their grievances in Jeypore estate.68 Phani Pal, a prominent local activ-ist, organized the Munda and Ho tribals in the Sukinda estate. On one occasion, five tribals assaulted one Ratan Munda, who provided straw and bamboo to the Sukinda proprietor in lieu

64 HPD, “OPAI”, Vol. II, Nos 24 and 25, 24 June 1937, 3 July 1931, pp. 94–99.65 HPD, “OPAI”, Vol. II, No. 24, 24 June 1937.66 WWCC, ACC-34, p. 71.67 WWCC, ACC-34, p. 74.68 HPD, F. No. 7/37, 10 July 1937, ACC-628.


of forest produce. They demanded Rs 16 from Ratan Munda but released him when he paid only “Rs 2 to Phani Pal”.69 Girija Bhusan Dutta in a meeting at Baurpal marketplace in Angul on 13 July asked the people to take “wood from the forest tree” and to shed fear of the “police and chaukidars” because they were paid by the tenants.70 On 10 July, a group of Harijans of Kangula and Poktunga “invaded the courtyard of the Jagannath temple” at Bantla (Purnagarh: Angul). They “waved Congress flags, sang nationalist songs” and attempted to march into the temple premises disregarding the police cordon arranged in connection with the car festival. However, the police cordon held them back.71 This indicates the assertion of “low castes” to participate in the “high-caste” religious ceremonies, imme-diately springing up with the advent of the Congress ministry. In other words, the ushering in of a “new age” where caste taboos were challenged coincided with the installation of the Congress ministry. After the election, peasant resistance led to every village getting sharply divided between the raja and the tenants’ party in Kanika estate.72 Similarly, in meetings organized in rural pockets of Ganjam during July, peasants were exhorted “not to pay rent” to the zamindars.73

With the formation of Congress ministry, the Congress social-ists functioned as the pressure group to realize the commitment made to the peasants before the election. Malati Choudhury, Secretary, Provincial Krushak Sangha, explained the position in a press release:74

Congress got this power as peasants in large numbers voted for it. As a matter of fact, the peasants and people in general have got this power. Now it is your [peasants] duty to see how this power can be made effective. The police will work under the Congressmen whom they [police] arrested and put into jail. They are no longer Hakims [masters], they are servants of the public. Hence, if they go against the people, they will be punished. So at such a time, it

69 HPD, DM’s Report, 10 July 1937, ACC-786.70 HPD, “OPAI”, Vol. II, No. 27, 17 July 1937, p. 107.71 Ibid.72 HPD, DM’s Report to Chief Secretary, 14 July 1937, ACC-631; HPD, “OPAI”, Vol. II, No. 25, 3 July 1937, WWCC-36.73 HPD, FNR, “Ganjam of 9 July 1937”, ACC-626.74 The Samaja, 3 August 1937; HPD, Report of IG to CS, 18 August 1937, ACC-712.


is necessary to strengthen the peasants’ association still more. The peasants are advised to form peasants’ association in every village and send petitions to the Ministers in charge of the revenue depart-ment, detailing the exactions of illegal dues, forcible bethi etc. If the police, kutchery [court] peons, Government officials oppress them or harass them by exercising authority illegally, Congress Ministers should be informed in writing.

Reminding the ministry of their duties, she added:

Previously, ... claims have been made especially for reduction of rent, water rates, debts and amendment of tenancy laws to vest proprietary rights in the land. Congress Ministers and Congress Party must carry out their programme in the Legislative assembly to realise such promises to the people. But nothing can be done if peasants do not represent their claims still more firmly. So, by holding meetings in every village claims should be put forward for the redress of the urgent wants and grievances. The present is the most opportune moment. There is no reason to fear the zamindars, mahajans, moneylenders, police or officials now. Because, the strength of the Government or its machinery is no longer behind them. It has now come into the hands of people though not in full measure. If the peasants protest, they will not have the courage to oppress.

She further went on to advise the “peasants of different districts to take advantage of the opportunity by holding meetings and sending copies of the resolution to the Revenue Minister and the office of the Provincial Peasants’ Association”. She asked the ministry to take steps to explain the peasants in general about the doings of the ministry in the assembly and to make the peasants “conscious of their political and economic rights”. She also appealed to the peasants to come to Cuttack in large numbers to lay their grievances before the ministry and “de-mand redressal without delay” on the occasion of Kisan Day celebrations on 1 September.

In the immediate context of the flood ravaging the coastal tract, the peasant meetings during the month of August invari-ably voiced the demands for remission of land revenue and relief to the flood victims.75 The tension between the raja and the tenants in Kanika estate persisted. The DM, as a result,

75 HPD, FNR, Puri, 24 August 1937, ACC-629.


undertook a tour of the estate and advised the raja to negotiate with the tenants over the popular demands. But the raja refused to do so.76 The Utkal Kisan Sangha geared up its preparations for the celebration of Kisan Day on 1 September. The socialists saw it as an opportunity to demonstrate the strength of krushak sangha vis-à-vis the Congress ministry. They planned to have a huge demonstration of peasants at Cuttack on that day. As Puri district was badly affected by floods, peasants of Puri were advised not to join the demonstration at Cuttack but to orga-nize the Kisan Day in the rural pockets. Manjari Devi (wife of Prananath Patnaik) and Gatikrushna Swain, and Gour Chandra Das were entrusted with the responsibility of sending peasants from Puri and Balasore, respectively, in large numbers to join the demonstration at Cuttack.77 On 1 September, a procession of nearly 10,000 peasants marched into the municipal office compound carrying placards which demanded “Abolition of zamindari system” and “Reduction of rent by 50%” and presented their charter of demands to the ministers. Gouranga Charan Das submitted a memorandum containing the list of demands of the peasants, such as abolition of zamindari system, reduction of land revenue to half, amendment of tenancy laws and permanent relief from floods, as recommended by the Provincial Peasants’ Conference to the chief minister (CM).78

Kisan Day was also celebrated in many rural parts of the province with the usual set of krushak sangha resolutions be-ing passed in the meetings. Nearly 1,000 peasants assembled in the kisan meeting at Eram (Balasore) on 1 September presided by Basudev Panda. The meeting unanimously adopted certain resolutions for submission to the minister of law and order. Some of the resolutions were:

(a) Material reduction in the present scale of land revenue to compensate the low price of food grains

(b) Stopping of payment of mutation fees and salami and amend-ment of Tenancy Act in favour of the tenants

76 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 14 July 1937/14 August 1937, ACC-631.77 The Samaja, 3 August 1937; HPD, Report of IG (Police), 18 August 1937, ACC-712.78 HPD, FNR, 18 August 1937; HPD, “OPAI”, Vol. II, No. 34, 10 September 1937, ACC-622.


(c) No zamindar should realise any subscription (d) Permanent remedy against floods by the government (e) Village touts to be kept under check (f) No moneylender should get a decree for any amount in

which the interest would be more than the capital and in executing decrees, no household articles such as utensils should be attached and sold

(g) Cases in which the interest paid to the cooperative bank has overlapped the capital, the debtor should be exempted from the payment of outstanding dues

(h) Debottar (religious institutions) Law should be amended to compel the priests and mohunts (monks) to make proper use of debottar property

The meeting at Baliapal (Balasore) also highlighted similar demands.79

In the context of the Congress assuming office, the trend of refusal of rent assumed sharper focus in many parts of the province around September. In a meeting at Patrapur (Ganjam), Govinda Chandra Mishra, Secretary, Ganjam DCC, advised the peasants to “withhold payment of rent” in view of the new settlement effected in Surangi and Jarada estates. He, in fact, toured the zamindari tracts and mobilized the peasants against the new settlement. In one instance, the tenants assaulted the revenue inspector of Jarada estate. In connection with the issue, the official report pointed out that under the “cloak of Congress propaganda”, a campaign for refusal of rent was being encour-aged.80 The continuous campaign for the scrapping of Angul Laws Regulation resulted in a discussion over the issue in the assembly and the government promised to ensure payments against the rendering of compulsory labour in Angul.81 The concessions included:82

(a) Reduction of the processing fee in mutation cases from eight annas to four annas

79 HPD, “OPAI”, Vol. II, Nos 34 and 37, 10 September 1937.80 HPD, “Ganjam”, 23 September 1937.81 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 30 September 1937, ACC-631.82 HPD, Report of DM (Balasore), F. No. 183/1937, 25 November 1937; HPD, “SP’s Weekly Confidential Diary”, 22 October 1937, ACC-797.


(b) Reduction in the cost of printed forms from two annas to one anna

(c) Free use of wasteland by tenants for making threshing floors with the permission of the estate

(d) Free use of jungle produce on the eastern side of river Matai

(e) Construction of level-crossing on estate roads with the permission of the Raja for the convenience of the villagers and their cattle

(f) Remission of 25 per cent rent lying in arrears prior to 1930 (g) Recognition of the right of tenants on trees on their holdings

and the right of excavating tanks on their lands without permission

(h) Resettlement of nij-chas (self-tilled) lands purchased by the estate in certificate sales with original tenants on payment of salami and subject to enhancement of rent at an anna per rupee

A meeting of 1,000 tenants was held in Chandbali to review

the package offered by the raja as well as to greet Chakradhar Behera, the leader of the tenants; however, Behera dubbed the concessions granted by the raja as inadequate. Behera advised the peasants “not to be carried away by the concessions of the Raja but to wait till substantial concessions of material advan-tage” flowed from the assembly.83 Meanwhile, the raja of Kanika resigned from his membership in the Legislative Assembly as criticism mounted against his zamindari in the assembly.84

In Kotpad (Koraput), the tribals opposed the government’s attempt to form a “Kotpad Union”. There had been a campaign against the move right since July on the grounds that such an institution meant “new taxation”. In September, a Congressman assaulted a member of the Kotpad Union Board. This was fol-lowed by an “assault against the police” (deputed to investigate the case). In fact, the DCC leadership including Biswasray took a keen interest in the anti-police campaign.85 An interesting fea-ture noticed in different meetings was that the peasants were

83 HPD, Report of SP, 10 November 1937, ACC-797.84 Desakatha, 30 September 1937.85 HPD, Report of DM (Koraput), F. No. 7/37, 9 September 1937, ACC-628.


advised to give up ill feelings towards the police. For instance, in a peasants meeting at Darpan estate on 25 September, it was pointed out that “the police, the magistracy, education and revenue are now under the tenants’ control and that the police will no longer harass them and should they (tenants) ill-treat the police, the Congress would send them to jail”. Besides, the CID reporter of the police was garlanded at the commencement of the meeting. Similar feelings were expressed towards the police in a Tirtol peasants’ meeting. The audience was advised to give up ill feelings towards the police, as “the police were their friends, brothers”.86

However, complaints and assaults against the police remained a significant trend in 1937. The incidents at Dudpal, Balasore town and Kotpad, as pointed out earlier, largely occurred in the overall context of the Congress ministry coming to power. Besides, the Congress sponsored enquiry committees to probe into police excesses and the campaign by the leadership as well as the press against the police helped to generate popular defiance of the so-called authority. It is in this context that the leadership of both the PCC and krushak sangha advised the peasants to give up violence against the police.87

In a peasant meeting in Darpan estate on 25 September, resolutions on abolition of zamindari system, forced labour, recognition of peasant rights over land, trees, forests and a sys-tem of payment by the co-sharers at the time of fixing separate records of rights were passed. The meeting also expressed no confidence against the Madhupur zamindar for his oppression of the people who had elected him.88 In a peasant meeting at Bheuria (Padampur, Sambalpur) on 20 September, L.N. Mishra exhorted the audience to press before the ministers the following proposals which were approved by the meeting: (i) to appoint one Baban Sahu (a local Congress activist) as honorary magistrate

86 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 13 October 1937, ACC-631. In fact, the assault on police by the activists of the Jubaka Sangha at Dudpal (Bhograi, north Balasore) occurred during May 1937. For the detailed activities of the Jubaka Sangha, see HPD, Report of SP, 2 June 1937 (Special Report No. 12/37), ACC-706; HPD, Report of Balasore SP, F. No. 12 of 1937, 16 April 1937, ACC-643; The Samaja, 4/18 June 1937.87 The Samaja, 13 September 1937.88 HPD, Report of DM, Cuttack, 13 October 1937, ACC-631.


in place of raja of Borasambar who was harassing the people as they did not elect him in the last poll, (ii) to compel the raja to allow tenants to collect fuel from the raja’s jungle.89 In yet another meeting at Padampur, L.N. Mishra stressed the abolition of tehwari chanda (subscription) demanded by the raja.90 In a peas-ant meeting at Remenda (Sambalpur), Ghanashyam Panigrahi advised the people to form kisan sanghas in every village and enroll themselves as Congress members. Besides, resolutions relating to revenue reduction to 50 per cent, tenants’ rights over land as enjoined for coastal districts by the tenancy rights over forests, abolition of excise shops and placing Sambalpur at par with coastal districts administratively were passed.

The leaders in Sambalpur regularly toured the interior pock-ets, holding peasant meetings as well as enrolling Congress members.91 The tenants of Sukinda belonging to the Kol tribe cut down large numbers of sal trees in Sukinda estate forests to clear lands for cultivation. Phani Pal, who had been active here since August, provided the impulse for the Kols’ action. Pal was subsequently fined Rs 100 for his involvement and preaching among the Kols. The fine seems to have been raised through subscriptions collected from the Kols.92 The developments in Sukinda drew the attention of the ministry and Biswanath Das promised to undertake a “probe into the grievances of the tenants personally”. Other leaders like Mahatab, Dwarika Nath Das and Sudhu Charan Das also intervened.93 In October, the peasants in the estates of Jarada and Khallikote (Ganjam) resisted the attempts of revenue collection. The resistance emerged in the context of a legislative bill to amend the Estates Land Act.

In a peasant meeting at Khallikote, Dibakar Patnaik observed, “Government servants who are really the servants of the people can be trampled down.” He cited the example of the United Provinces where a tenant killed a zamindar and then surrendered before the police.94 The legislative bill on the estates, though primarily meant for the zamindari tracts, also fuelled hopes

89 HPD, DM’s Report, SBP, 7 October 1937, ACC-627.90 Ibid.91 Ibid.92 HPD, “Abstract of OPAI”, 14 October 1937, No. 38, UN No. 37.93 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 25 October 1937, ACC-786.94 HPD, FNR, Ganjam, 11 October 1937, 24 October 1937, ACC-626.


of the people in ryotwari areas. In connection with the bill, Biswanath Das undertook a tour of Ganjam district from 9 to 13 October and explained to the peasants the objectives of the bill. Despite the opposition to the bill, which he apprehended from the zamindars, he assured the peasants that the bill would be through by December. Peasants, in a meeting at Bodokhimedi and Chinna Khimedi estates, complained to the prime minister Biswanath Das about police excesses as well as certain feudal levies like bethi, supply of rations, etc. Das, conducting a “search-ing enquiry” into such allegations, instructed that due payment for bethi or compulsory labour and supply of rations should be made. He also ordered enquiry into specific allegations against the police and subordinate officials.95

In the Bargarh Political Conference (Bheuria, 11 October), B.M. Joshi (who was presiding the conference) observed that the “police and other Government officials who were harass-ing the Congress people, were now the golams [slaves] of the Congress”.96 The conference was organized in Padampur area as a move against the zamindar of Borasambar in order to mo-bilize the tenants against the zamindar. The Bardoli example was cited (tenants killing the zamindar) to impress upon the tenants that the zamindar was a slave of the tenants. Moving a resolution, Kailash Chandra Dubey (brother of the minister Bodhram Dubey) remarked: “Ministers have promised that the zamindar of Borasambar should no longer be allowed to exercise the powers of a magistrate”. He went on to appeal to the audience that they should “strengthen Congress” so as to fight the zamindar.97

In the peasant meetings at Badaghar, Ipping and Dabardhu (Bolgarh, Puri) during October, the leadership explained to the people the endeavours of the ministry in the legislature.98 Besides, the attention of the ministry was drawn to the problem of floods in Puri. Along with these, local issues like zulum (atrocities) of the Parikud raja as well as formation of Congress committees at rural level and enrolment of Congress members were also

95 Ibid.96 HPD, FNR, SBP, 23 October 1937, ACC-627.97 Ibid.98 HPD, FNR, Puri, 9 October 1937, ACC-629.


highlighted.99 The Puri District Kisan Sangha passed resolu-tions on 29 October, covering “appointment of a committee to probe into alleged zulum of zamindars and another committee to enquire into the ‘undesirable conduct’ of ministers towards the flood affected tenants of Gop and Khurda”.100

In a meeting at Patkura on 11 October, it was decided to form village and central committees to move the government for the abolition of certification powers granted to the zamind-ars and not to pay unreasonable dues to them.101 At Balipatna, certain Congress activists destroyed a plantain garden of one Chakradhar Naik of Bodhakhandi to avenge his refusal to become a Congress member.102 In Sagbaria (Titrol), a group of krushak sangha activists threatened one Banshidhar Das with ostracization because he refused to subscribe to the sangha. The subscription in the village was being raised for the “formation of a Krushak Sammilani”.103 In the kisan meeting on 21 October at Sinjola haat (Balasore), peasants were advised to hand over “thieves and bad characters” to the Congress and to the police. In Jaleswar, a section of Congress activists continued to with-hold the payment of chowkidari tax.104

In Baragadia and Gobardhanpur, the local Congress leaders instructed the villagers to stop bethi and payment of illegal exactions to the Sukinda estate.105 The general discontent brew-ing in Sukinda forced the DM, Cuttack, to undertake a tour of the estate in November. His report on Sukinda pointed out the sordid state of affairs existing there. The report observed:

There are large numbers of Ho immigrants from Singhbhum and some from Mayurbhanja and Keonjhar for whom it is difficult to obtain new land for reclamation in their old homes. During the past 30 years, they have been obtaining clearing leases on payment of Salami in Sukinda and these leases have been granted without any plan and without any regular produce for the individual cases … Complaints have been made by many tenants that they have paid

99 HPD, “Extract of OPAI”, No. 38, 14 October 1937, ACC-738.100 HPD, FNR, Puri, 10 November 1937, ACC-629.101 HPD, Extract of OPAI, 3 November 1937, UN No. 37.102 HPD, “OPAI”, Vol. II, No. 38, 14 October 1937, ACC-864.103 HPD, “Extract of OPAI”, Nos 38 and 37, 14 October 1937.104 HPD, FNR, Balasore, 10 November 1937, ACC-630.105 HPD, “Extract of OPAI”, No. 43, 24 November 1937, ACC-786.


salami for such leases during the past eight years and they have had no receipts for the same nor any permission for the settlement asked for … it is quite likely that in some cases somebody has taken money irregularly from the tenants.106

The report blamed the tehsildars, the muttahdar and propri-etor of the estate as responsible for the “bad management of administration and rent collection”. The above state of affairs existing in Sukinda explains why Phani Pal’s efforts at tribal mobilization found ready response. Both Pal and Dwarikanath Das, MLA, held a strong appeal for the tribals of Sukinda. At times, the rumour spread that trees cut by the tribals would be burnt, but only upon the advice of Pal and Das!107

In Padampur (Sambalpur), L.N. Mishra advised the tenants to take away forest products without buying the usual licence from the raja of Borasambar. He even offered to lead the tenants into the zamindar’s reserved forest, but the offer was turned down by the tenants for “fear of criminal proceedings”. He also advised the peasants not to pay rent, fee and grazing tax.

Jungle cutting as well as pilfering forest products remained a marked trend during October and November.108 In Jeypore estate, rent refusal by tribals during November had been a fairly clear trend and there was a perceptible fall in the collection of peskash (a tribute or quitting rent) and land cess amounting to arrears of two installments totalling about Rs 34,000.109 The peasant meetings in the rural tracts of Balasore during November, while advocating reduction of rent, also emphasized on the removal of untouchability, cultivation of cotton, manufacture of salt, boycott of foreign goods and abolition of the dowry system. The district kisan sangha conference in Puri formed a committee to enquire into the “undesirable conduct of the Congress ministers” towards the tenants of the flood-affected area.110 In a peasant meeting at Bolgarh on 11 November, Purna Chandra Mahanty exhorted the audience “to destroy the government”.111

106 HPD, “Extract of FNR”, Cuttack, 10 November 1937, ACC-786.107 HPD, “Extract of OPAI”, No. 43, 24 November 1937, ACC-786.108 HPD, “OPAI”, Vol. II, No. 43, 24 November 1937, ACC-864; HPD, FNR, SBP, 23 November 1937, ACC-627.109 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 24 November 1937, ACC-628.110 HPD, FNR, Puri, 10 November 1937, ACC-629.111 Ibid.


The meeting in the countryside focused on anti-landlord and anti-police issues while debating the pros and cons of the tenancy legislations initiated by the ministry. It is interesting, in this context, to examine the proceedings of the Patia Peas-ants’ Conference held on 6 November. In this conference, first of its kind in the annals of Patia (Cuttack), presided over by Bhagabati Charan Panigrahi (Secretary, Congress Socialist Party, CSP hereafter), nearly 5,000 peasants attended, and prominent socialists like Ananta Patnaik, Sachi Routray, Baidyanath Rath, Prananath Patnaik (MLA) and Gourang Charan Das (Secretary, Cuttack District Peasants’ Association) addressed the meet. In his speech, Rath pointed out that the purpose of the Socialist Party was to oust the capitalist elements from the National Congress. He also observed that people in Orissa had derived no benefit from the capitalist Congress leaders such as Nilakantha Das or H.K. Mahatab and hence the Socialist Party had been formed “inside the Congress” to “do good to the masses”. Panigrahi attributed the cause of peasants’ sufferings to the exploitation by the capitalist-imperialist combine, as well as lack of orga-nization. He cited the example of the Russian Revolution, in which the masses killed the Czar. Appealing to the peasants to get organized, he observed: “If peasants are united, they would rule the country one day. Swaraj does not mean change of heirs between Englishmen and India but it means a change between capitalists and the masses.”

Sachi Routray, the poet, made his vitriolic observation against the ministry in the following manner:112

The British Government who were a few days ago trying to crush the Congress, have made these Congressmen ministers. These were also accepted by Congressmen who are opportunists. They were tempted and trapped like mice. They thought that they have been given too much by the British Government. The real motive behind the move is that in order to make their position safe and to safeguard their interest outside India, they have given the bait of ministry to Indians to please them and to keep them in their clutches. The zamindars and the capitalists who were inside Congress were

112 HPD, Report of SP, Cuttack, “Extract from OPAI”, No. 41, 10 November 1937, ACC-748.


tempted to become ministers. The ministers of Orissa belong to the class of zamindars, capitalists and exploiters.

In this connection, Ananta Patnaik observed that all the three ministers of Orissa were either moneylenders or zamindars and, hence, it was necessary that peasants, youth and the workers should join the Congress in large numbers and capture it. He, however, pointed out that the Congress was being dominated and controlled by capitalists or zamindars except some “hon-ourable exceptions like Gandhi and Nehru”. The conference resented the failure of the Congress ministry in forming an enquiry committee to enquire into general indebtedness of the peasants. The conference voiced the following demands:

(a) Reduction of rent by 50 per cent (b) Legislation prohibiting the sale of agricultural implements

of the peasants (c) Legislation for realization of interest at the rate of one anna

per rupee per annum (d) Compulsory primary education (e) Realization of rent from peasants whose income was more

than Rs 50 (f) Regulation prohibiting realization of mutation fee (g) Abolition of indirect tax (h) Full rights of the peasants over trees, etc. (i) Abolition of zamindari system (j) Cancellation of Lakhraj-Baheli right of the Patia estate as

it was detrimental to the socio-economic and political progress of the people

(k) Legislation prohibiting realization of rent for at least three years from the land washed away by floods and total remission of rent for the land covered by sand

(l) Free grazing in khasmahal (a district held in the management of government) lands

(m) Postponement of realization of arrears of rent for three years and remission of total rent for the year

The conference terminated with the slogan of “Chasi Muliara Jai” (“Victory to Peasants and Workers”).


In yet another peasant conference at Mahanga on 28 Novem-ber,113 Rajkrushna Bose (parliamentary secretary) advised the peasants to form committees and unions which could elect their representatives to the legislature to fight for them. Citing the example of Russia where masses murdered the Czar, he pointed out that it was not the “intention of Congress to instigate peas-ants to refuse rent to the landlords”. Krushna Chandra Naik criticized the ministers as capitalists who would do “nothing real to benefit the labouring classes”. He went on to exhort the tenants to “loot their zamindars” if they failed to obtain what they wanted.

The above developments indicated the surfacing of a distinct trend of a socialist critique of the ministry around this time. The “extreme socialist” leaders blamed the ministry for “inactivity” and “lukewarm sympathy”114 for the peasants’ cause.

In Surangi estate (Ganjam), Govind Chandra Mishra advised the tenants not to pay the exorbitant land rent and forest tax, but to wait for the decision of the Orissa Assembly with respect to the amendment to the Madras Estates Land Act. He also col-lected subscriptions in Kolua and Patrapur villages for fighting out the cause of the tenants and organizing youth leagues.115 In the Bodokhimedi estate, the zamindar failed in his attempt to lease out a few of his villages due to the anti-zamindar campaign undertaken by a Congress activist named Tumula Krishna Murti.

Similarly, the rajas of Khallikote, Athagada and Biridi estates faced problems in their attempt to lease out villages due to the campaign against the estates. In fact, the collection of miscel-laneous taxes in Surangi was nil by December 1937, compared to Rs 5,000 in the preceding year. This, in fact, forced the raja to lease out his villages on reduced rent.116 Dibakar Patnaik (MLA) advised the zamindars of Bodokhimedi to effect an “amicable settlement” with the tenants of the four villages where the crop had failed. The tenants insisted on villages being leased out for half the rental collected in 1936. The peasants’ resistance in these estates made the zamindars grant some concessions to the

113 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 14 December 1937, ACC-631.114 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 14 November 1937.115 HPD, FNR, Ganjam, 24 December 1937, ACC-626.116 Ibid.


tenants.117 In this context, the CM issued a statement that neither he nor his party was in favour of non-payment of legal dues to the zamindars. This had a “positive impact” on the vexed issue of leasing out the villages by the zamindar of Surangi.118

In a peasants’ conference at Jaleswar (north Balasore) on 5 December, Rajkrushna Bose stressed on the need for peasants’ organization and observed that Congress had entered the legis-lature to utilize the opportunity for the benefit of the masses, to arouse mass consciousness and to defeat and expose the errors of the present administration. Since the British government was able to continue its administration through the help of zamindars, moneylenders and village touts, their (Congress’) object was to crush the middlemen first. However, he implored the peasants to work peacefully and constitutionally.119 The trend of jungle cutting also surfaced in Dharmasala and Barchana areas of the Madhupur estate. In Darpan estate, the tenants felt bold enough to cut down trees for fuel from the jungles without paying the fees.120 A meeting at the Madhupur estates, attended by 500 peasants, protested against the oppression of tenants by the zamindar and his officials.121

Response of the Landed Elements

On 22 September, 300 zamindars from different parts of Orissa attended the conference of the Orissa Landholders’ Associa-tion at Cuttack.122 The conference condemned the tenancy bills introduced in the legislature by the ministry as expropriator. It was also decided to broaden the base of the association with district branches throughout the province. The view that the zamindars should resort to satyagraha “if necessary to save their interests” was also voiced in the conference. Another meeting held at Puri on 26 September under the initiative of Mahanta Gadadhar Ramanuj Das of Emar Mutt also highlighted the threat to the landlords posed by the proposed legislation.123 In another

117 Ibid.118 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 14 December 1937, ACC-631.119 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 14 December 1937, ACC-631.120 HPD, “OPAI”, Vol. II, No. 46, 17 December 1937, ACC-864.121 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 14 December 1937, ACC-631.122 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 13 October 1937, ACC-631.123 Ibid.


meeting of the zamindars held at Bhadrak on 10 November, it was decided to organize a conference and represent their griev-ances to the ministry over the proposed bill on tenancy.124

The landholders’ conference held at Cuttack125 (28–29 Novem-ber) under the presidentship of the raja of Dharakote resolved to make the landlords’ movement broad-based and sought to establish contact with similar organizations of zamindars and landlords of other provinces in its bid to strengthen the Orissa organization of landlords. It also hoped to make their agitation a matter of all-India importance. Two organizers were specifi-cally appointed to tour the districts like Koraput and Balasore to instigate the tenants to demand the concessions promised to the people by the Congress in their election manifesto and also to counter the “doctrine of ‘Congress Socialism’ by propaganda”. Puri and Balasore were selected as the venues for the second and third sessions. Besides, the raja of Darbhanga was invited to preside over the Puri session. The conference of landlords at Puri advocated a resolution in favour of 50 per cent remission of land revenue to ensure “good relations between landlords and tenants”.126 This was the stand specifically adopted by the Nationalist Party (the opposition party) under its leader Moulavi Latifur Rahman (MLA), who advocated such moves in the as-sembly as 25 per cent reduction of land revenue, total abolition of chowkidari tax and abolition of mutation fee in government estates. The logic was that if the resolutions were defeated by the majority Congress party in the assembly, the Nationalist Party would expose the impracticability of the Congress’ elec-tion manifesto.

1938: The Peak of Popular Struggle: Context and Pattern of Resistance

Cuttack

The peasant association in Kujanga (formed towards the end of 1936) named as ‘29 Village Sabha’ stepped up its militant 124 HPD, FNR, 10 November 1937, ACC-630.125 HPD, Misc., Report from CID, F. No. 292 of 1937, 10 December 1937, ACC-760.126 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 29 December 1937; HPD, FNR, Puri, 24 November 1937.


resistance around 1938. The sabha, essentially organized to conduct the election campaign of Congress, took to village welfare activities such as settling of disputes between tenants and building roads. Around September 1937, under the “Chief Dictatorship”127 of Narayan Birbara Samanta, the local Congress activist and an active leader of the area during the salt satyagraha, the sabha attempted to enforce its decisions on certain issues in the villages. For example, the sabha pressurized the mahajans to offer loans to the peasants when the latter refused to do so on the grounds that old loans had not been repaid. In the context of crop failure of 1936, paddy scarcity became acute in the area during August 1937. Around December 1937, the sabha started expanding its activities by enforcing certain rules such as that (i) every villager employing a servant would contribute Re 1 to the sabha’s fund; (ii) each member would continue paying Re 1; (iii) in lieu of feasts at marriages and funerals, contributions would be made to the sabha; (iv) villagers whose contributions were made by others would pay Re 1 per acre to the sabha; (v) villagers who let out their cultivation on bhag (share) would pay Re 1 per acre; (vi) for every rupee of land revenue, 6 pais would be paid to the sabha.128 The sabha arranged to collect paddy from the tenants and sell it in Cuttack, charging a commission of 4 annas and 6 pais per bharana (about 10 maunds) from the owners towards the sabha fund.

The virtual strengthening of the sabha led to a reaction from the mahajans, and, around January 1938, a Mahajan Sabha was formed to counter the activities of the local krushaka sangha. The counter-propaganda of the Mahajan Sabha against the 29 Village Sabha’s activities led to the formation of an enquiry com-mittee consisting of Nabakrushna Choudhury and Gangadhar Das to probe into the complaints. The committee dismissed the complaints against the 29 Village Sabha as malicious exaggera-tion, thereby giving a clean chit to the sabha’s activities.129 The committee examined specific complaints against the sabha in the form of130

127 Krushak, 27 January 1938.128 HPD, Confidential Report by the DM, Cuttack on Agrarian situation in Tirtol PS, 29 March 1938, ACC-1640.129 Krushak, 27 January 1938.130 HPD, Agrarian Situation in Tirtol PS.


(a) assault and looting of paddy and plantation; (b) remission and reduction of debt demanded from the mahajan

and upon refusal resorting to picketing and boycott of the mahajans;

(c) assaulting the members of the Mahajan Sabha who attempted to meet the raja of Burdwan (owner of Kujanga estate) to petition against the village sabha and thus seek redressal against the atrocities by the sabha;

(d) forcible seizure against hand notes from the mahajan; (e) assault against persons siding with mahajan’s cause; (f) “looting” of paddy from the mahajans, which was received

by them as repayment of loan from the villagers.

The objective of the sabha, as pointed out by the report of the enquiry committee, was “to raise a common fund with which rent could be paid and the mahajan paid off and paddy sold on a co-operative basis”. However, the method of enforcement of the sabha’s rules and decisions often took the form of vigorous boycott. Krushna Pradhan, an activist of the Mahajan Sabha, was boycotted under the orders of Bhagabat Pradhan, the president of the village sub-committee, and the boycott was withdrawn after a payment of Rs 200 to the 29 Village Sabha by Krushna’s uncle. Under the sabha’s order, the accused person would be forcibly taken to the sabha’s committee meeting; in certain cases, the accused was assaulted.

The activities of Phani Pal extended to other estates like Pach-hikote and Madhupur beyond Sukinda towards the beginning of 1938. Jungle cutting remained a noticeable trend in these pockets. Stealing of fish from the anabadi tanks of the estate was another activity frequently resorted to.131 Pal, an ayurvedic doctor who toured the rural areas ostensibly to popularize ayurvedic medicines in village meetings, used such platforms to mobilize the peasants and tribals of the area. Pal was instru-mental in the organization of the kisan sangha with about 400 members at Chusathipara (near Jenapur).132 Pal’s activities got full support from the socialist leadership. For example, Malati Devi, addressing a gathering of 4,000 peasants including the

131 HPD, “CS to Minister (Home)”, 19 April 1938, ACC-903.132 HPD, “OPAI”, No. 3, 19 January 1938, ACC-786.


Kols of Sukinda at Pachhikote haat on 3 February, approved of the jungle-cutting activities of the Sukinda Kols. She went on to observe that the kisan sangha was not responsible for the jungle cutting, yet the sangha was ready to back those who had done it since the cutting was “just”.133 In March, the kutchery house (office) of the proprietor of Madhupur was set on fire. The objective was to burn the papers, which could have gone against the interests of the tenants.134 In the peasant meetings in the Korai area, tenants were asked to pay rent and chowkidari tax but to refuse illegal dues to landlords. Besides, they were told that the zamindars lacked rights over trees and fisheries.135 In response to the campaign, fish stealing in Korai picked up around March. For example, the villagers of Kaipada stole fish from a tank which the proprietor had leased out to a person. This incident followed a meeting in Kodama where the villag-ers of Kaipada sought clarification from Purna Chandra Singh and Nabin Behera, the speakers, on whether they could take away fish from the anabadi tanks. The speakers said that they could do so even without the permission of the proprietor.136 Phani Pal also advised tenants in meetings at Ragadi and Korai during March to assault the zamindar’s men if they caught fish from anabadi tanks of the estate and encouraged the tenants to cultivate anabadi lands without the permission of the proprietor. In January, he mobilized tenants in Dharmasala not to pay rent to the proprietors something they had been doing for the last 10 years. He also exhorted the tenants of Madhupur estate in March to rise against the proprietor of the estate, emulating the examples of Kols of Sukinda.137 In Sukinda estate, he advised the tenants:138

(a) not to pay rent for the time being as arrears of rent would be remitted shortly;

133 HPD, Report of SP, Cuttack, 8 February 1938, ACC-905.134 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, First half of March 1938, ACC-905.135 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 26 March 1938, ACC-1058; also see HPD, “OPAI”, Feb-ruary–March, ACC-868.136 HPD, “Kisan Meeting at Kodama”, 2 March 1938, ACC-959.137 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 10 April 1938. Pal addressed many peasants’ meetings in Dharmasala (January), Rayadi and Korai (March), Madhupur (March), Sukinda (March, May) and Pachhikote (1937 November onwards).138 HPD, “Manager, Sukinda Estate to SDO, Jajpur”, 1 April 1938, ACC-903.


(b) not to pay any mutation fee, which had already been abol-ished;

(c) that tenants had a six anna share in the estate forest and that they might, if they wanted, fell and remove the timber without permission and without royalty;

(d) that the raja had no powers; no money to sue the tenants, so tenants need not be afraid of him; and

(e) that the tenants need not be afraid of jails.

Pal’s activities in Pachhikote encouraged peasants to de-mand a greater share in the division of paddy cultivated on the proprietor’s land on bhag (sharing) system and to insist on rent receipts from the estate. The tenants of Pachhikote also boycot-ted the estate officials as well as others who refused to carry out the command of the krushak sangha. In May, tenants of Sukinda demanded the settlement of lands where the trees were cut.139 The campaign by the krushak sangha as well as popular response to it was so successful that the estate of Pachhikote reeled under the pressure of a heavy debt to the tune of Rs 150,000 by April 1938.140 Alongwith Pal, the local leaders were Purna Chandra Singh, Nabin Behera and Bhibisan Panda (Korai), Sashi Bhusan Das (Madhupur), Kulamani Acharya, Baldev Lal and Jaikrishna Patnaik (Jenapur). Besides, socialist leaders like Nabakrushna Choudhury, Malati Choudhury, Gouranga Das, Pranakrishna Padhiary and Sarangadhar Das also backed the krushak sangha activities of these pockets.141 Pal was restricted under Section 144 CrPC on 6 April from making speeches in Sukinda, Korai and Dharmasala areas.142 After a few days, he was hospitalized following a brutal assault on him engineered by the Pachhikote estate.143 This came under severe criticism, especially by the socialists. The attention of the minister was drawn to the issue and the SI’s patronization of the proprietor’s atrocities was condemned.144

The orders of the SDO, Jaipur,

preventing Pal’s politics in Sukinda, Korai, and Dharmasala,

139 HPD, Report of SP, “Agrarian Agitation in Korai”, 22 April 1938, ACC-903.140 Ibid.141 HPD, FNR, January–March, Cuttack, ACC-1058.142 Amrit Bazaar Patrika, 9 April 1938.143 HPD, Report of SP on Agrarian Situation in Korai, 22 April 1938, ACC-903.144 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 10 April 1938, ACC-1058.


caused general resentment. The ministry opposed the imposi-tion. In this connection, Home Minister Nityananda Kanungo observed in an official note that the order of the SDO against Pal meant “a fundamental curtailment of civil liberties which is contrary to the settled policy of this Government”. He went on to order the immediate “withdrawal of the notice without delay” as a mistake had been committed by issuing the order against Pal.145

Thus, an encouraged Pal called upon the tenants in a meeting at Kalkala (Barchana) on 28 April to assault the zamindars in return for assault on them. However, Pal was finally arrested on 3 May on the pretext of his defaulting on the payment of a fine of Rs 100 in a case against him pertaining to his activities in Sukinda in 1937.146 The Krushak, the socialist mouthpiece which propagated pro-tenant causes and supported the peasant move-ment in the estates, came to be hauled up by the authorities.147 The krushak sangha meetings organized under the socialist platform condemned the false charges levelled by the police on sangha activists. For example, Malati Devi, in a meeting at Patrajpur, Barchana, on 16 May148 blamed the police and the magistrate for helping the zamindars in instituting false cases to suppress the peasant movement. Demanding the withdrawal of Section 144 CrPC imposed on Pal, the meeting passed resolutions such as six months of rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs 500 against landlords collecting illegal dues and the formation of an enquiry committee to probe into the oppression of zamindars by instituting false cases against tenants. The Utkal Provincial Kisan Sangha also strongly protested against the repression of the krushak sangha. On 2 May, the working committee of the sangha urged the government to conduct an impartial enquiry into popular allegations that the “police and other officials were siding with zamindars and mahajans to check the Kisan move-ment on false grounds”.149

The kisan sangha’s campaign had in fact scaled new heights by emboldening the tenants in their fight against landlords and

145 HPD, “N. Kanungo to CS”, 13 April 1938, ACC-903.146 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, Second half of May 1938, ACC-1058.147 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 10 April 1938, ACC-1058.148 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 11 June 1938, ACC-1058.149 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, First half of May 1938.


mahajans. For instance, when the proprietor of Madhupur estate leased a bi-weekly haat at Madhuban village to one Kalandi Rout and when the lessee attempted to collect the haat fees, the shopkeepers boycotted the haat by deserting it. They shifted to a new site 50 yards away from Madhupur estate under the ju-risdiction of another estate holder, Motilal Pandit. This new haat came to be called Krushak haat and despite the ban imposed by the SDO, it continued to function. When the landowner of the new haat was threatened with a case by the authorities, socialist leaders like Malati Choudhury and Sarangadhar Das lent moral support by backing the villagers’ stand. Bichitrananda Das and Birakishor Das (Advocate General) were engaged by the lead-ers.150 Following the advice of G.B. Dutta, the peasants in Angul backed out from the idea of boycotting the haat in connection with their demand for abolition of the system of settlement of the haat by auction. G.B. Dutta asked the people to “wait for the reconsideration of the question by the Government”.151 In the face of repression by the authorities, the peasant movement in its militant version petered out by June in the hotbeds of the krushak sangha in Cuttack district.152

We could have a quick glance at the response of the non-social-ist section of the PCC leadership to the peasant movement. In a meeting at Salipur haat held on 13 February, Mahatab explained that the country had obtained only a “four anna Swaraj” and by forming village kisan sanghas to support the Congress, people should “now work for the remaining 12 annas”. However, the meeting marked a lack of enthusiasm due to the “paucity of gains to the tenants embodied in Tenancy Bill”.153 Further, Mahatab advised the tenants of the Pachhikote haat (16 April) that unity among tenants was good but holding meetings against the pro-prietors was not. He advised the tenants to reach a compromise with the proprietors and added that the proprietors should also join the krushak sangha.154 Mahatab and Bhagirathi Mahapatra took up the initiative to bring about peace and unity among the landlords and tenants in the Kujanga area, following the intense

150 HPD, Report of SP, Cuttack, 19–21 June 1938, 1/15/5-38, ACC-961.151 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, April 1938, ACC-1058.152 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 11 June 1938, ACC-1058.153 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, February 1938, ACC-1058.154 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, April 1938, ACC-1058.


phase of peasant resistance. This resulted in the withdrawal of a number of petitions filed by the parties over several cases pending in law courts.155 Nanda Kishore Das and Harihar Das (deputy speaker) in a meeting at Tentuliapada—an active pocket of peasant mobilization under the banner of 29 Village Sabha of Tirtol—appealed to the zamindar for cooperation.156

It is important in this respect to understand the state of the PCC during this phase of intense peasant mobilization. It was then affected by the fight for presidentship between two warring heads: Mahatab and Nilakantha Das.157 The latter, with his pro-landlord sympathies, had been successful in exerting his clout in the DCCs of Puri and Ganjam. The crisis was resolved to some extent by Gopabandhu Choudhury, a committed Gandhian who was elected as the president in March. He formed an executive committee consisting of four members each from both Mahatab’s and Das’ factions. However, the socialists demanded a larger share in the provincial working committee.

The PCC’s fifth annual session158 was held after a gap of nine years at Cuttack on 21–22 May. In his speech, the chairman of the reception committee, Bhagirathi Mohapatra, referring to the formation of a separate peasant organization, observed: “There is nothing to be afraid of. It is necessary to form au-tonomous organisations if these supported the Congress cause. Any organisation based on non-violence would be helpful to the Congress.”

In his presidential note, Gopabandhu Choudhury observed: “Now the movement had not been restricted to politics only but it has also the programme of eradicating the social, religious and economic evils. The movement is not only meant for severance of all connections with the British but also to uproot the sources of all kinds of exploitation noticeable in the country”.

The conference registered its resentment of the action of the governor of Orissa in referring the Madras Estates Law Amend-ment Act to the Governor-General and cautioned the governor not to repeat the mistake in the case of Orissa Tenancy Amendment

155 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 11 June 1938, ACC-1058.156 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, May 1938, ACC-1058.157 HPD, Report of CS, 15 January 1938/14 April 1938/14 May 1938, ACC-1059.158 HPD, Report of Special Branch (CID) on UPCC, 21–22 May 1938, ACC-1679.


Bill. Seconding the resolution, Malati Devi advocated the stop-page of rent in case the bill was not passed. She warned that Congress ministers would resign and a no-tax movement on a countrywide basis would be launched if the bill was not passed. Nabakrushna Choudhury moved a resolution which stated that peasant organizations be recognized and minimum demands of the peasants be fulfilled. The proceedings of the PCC session clearly brought out the differing perceptions of the leadership vis-à-vis the peasants’ movement.

The views of the socialist leadership were further spelt out in the meeting organized by the socialists in Cuttack during 3–4 June.159 The meeting was conspicuous by the presence of the prominent socialist Mr Batliwala (Bombay) and the kisan leader Professor Ranga. Prof. Ranga, reflecting on the state of the kisan movement, observed that he along with Biswanath Das had fought for the cause of kisans in Madras during 1923–30 and added that Das had become a disappointing moderate. He characterized the objectives of the peasant movement as a fight against landlords, moneylenders and British imperialism. He also threatened to make the issue of the Madras Estates Land Act Amendment Bill an all-India and a worldwide question if it was not approved.

The pattern of the peasant movement around June is worth analyzing. The 29 Village Sabha of Kujanga was abolished in June, and the differences between mahajans and tenants were amicably settled; cases were withdrawn mutually and aggrieved persons were compensated, thanks to the efforts of Mahatab and Bhagirathi Mohapatra. The local zamindar, Purna Chandra Parija, enrolled as a Congress member, convened a peasants’ meeting, which was attended by the erstwhile leaders of the 29 Village Sabha, including Narayan Birabara Samanta.160 In Jenapur, a meeting was held on 14 July where Biswanath Das said:

Congress is a very old institution, which has allowed into its fold all sections of people: high or low, rich or poor, labourers and capitalists, landlords and tenants, and kisans form the majority in it. By assuming the power of Government, the responsibilities of all

159 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 11 June 1938, ACC-1038.160 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 25 July 1938, ACC-1058.


sections of people have increased and whenever any section of the people demand anything, it should be alive to its responsibilities to the province as a whole.

Objecting to the kisan slogan about the destruction of zamind-ari system, he added that the system itself was not bad, though certain zamindars might be abusing powers and privileges and that if they did so they would bring about their own destruction. He advised peasants not to withhold the rent of the landlords but urged them not to pay illegal dues.161

It is fairly clear that advocating a line of conciliation between landed elements and the tenants, tried by the non-socialist sec-tion of the PCC, was necessitated in the context of the militant position of the krushak sanghas in Kujanga, Sukinda, Madhupur and Dharmasala areas of Cuttack. Phani Pal; after his release from jail, again became active in krushak sangha activities. In the meeting at Pachhikote (17 July), he advised the peasants to refuse illegal dues to the zamindars. However, a peasant from the audience protested against the advice, saying that it was easy for the kisan leaders to ask the people to do illegal acts like cutting of trees, but when they (tenants) went to jail the leaders withdrew from the scene and kept aloof.162

In the post-June phase, the krushak sangha campaign as well as the socialists mostly dealt with the usual demands of the sangha. The campaign also sought to popularize the idea that from the governor down to the chowkidar, everybody should be treated as servants of the people and were bound to work according to people’s wishes.163 The krushak sangha at Kusinga (Jagatsinghpur) decided to resolve the disputes through the village panchayat.164 In a meeting organized at Burundadeipur haat (Dharmasala) to mark the celebration of Kisan Day165 on 1 September, the socialists again clearly spelt out their stance vis-à-vis the kisan sangha and Congress ministry. Nearly 15,000–20,000 people, including peasants from Dhenkanal state, attended the

161 Ibid.162 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 25 July 1938, ACC-1058.163 Ibid.164 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 26 June 1938, ACC-1058.165 HPD, Report of Special Branch, 5 September 1938, ACC-913; HPD, Report of CID, 3 September 1938, ACC-1938.


meeting. In his presidential address, Pranakrushna Padihary observed that though there had been no economic change in the celebration of the 1937 Kisan Day, yet there was a “new awakening” among them in the last year. He went on to add:

Today, the Santal peasants of Sukinda, the peasants of Pachhikote are gladly courting imprisonment. The peasants of Gop of Puri are at the doors of prison. The peasants of Nilagiri State have gun shots on their chests. Today the poor peasantry in Orissa is awakened ... Mere zamindars like [those of] Madhupur and Sukinda have no right to stand [up to them]. They can be blown away ... The nation is moving fast like the Punjab Express. One fine morning you will find that the zamindars and the Government have gone. You will then rule this country. Thus you will have to unite and organise yourselves village-wise to achieve Swaraj.

Describing the Congress ministers as “eunuchs”, he said that swaraj could not be obtained through them. He also went on to advise the peasants to organize themselves and to ask the ministers to resign as they had not been able to do anything. Again, while expressing satisfaction over the approval of the Tenancy Act just before the Kisan Day, he pointed out that provisions contained in the act were still insufficient and there was a need for the abolition of the zamindari system as well as the practice of having an intermediary between the govern-ment and tenants. While urging the peasants to emulate the example of the Russian Revolution, he observed, “Within this year, the British empire shall be wiped out from the face of earth”, and so will zamindars, and “peasants and workers will be owners of this country”. However, he also pointed out the need for peasants to enroll themselves as Congress members and to take up a non-violent form of protest under Congress guidance. Padihary, who was involved with other socialists in peasant mobilization, subsequently disapproved the use of violence. Nabakrushna Choudhury made a critical observation on the issue of violence/non-violence:

A time has come when, if necessity arises, and if it is not possible for us, we may not accept the advice of Gandhi, who is decidedly the only man who can claim to have brought about general con-sciousness amongst masses, peasants and workers, a new awakening among the people of the whole world. Those who want to assault


us, we should not assault them in return. This we have decided in consultation with the Congress, considering the present political situation in the country, as it would be the best thing to organise ourselves peacefully.

“But”, he added, “if those who are in the habit of assaulting others … realising rent at the point of arms—if these people deliver lectures on non-violence, we are not prepared to hear them … as they have the right to kill us for their interest … we have also the right to kill them for our own interests.”

After the release of Phani Pal and the vigorous campaign by the krushak sangha and the socialist leaders, another phase of intense peasant mobilization occurred around September. In a meeting at Andhari166 in Korai PS on 15 September, Pal advised that each man should keep a lathi for self-protection and in each village a drum was to be used for rallying round all the villag-ers to offer satyagraha in case of oppression by the zamindars. Taruna Sangha, a Congress-affiliated youth organization, headed by Laxmidhar Singhdeo, led a no-rent campaign in Sukinda as well as the social boycott of the raja’s officials and demanded the dismissal of the assistant manager.167 Malati Choudhury founded a kisan ashram in October at Kulanda village (Dharmasala).168 There is evidence of campaigns over no-rent and remission of rent alongwith social boycott against estate officials by the tenants in the estates of Balarampur, Madhupur, Pachhikote, Sukinda and Chausathipara around September–October. The services of barbers, washermen, shopkeepers, etc., were refused to the officials of the estate.169 Mahatab did not approve of the activi-ties of the krushak sangha of Jenapur and thought of having counter-propaganda against their activities. By December, the krushak sangha of Chausathipara got into serious conflict with the zamindar for its policy of continued boycott and the assault against the zamindar’s men. This was followed by massive arrest of krushak sangha leaders.170 In Chhatia (Barchana PS),

166 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 29 September 1938–10 October 1938, ACC-1058.167 HPD, “OPAI”, No. 35, 17 September 1938, ACC-938; HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 29 September 1938, ACC-1058.168 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, October 1938, ACC-1058.169 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 29 September 1938–10 October 1938, ACC-1058.170 HPD, Report of SP, Cuttack, F. No. 298 of 1938, 12 December 1938, ACC-1042.


peasants were mobilized not to pay revenue to zamindars in view of the famine.171 A pamphlet issued by Phani Pal in October in a peasant conference at Nadiabhanga in Sukinda held on 1 November called for the participation of one member per family within a distance of 120 miles from the meeting spot. Attacking samrajyabad (imperialism) and capitalism as the reasons for the miseries of peasants, the pamphlet focused on rent reduction and wished victory to kisans and labourers. It underscored the promotion of the kisan sangha.172

In November, Taruna Sangha, which was functioning under Praja Parishad, the Congress organization of Sukinda, broke away from it and joined the krushak sangha movement when their dabipatra (charter of demands) was not accepted. The dabipatra highlighted demands like reduction of rent by 50 per cent, abolition of haat tax, padhan (headman) system, right to cut timber from reserved forests, diversion of half of the net income of the zamindar for tenants’ welfare activities like education, public health and opening of industries to absorb unemployed labourers.173

To sum up, after a brief lull, peasant mobilization picked up around August, mainly in the Jaipur sub-division. The krushak sangha and socialist leadership played an active role in the campaign. The socialist position of having a separate organiza-tion for the krushak sangha and some distancing from the PCC over the issue surfaced after the PCC annual conference in May. Mahatab and Padihary positioned themselves in opposition to the socialist and krushak sangha campaign of anti-landlordism. It is important to note that Padihary, although basically a CSP-ian, also distanced himself from the CSP’s violent anti-landlord tirade.

The other point of import was that with their overall faith in the Congress and Gandhian ideology of non-violence, the socialists often displayed their support to “violent actions” by the peasants and expressed their willingness to differ from the Gandhian method of struggle. The shift became growingly noticeable in the post-May phase (after the PCC conference and

171 HPD, FNR, October 1938, Cuttack, ACC-1058.172 “Huge Kisan Conference at Sukinda Thana” (Pamphlet), Cuttack, 24 October 1938, ACC-1058.173 HPD, Report of DM to CS on Sukinda Affairs, 10 November 1938, ACC-903.


Gopabandhu’s takeover as president). For instance, Nabakrushna Choudhury, during the Kisan Day meeting at Dharmasala, jus-tified the killing of landlords by the tenants by not accepting the advice of Gandhi. However, this position co-existed with their broad faith in the Congress and the Gandhian method. For instance, in the peasant meeting at Barchana (16 May 1938), Malati Choudhury eulogized the Marxian principle for the objective of achieving a classless society, and explained to the peasants that the peasant movement in India should be taken up in a non-violent way as had been pointed out by Gandhi and the Congress. Peasants and workers should fight on Gandhian principles and not with arms and ammunition. Similarly, Padi-hary, exhorting peasants to emulate the example of the Russian Revolution, also advised them to take up a non-violent fight under Congress guidance.174

The PCC’s overall efforts at promotion of class harmony co-existed with the above trend, as pointed out earlier in the posi-tions of Mahatab and Biswanath Das. But, it is significant that this leadership was more responsive to the socialist campaign than the “rightist bloc” led by Nilakantha Das. However, with the presidency of PCC resting with Gopabandhu Choudhury, the PCC’s overall exercise focused on raising “mass conscious-ness” with a “spirit of non-violence”.

Puri

The peasant movement in Puri initially got affected by the differ-ences between Nilakantha Das and Mahatab. Das, hailing from Puri, had a sizeable influence on the Puri DCC. However, he came to be increasingly opposed by the socialist forces, which tried to break away from the “orthodox Congress fold”. By Janu-ary, Mohan Das (Nimapara), who was considered Nilakantha Das’s protégé, turned against him, as did Rath and Prananath Patnaik, both of them socialist leaders. Of the 27 members elected to the PCC from Puri, 10 belonged to the socialist camp.175 An

174 HPD, Report of SP (CID) on Barchana Peasants’ Conference, 21 May 1938, ACC-888.175 HPD, FNR, Puri, 10 January 1938, ACC-1055; HPD, Report of CS, 15 January 1938, ACC-1059.


apparent move by Das to form a party within the Congress to dislodge the Congress ministry was not backed up by the socialist group.176

Speaking at the Puri District Kisan Conference (Jatani, 11 February), Mohan Das branded the older section of the Congress as capitalist and pro-zamindar.177 In the Tangi Peasant Confer-ence held on 27 February which was addressed by Nabakrushna Choudhury, Mohan Das held the zamindars, moneylenders, sar-barkars (headmen) as well as the Government responsible for the exploitation of the people, and Prananath Patnaik observed:

If mill hands go on strike and peasants stop paying rent, what can the Government do except to quit India … Police and Governments who are now being paid by the Government will also resign when they realise that they are not being properly paid.

Thanking the ministry for appointing a committee to exam-ine the forest laws, the meeting asked the people of Khurda to report their grievances to the committee for redressal. It also advised people not to pay anything for illegal gratification and to subscribe to the Krushak.178

In the context of starvation deaths in Brahmagiri, Gop and Kakatpur, the socialists voiced the demand for rent reduction and advocated taxation on the rich and the zamindars.179 In the peasants’ meetings, the leaders also focused on issues like the right to manufacture salt and taking measures for flood protection.180 In April, Mahatab, accompanied by socialist lead-ers, toured the interior areas of Pipli, Kakatpur, Nimapara and Gop, addressing many peasant meetings. He talked about the difficulties the ministers had to face under the “existing laws to do any real good to the people”.181 At the Benupur (Balianta PS) peasant meeting,182 Bhagabati Panigrahi expostulated that socialism meant that everybody should get equal privileges

176 HPD, FNR, Puri, 22 January 1938, ACC-1055.177 HPD, FNR, Puri, 25 January 1938, ACC-1059.178 HPD, “Speeches of N.K. Choudhury, Prananath Patnaik, et al. in Tangi Peas-ants’ Conference”, F. No. 73 of 1938, 27 February 1938, ACC-1150.179 HPD, FNR, Puri, 24 March 1938, ACC-1055.180 HPD, Report of SP, 3 May 1938, F. No. 125/1938, ACC-1681.181 HPD, FNR, Puri, 10 April 1938, ACC-1055.182 HPD, FNR, Puri, 25 May 1938, ACC-1055.


whereas the Congress was unwilling to go against capitalism. Prananath Patnaik advocated for non-payment of taxes and Rath talked about the abolition of vested interests represented by the mahajan-zamindar-capitalist nexus. We come across a reference to the mobilization of tenants in Balipatha by a Congress activ-ist named Krushna Chandra Mohanty around May as a result of which many cases against the mukadaams (village headmen) were filed. The mahantas (abbots of mutts or monasteries) also complained that they were forcibly offered bhog (offerings) inside the local temple of Bhagabati Thakuraani (goddess’ name) by the tenants.183 Local leaders like Krushna Mohanty and Kshetra Mohan Rai advised people to carry on satyagraha outside the doors of ministers and officials if flood protection measures were not taken up.184

At the Banpur peasants’ meeting (10 June), Nilakantha Das with his typical anti-ministry stance exhorted the audience “to catch hold of the ears” of the chief minister and ask him why he had not taken up the question of “remission of land revenue till now”. He alleged that the chief minister had reduced the rents in Khallikote and Athagad estates in Ganjam to serve his own self-interest, as he was a rich landowner.185 The Puri District Political Conference (Bhubaneswar, 2 June) highlighted existing local problems such as floods, salt manufacture and abolition of the sarbarakari system.186 When the prime minister visited Khurda and addressed a peasant meeting187 there on 12 December, he was given a memorandum listing demands such as remission of enhanced land revenue. Das assured the gathering that he would take immediate action on their legitimate grievances.

Balasore

At meetings in Eram (January) and Gundripada (February), peasants were exhorted to utilize the privileges offered by the Amended Tenancy Bill. Peasants were told that mutation fee

183 Ibid.184 HPD, FNR, Puri, 10 July 1938.185 HPD, FNR, Puri, 25 June 1938, ACC-1055.186 HPD, “Speech of N.K. Das in the Puri District Political Conference on 2 June 1938”, ACC-958.187 HPD, FNR, Puri, December 1938, ACC-1055.


had already been abolished.188 In a meeting held at Chamargan (Jalleswar PS) in May, Malati Choudhury called upon the peas-ants to refuse paying land tax in case British authorities stood against the passing of the Orissa Tenancy Act to favour the zamindars. She even observed that the Congress ministry would eventually resign and if an interim ministry were set up, people should be prepared to refuse payment of land taxes.189

The village of Ambo, bordering the Korai police station in Cuttack, witnessed peasant mobilization, following intense peas-ant struggle in Cuttack. The impact of the Pachhikote Krushak Sangha activities was reflected there. The peasants of Ambo village who had attended the kisan sangha meeting in Korai (Cuttack) area were encouraged to form a Congress committee in the village. The krushak sangha activities picked up here onwards and a pamphlet190 issued by the socialists asked the peasants to subscribe to the socialist newspaper Krushak and explained to the people the nature and objectives of the kisan sangha. Consequently, a kisan conference was organized in the village of Ambo on 6 April. Phani Pal, who was supposed to attend the meeting, failed to turn up as he was assaulted on the same day at Pachhikote.

The presence of peasants from Keonjhar state made the meeting more significant. Gouranga Charan Das and Sargangadhar Das, who spoke at the meeting, focused on the existing grievances of the peasants in terms of road cess, bheti (presents), death subscription, marriage presents, lack of right over fishery and anabadi lands. This meeting signalled serious trouble for the zamindars.191 The kisan activists encouraged the barbers, washer-men and labourers to boycott the zamindar’s people. They also asked people not to take lease of nij-chas land of the zamindars for cultivation. The emboldened peasants also withheld rent, forcing the zamindar to mortgage ornaments to deposit land revenue on 28 April. There were also instances of stealing of fish from the zamindar’s tank. The peasants in Kuragola were told by Purna Chandra Singh, a Congress activist of Korai, that

188 HPD, FNR, Balasore, 23 January 1938–10 February 1938, ACC-1629.189 HPD, FNR, Balasore, May 1938, ACC-1679.190 Ibid.191 HPD, Report of SP on Agrarian Trouble at Ambo, F. No. 123/1938, 30 April 1938, ACC-1679.


they were entitled to enjoy fish from the zamindari tank as well as fuel from the trees of anabadi land. The mobilization of peas-ants reached such heights that the zamindar agreed to forego collections in the shape of road cess, bheti, death subscription, presents for marriages in the zamindar family, grazing fee and bethi. Nityananda Kanungo, the minister, in connection with the issue noted:

… responsible officers like the SP ought to have severely warned the zamindars for collecting these abwabs. … Holding back rent cannot be considered as an offence under any provision of law existing at the moment. Apart from law, it is the only way by which tenants can emphasise their point of view in matters connected with manage-ment of estates … responsible officers should never presume that the zamindar is such a helpless person as he claims to be.192

This report offers an insight into the ministry’s position regard-ing tenants’ rights and the peasant movement.

In Lakhmananath (Jaleswar), peasants took up the issue of title to the estate in the zamindari of Satyendranath Ray during May.193 In the peasant meetings at Remuna and Brahmania, Goura Mohan Das explained to the villagers that zamindars were their enemies and they should join the Congress. He also asked the peasants to settle their disputes among themselves and report all matters of oppression to the Congress office.194

Another interesting development that occurred in the district during the May–June phase was the attempt to manufacture salt and hold sale in the market. Balasore had witnessed intense mobilization over this issue during the salt satyagraha. Peas-ant meetings over the years had stressed the demand for the formation of committees in coastal villages for manufacturing salt. Around May, there was a case of violation of the Salt Law, with 6 maunds of contraband salt being carried for sale.195 At about the same time, there was reaction from the landlords. The landlords of Bhadrak sent a petition to the government “to accept revenue without any penalty or process fee” as they had been having considerable difficulties in realizing rent from the

192 Ibid.193 HPD, FNR, BIS, May 1938, ACC-1679.194 HPD, FNR, BIS, February 1938, ACC-870.195 HPD, FNR, BIS, May–June 1938, ACC-870.


tenants. Interestingly, one of the signatories to this petition was Mahatab himself.196 While touring north Balasore in February, he also voiced his concern over the difficulties of zamindars in realizing rent from the tenants. He advocated the inclusion of certain provisions in the proposed amendment of the Tenancy Act to help in the collection of rent.197 Biswanath Das also toured Balasore in April and advised the peasants not to withhold their “lawful” dues and disowned the responsibility of the Congress in any “no-rent” campaign.198 These efforts by the PCC leader-ship were made with a view to seeking reconciliation between the landlords and the peasants.

The estate of Kanika continued to be characterized by popular assertion of rights. For instance, the rent collection in Panchmukha elaka (area) was Rs 12,000 by February 1938 as against Rs 50,000 for the previous year. Tenants in Kanika col-lected funds to fight civil suits with the estate to enforce their rights on anabadi lands. The drive to form village-level Congress committees and raise subscription for Congress funds also continued. A youth association too was formed. As a reaction to these developments, the raja’s repression was stepped up. The house of Chakradhar Behera, the leader of the tenants, was burnt down in March 1938.199

Jeypore Estate

The pattern emerging in Koraput throughout 1938 serves as a vital link in the reading of popular perception of “swaraj” and the attempts at actualizing it.

The campaign against shandy (market tax as well as tax on head-loads entering the market), an issue which the DCC took up towards the end of 1937 in Koraput, intensified around April 1938. In fact, Radhakrisna Biswasray’s efforts in this regard had led to the collector’s recommendation for its abolition. The government also postponed the move by the Jeypore estate to sell the right to collect tax on head-loads to shandy contractors.

196 HPD, FNR, BIS, 10 February 1938, ACC-870.197 Ibid. 198 HPD, FNR, 21 February 1938, ACC-870.199 HPD, FNR, 20 March 1938, ACC-870.


However, April onwards, this tax was to be collected directly by the estate officials. Then only, the shandy picketing picked up vigorously. The mobilization of tribals was carried out by the circulation of brief letters, drafted by Gandhi gumastas200 and Gandhi naikos, who headed the rural units of Congress organi-zations. These “Gandhi notes” called upon Congress activists to assemble at particular points to picket markets.

Table 3.1Shandy Picketing in Koraput

Shandy No. of Method Attenda- Collection Picketers nce at the of Tax Shandy

A. Mydalpur 200 Picketers wore khadi Normal Nil caps and exhorted sellers not to pay tax; shouted/clapped hands in a body; an ASI of police was presentB. Dabugam 400 Picketers took posts Normal Nil at approach to the shandy estate; forest officer prevented from seizing bamboo mats on which forest tax had not been paid; receipt forms were snatched from estate collection agents and torn in the presence of the ASI of policeC. Papadahandi 200 Receipts issued to five Half of 0-1-3 tax payers, taken and normal from torn; a police constable five was present persons D. Kottagam 20 Same as “A”; also Normal Nil normal beating of drums; no police present

200 HPD, “Confidential Diary of SP, Koraput”, 28 April 1938, ACC-1676.


Table 3.1201 on the nature and organization of shandy picketing during April (20–21) in the district is quite illustrative.

However, “shandy picketing” slackened by May thanks to the efforts of Biswasray and other leaders of DCC as well as a tour by Mr Dube, a minister, advising people to be law-abiding. The DCC also took the stand that it would await an order by the government in this regard and suspend the campaign till such time. It also advised the people to pay the shandy tax.202 But, the activists in Hatkonga (Jeypore), Chikima (Nowrangapur) and Awarda (Padwa) continued with the campaign, carrying Congress flags and wearing Gandhi caps. Under the leadership of Shama Gadba and Laikhan Poojari, the villagers of Dumraguda contin-ued to picket Hatkonga shandy, and wanted the government order by the end of May. The “Gandhi notes” used to mobilize the tribals for picketing shandies were replaced by similar notes issued by local-level Congress activists instructing them not to stage any demonstration without the permission of the leaders. Similarly, non-payment of kists of rent, non-payment of royalty to the estate and the forest royalty to the Samasthanam, and refusal to carry the luggage of government servants were the issues over which mobilization of tribals occurred in Malkangiri taluk, Baipariguda (Jeypore taluk) and Mydalpur (Nowrangpur taluk).203 Around July, Balaram Palo (Kalyansinghpur) advised the people to refuse rent to Samasthanam and accordingly wrote petitions for the villagers and in fact procured and supplied free labour from them.204 The Dombs (an “untouchable” caste) led by one Tingu Birisa (Oraon, Nandapur PS) advised people not to report crimes to the police and to stop the naiko in his attempt to collect revenue and taxes.205

Biswasray and a local Congress activist of Konga led a pro-cession of 100 men to Jeypore to lodge a complaint against the ASI of police, Konga, alleging procurement of bethi and assault by the said ASI.206 Bhagaban Amantya, a local Congress leader

201 Ibid.202 HPD, “OPAI”, No. 21, July 1938, ACC-1676.203 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 22 May 1938, ACC-1054.204 HPD, “Extract of FNR”, Koraput, 9 July 1938, ACC-997.205 HPD, “OPAI”, No. 28, 26 July 1938, ACC-947.206 HPD, “OPAI”, No. 27, 19 July 1938, ACC-997.


who was assaulted by the ASI, had asked the people not to carry the police officer’s luggage—even if they were paid—since he was a government servant. The subsequent transfer of the ASI was claimed to be the result of direct action by Hannu Domb, who had been advising the people of Konga to approach him for writing petitions against the police, in case people were not satisfied in any incident.207 At Kalyansinghpur, the primary Congress committee settled petty cases in lieu of contribution to the Congress fund.208 Even criminal offences were compounded under the initiative of local Congress MLAs.209 Balaram Pal kept advising the Khond ryots of Kalyansinghpur not to pay land revenue each year to the estate but to withhold it for three years. He also said that if after three years they were sued, they could pay only one year’s land revenue.210

The announcement of abolition of tax on head-loads for one year by the raja in July was projected as a victory for the DCC and lent legitimacy to the DCC’s authority in popular percep-tion. There is evidence of clearing of jungles by the Dongri Khonds in Kalyansinghpur area for podu cultivation during August. A similar pattern existed in Vendatpalem, Malkangiri and Nowrangpur areas. In these areas, ryots were encouraged to take up podu cultivation and to withhold grazing and plough tax.211 Instructions were given by two Dombs who urged Congress activists in the Jeypore circle not to give information or evidence to the police or officials even in murder cases as the Congress would deal with all offenders.212 In Nandapur area, the Barik (barber) and Challan of the villages were asked by Congress activists not to perform their hereditary duties. Villagers were also asked not to pay shandy tax or act as porters. A villager was “forcibly prevented” from reporting cases of theft to the police.213 As early as January 1938, villagers reported instances of oppression to the Congress leaders. For instance, a petition by Sunadhar Baranga of Bayapada (Jeypore PS) complained to

207 HPD, “OPAI”, No. 29, 5 August 1938, ACC-1010.208 HPD, “OPAI”, No. 26, 12 July 1938, ACC-997.209 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 9 July 1938, ACC-997.210 HPD, “OPAI”, No. 26, 12 July 1938, ACC-1010.211 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 13 August 1938, 12 September 1938, ACC-1054.212 HPD, “OPAI”, No. 38, 18 October 1938, ACC-1010.213 HPD, “OPAI”, No. 26, 12 July 1938, ACC-1676.


Biswasray about how his field had been trampled upon by the elephants of the estate and the hay taken away by force. When Sunadhar protested against the “wanton act” of the servants of the estate, they challenged him to complain before the “lords” like “Gandhi, Biswasray and Radhamohan Sahu”. The petitioner also told them, “I have joined the Congress … I have no one else to resort to than yourselves. Unless you take action against the owners of the elephants, their servants will go on harassing like this. You are our guide and master”.214

In September, two Dombs deposed in the court that they had intentionally ignored the restrictions as they were Congress members and had been advised so by Sadashiba Tripathy, a Congress MLA.215 Similarly, Nilakantha Patra (Kundra PS), who heard the complaints of villagers during October, sent non-cognizable complaints of villagers to the SI, ordering the latter to investigate them. He also sought explanation from him for delay in disposing certain cases.216 Another development in October was the attempt to replace the existing village Gandas (watchmen or chowkidars) by Congress members in the Jeypore circle. Accordingly, one Hari Domb was appointed near Konga and was “represented with a Congress cap and shirt”.217 In yet another incident, one Mudi Naik of Bholia village (Jeypore PS), who refused to join Congress, had to face the combined opposition of the villagers of Nuaput, Bholia and Baminia (villages under the control of the naik). The villagers, in fact, were mobilized against the naik under the leadership of Narasingha Paduva and others. The campaign against the naik was intended to boycott him and to get him removed from the position of naikship.218

There is a reference to an incident in December involving a land dispute under the Borigumma PS.219 Here, a Congress activist named Boli Kumar led a group of villagers from Samarthaguda and planted a Congress flag in the field of one Panagenti Dalia as a symbol of his possession of land and cut away the paddy after threatening him. The ownership of land had been under dispute since 1935, but in 1937 the dispute was settled in favour

214 HPD, “Petition by Sunadhar Baranga”, 17 January 1938, ACC-1626.215 HPD, “OPAI”, No. 34, 13 September 1938, ACC-1010. 216 HPD, “OPAI”, 12 October 1938, ACC-1010.217 HPD, “OPAI”, 26 October 1938, ACC-1010.218 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 12 September 1938, ACC-1054.


of Dalia; paddy was raised for the first time in 1938 after the settlement of dispute. This act by Boli Kumar led the SI to en-ter the field and pull out the Congress flag. Soon, the villagers gathered there and Kumar attacked the SI with an axe saying, “I have planted the flag and you can’t reap the paddy.”

In similar attempts, two persons, Ratna Gudavas and Sonu Gudavas of Samarthaguda, were arrested following their attempts at taking away paddy from a disputed land. It is interesting to read the petition made to the police by Hari Kumar and Boli Kumar in connection with the incident at Samarthaguda. The petition noted:

… we had posted a Congress flag under orders of the Congress. Sukku Pentia of Janiguda and a constable of Borigumma stole away the flag. They must show order [of] winning the case. There is no use coming to us, but they must go to Radhamohan and Biswasray of Jeypore and show it to them. There is record in our name and we must reap the paddy. If Chinnaganti Dalia has got any record, he must show it. Ratan Kumar has got a record of Rs 5-8-0 … Radhamohan and Biswasray had enquired about the result of the appeal at Cuttack. It is Ratan Kumar’s land. Chinganti Dalia must not go near the land.219

Thus, at a popular level, the Congress and its leaders as well as its symbols were used to assert the rights of the people. In the tribal perception too, the Congress came to be increasingly seen as an institution for righting their wrongs. In other words, the notion existing at the popular level was that the Congress was beyond the reach of the colonial authorities. Though the issue was settled in favour of Dalia, Boli Kumar still looked upon the Congress and its leaders to deliver the final judgement.

At this stage, it may be interesting to note the nature of Con-gress propaganda that existed in Koraput during 1938. One of the important aspects of the propaganda was that it was often backed by various kinds of rumours. Box 3.1 helps understand them:220

219 HPD, “OPAI”, No. 43, 28 November 1938, ACC-1034.220 The pieces of information are based on the following sources: HPD, “OPAI”, No. 39, 24 September 1938, ACC-1010; HPD, “OPAI”, Nos 26–34, July–December; examples of dangerous tendencies among the aboriginal people in Koraput as a result of false propaganda with the purpose of undermining the authority of the Government and its local officers, ACC-1010; HPD, FNR, Koraput, May– December 1938, ACC-1054.


Box 3.1Nature of Rumour/Tendencies (NR/T)

During this phase, hopes were held out to the tribals that they would be immune from the prevailing laws, taxes, etc., and that the land which they tilled and for which they paid land revenue would become theirs.

Rumours were backed by persuasion and threats to boost the Congress membership enrolment drive. For instance, it was said that Gandhi would tour the district, visiting from house to house and those who could not produce the Congress ticket, which they must buy, would die.

Similarly, in Padwa, Dora of Panua adopted the method of “spreading the name of Congress” by drum beating and propagated that Mari Kamaga, a Congress activist of Paderu of Vizagpatnam, had ordered that for three months husbands and wives should not cohabit.

Villagers were given warnings that their lands would be confiscated; they would not be allowed “to draw water from sources used by Congress members”; Mohammedans would loot their villages if they did not become Congress members. Money and various articles were realized from the vil-lagers by activists who preached the abolition of any kind of illegal payment or bethi. Money at times was realized on false pretexts, but people were not willing to give evidence against the offenders.

Village naikos were asked to become Congress members on pain of dis-missal, as in the case of Mudi Naik of Bholia.

People were advised not to fear officials and to bring all their complaints to the Congress members instead of going to the police or to the court. When such cases were brought for arbitration, a “large sum” was realized from the parties for the work. This feature, as seen earlier, was reported from many places, such as the case of (i) Tingu Birisia of Oran, Nandapur in July; (ii) Hannu Domb of Konga in August; (iii) Biswasray’s address in Siparjiput; (iv) the two Dombs of Jeypore asking people not to provide information to the police; (v) Nilakantha Patra (Kundra PS) ordering the police to investi-gate cases; (vi) instances of petitions to Biswasray and Radhamohan or the advice of Sadasiva Tripathy. When the law was broken and the accused was questioned, he/she would answer that he/she did it deliberately as he/she was a Congress member and was advised to do so.

Non-payment of revenue and taxes was also advocated through ru-mours.

The reading of these rumours and tendencies points to the fact that mobilization of the tribals at a popular level often occurred using the symbols of Congress and Gandhi. More importantly, the legitimacy for popular action was derived from the notion of authority of Congress/Gandhi. The most prominent local lead-ers taking up such campaigns in different areas of the district were Lakshmi Narayan Padhi, Apudu Padhi (Kalyansinghpur),


Balaram Pal, Nilakantha Patro (Kundra), Tingu Biriso (Oran), Hannu Domb and Dora of Panna. Besides, Radhakrishna Biswasray, Radhamohan Sahu and Sadashiba Tripathy (DCC leaders) often lent moral support to the campaign in one way or the other.221

As far as local-level activists were concerned, Donardono Singh222 (Goliuma, Dasmanthpur PS) attracts attention. He started preaching non-payment of taxes and forest revenue and fight against British rule around June 1938. He told people in his area that the (Congress) ministers had ordered that all of them should become Congress members, failing which they would be driven out of their villages. He also collected a fee of Re 1 from the villagers, promising that he would get their rent and royalties remitted. He charged Rs 1–8 from each villager as fee for the work he had been doing to reduce taxes. Besides, he charged 5 annas instead of 4 annas for enrolling Congress members, and collected Rs 10 from the naikos of Dasmanthpur area to provide them with Congress tickets. In August, at Girl-iguma, he reportedly told the audience in a meeting that swaraj would be declared within two months and the government and the maharaja of Jeypore would vacate the district. He also went on to instruct the people not to report cases to the police but to settle them through “Congress panchayats” and added that he had received “instructions” to dispose off cases himself.

Around September, he threatened the employers with crimi-nal action under Congress rule and held lathi demonstrations before the houses of ryots to make them pay what he considered “reasonable wages”. He fixed the wages for field workers at Rs 7 plus 12 putties of paddy per annum. He also claimed that the transfer of the SI of Dasmanthpur was made following his com-plaint to Biswasray. In November he told the villagers that he would be going to Cuttack to take the forthcoming “collectors’ examination”. He also conveyed the message to the villagers that after his return from Cuttack, the magistrates and police officers would be removed from the district and he along with

221 Ibid.222 Information based on: HPD, FNR, Koraput, 24 June 1938/25 September 1938; HPD, “OPAI”, No. 28, 26 July 1938; HPD, “OPAI”, 13 September 1938, 24 September 1938; HPD, “OPAI”, No. 32, 27 August 1938; HPD, “OPAI”, 26 September 1938.


his “friends” would take over the administration. Further, he demanded free supplies of vegetables and fruit from village naikos and in case of refusal; he threatened them with dismissal from their posts. A taluk magistrate of Malkangiri even advised the village naikos not to pay grazing and plough taxes to the Jeypore estate.223

The other notable feature of the Congress campaign was the massive drive for enrolling members. As said earlier, this drive gained strength through the circulation of rumours. Besides, the Congress membership campaign drive very often adopted a certain form of moralistic preaching. Some of the rumours were also based on inculcating moral values like putting an end to the sacrifice of animals or the practice of stopping cultivation on Tuesday/Thursday, etc. Similarly, a pamphlet issued by Congress activists in Nowrangpur asked the Congress members to observe certain practices, such as: (i) pray to God and ask Him to give wisdom to do good to the people; (ii) to take bath early in the morning, clean teeth with charcoal, wash hands, etc.; (iii) to spin and wear khadi, as per the Congress rules; (iv) not to sow seeds in another’s land by force; (v) not to quarrel; (vi) renew Congress membership every year; (vii) not to have wine, opium, etc.; (viii) not to sacrifice cows or buffaloes during festivals but instead worship with sweetmeats and be kind to animals; (ix) to speak the truth; and so on. This shows how the drive for recruitment of Congress membership was associated with the process of educating the “illiterate tribals” with certain values of Gandhian nature.

The drive for membership was carried out under the overall supervision of Gandhi gumastas and Gandhi naikos, who headed the village Congress units. The structures of Congress rural units under Gandhi gumastas were effectively given shape under the initiatives of DCC leadership such as Sadashiba Tripathy, Radha Mohan Sahu (MLA) and Lakshmi Chandra Sahu.224 The anti-alcoholic drinks campaign remained a major move by the Congress leadership in view of tribals’ propensity for alcoholic drinks. The Khonds at Narayan Patna (Rayagada) who gathered for the Thakurani festival were offered mandia jau (porridge of

223 HPD, “OPAI”, No. 31, 20 August 1938, ACC-1010.224 HPD, “Confidential Diary of the SP”, Koraput, 28 April 1938, ACC-1676.


a kind of cereal) instead of alcoholic drinks by the Congress volunteers.225 The campaign was so vigorous that proprietors of alcoholic drink shops had to bribe the picketers to stop picketing.226 There is also evidence of attempts by Harijans and Congress activists to enter a temple at Vikrampur (Nowrangpur) in September.227

In view of the divergent trends of the movement gaining popularity, the DCC planned to set up various centres in the districts to impart training to volunteers in October. The DCC also resolved to train 400 Congress volunteers, who, among other things, were expected to undertake the functions of the rural police.228 Accordingly, a training camp for Congress vol-unteers was opened at Nuaput near Jeypore on 6 November.229 Gopabandhu Choudhury and Godabarish Mishra graced the occasion and spoke to the audience on issues concerning tribal upliftment and advised the tribals to give up intoxicants, opium and other “social malpractices connected with money”; and also to take to “hand-spun” cloth. The Nuaput training centre started with 300 volunteers, partly financed by the DCC fund raised through membership fees collection. Besides, subscriptions were also collected for the camp. The camp imparted training in scouting, lathi drill and physical exercises. Besides, lectures were given on spinning, homeopathy, indigenous medicines, animal husbandry and untouchability. On completion of training on 8 December, 20 volunteers were declared “fit to instruct others”. However, the number of volunteers dwindled because of the harvesting season. Some of the trained volunteers who left the camp with a booklet on untouchability were declared outcastes back home because they had dined with the untouchables at the camp.230

As noted earlier, Congress minister Dubey toured Koraput dur-ing April in the context of the agitation against taxes on shandy and head-loads; he advised people to be “law-abiding”231 and to

225 Ibid.226 HPD, “Confidential Diary of the SP”, Koraput, 28 June 1938.227 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 12 September 1938, ACC-1054.228 HPD, “OPAI”, No. 39, 26 October 1938, ACC-1010.229 HPD, “OPAI”, 18 November 1938, ACC-1010.230 HPD, “OPAI”, 6 December 1938–20 December 1938, ACC-1010.231 HPD, “Extract of OPAI”, 16 May 1938, ACC-1676.


pay the tax till orders were communicated by the government. This may be seen as an effort by the leadership not to allow the movement to acquire a militant form and invite suppression. Besides, the use of the symbols of Gandhi and Gandhian values in the context of the mobilization of tribals can equally be read as efforts to systematize divergent trends at popular levels. As elsewhere, and as has been seen in the context of Koraput, in the tribal perception too, the Congress ministry came to be regarded as a government of their own. The developments in the state in 1938 caused concern to the colonial administration, which thought it necessary to distribute pamphlets warning the tribals against “mischievous propaganda”.232 It also sought to clarify its position on issues like bethi, podu cultivation, shandy dues and rent payment. A circular was issued by the Madras government (subsequently translated in Oriya) to counter the preaching among the tribals in Madgul, in Vizagpatnam district, an area adjoining Koraput district. It referred to the “preach-ing in the Agency” that mustadars (same as muttahdars, that is, village headmen, landholders, zamindars), estate officials and government officials should no longer be obeyed. These activi-ties of Magha Kirasani and Marri Kamaya of Allangapada were repeated in Vizagpatnam Agency.233 In one case, Magha Kirasani had dismissed “on his own authority” two village headmen as they were in league with the muttahdar and the police, and ap-pointed others as new headmen. On 6 October it was announced that all village headmen must be present before Kamaya by 10 October to settle payment of installments, failing which the headmen would be removed from their positions. Again, on 12 October, the police were instructed by Kirasani and Kamaya that they need not enquire into or take action in the case concerning the dismissal of the headmen by them. On 15 October, one Gali Ram Das, secretary of the Panasa village Congress committee (Sujankonta), asked all villagers to attend a Congress meeting on 28 October, wherein the “benefits of non-violence” would be explained. These activities in a neighbouring agency had great influence on the people of Jeypore estate as well. That

232 HPD, Report of IG (Police), Orissa to CS, 16 December 1938, ACC-1018.233 HPD, “Extract of Madras Police Abstract of Intelligence”, Nos 41 and 42, 22 October 1938–29 October 1938, ACC-1018.


popular mobilization had scaled a new high in Jeypore estate can be gauged from Table 3.2, which illustrates the collection of revenue in nine out of 11 thanas in the upper division of the Jeypore estate in 1938.234

Table 3.2Revenue Collected in Jeypore, 1938

Thana Fasli 1,346 (1936) Fasli 1,348 (1938)

Kotpad 38.61% 22.84%Nowrangpur 28.45% 19.40%Borigumma 18.16% 14.89%Jeypore 17.02% 14.20%Ramagiri 14.23% 3.17%Koraput 13.84% 12.07%Nandapur 9.55% 3.02%Pottangi 7.07% 3.35%Malkangiri 27.51% 14.28%

The obvious reason for the fall in collection was the mas-sive no-rent campaign organized in the period. The revenue commissioner, in fact, anticipated the possibility of allowing extension of time for the payment of cess for the first time in the annals of the estate.

Ganjam

In the context of the Madras Land Amendment Bill initiated by the Congress ministry, expectation of the peasants for immediate and substantial relief was whetted further. The official report for February commented:235

The villagers one and all are combined against Khallikote and Athagad Estates, owing to the introduction of the Madras Estate Land Amendment Act Bill. The people have been much excited and they have great hopes for immediate and substantial benefits resulting therefrom. Their expectations are increased still further by the fact that not only is the Congress Ministry in power but that the home of the CM lies in their midst … the second installment of the

234 HPD, Report of Revenue Commissioner to CS, 28 February 1939, ACC-1018.235 Board of Revenue Records, Report of SP (Ganjam), 16 February 1938, Sl No. 286.


Estate revenue has not been paid this year though it was paid last year in similar circumstances. Nevertheless, the tenants are said to defend their action on the ground that the price of the paddy is low … Police intervention was looked upon with suspicion by the ryots … Estate servants are defied by the villagers and are threatened with violence … as long as the estate offices will merely ask the ryots to pay their rents and do not enforce their claims, it may be that there will be no disturbances but that if any attempt is made to enforce them, it is likely that a riot will occur.

Truly enough, the revenue collection by the raja of Khallikote in February was a paltry Rs 8,000 against nearly Rs 1 lakh col-lected in the corresponding period, the previous year.236 The raja, in fact, sought a time extension till 10 March for the total payment of revenue for January.237

Now it is time to turn attention to peasant mobilization in the district. A Congress meeting at Polasara:238 (i) emphasized the raising of funds from the ryots to meet general expenses; (ii) demanded necessary remissions of the rent and fixing a uniform market rate for paddy in the Khallikote and Athgad estates; (iii) demanded an enquiry into the “police zulum” against the ryots at the behest of estate officials.

The no-rent campaign soon picked up in Polasara, Kodala, Purusottampur, etc. In Polasara, the tenants who were willing to pay the rent were held back under the threat of social boycott and it remained a fairly active pocket in so far as organization of peasants was concerned. Local Congress activists assured the peasants that if they withheld payments, all the arrears payable to the estate before the passing of the amendment bill would be written off. The tenants refused to pay until their petitions to the chief minister and revenue commissioner in this regard were disposed of. Interestingly, the no-rent campaign was carried on by selecting “influential tenants” in the village who made the other peasants withhold payment.239 The local Congress leaders such as Madhobo Naik (Padmapur), Saibo Biswal (Balijoro), Judhisti Panda (Koirasi), Maguni Mohanty and Bharat Naik

236 HPD, FNR, Ganjam, 24 January 1938, ACC-1057.237 HPD, FNR, Ganjam, 25 February 1938.238 Ibid.239 Ibid.


(Sumandalo) toured villages and exhorted the peasants not to pay rent. In contrast, DCC president Dibakar Patnaik advised the tenants to pay what they owed to the estate.240 Similarly, a meeting of ryots and workers at Nuagam (Russelkonda, 14 April) demanded241 (i) the cultivation of lands only on bhagam (share) when lands were leased out; (ii) not to allow outsiders to cultivate the land of particular villages; and (iii) to raise the existing rates of wages.

In the context of the peasant movement in Ganjam, the activi-ties of Banamali Maharana (president, Kudala Taluk Congress Committee) were quite striking. In a peasant meeting at Pola-sara convened by Maharana, the following resolutions were passed:242 (i) remission at different scales for first, second and third batches of settlement villages; (ii) to settle the remission suits pending in courts amicably; (iii) to make necessary alterna-tions in various patta (land ownership document) demand rates wherever found in excess to the rates fixed for the adjoining similar settlement lands and to grant a remission in accordance with the rules under Section 39A of the Amended Madras Es-tates Land Act, 1934.

On 9 June, at a peasant meeting held at Sochina Jagannathpur, Maharana moved the following resolutions: (i) wrongs done to the ryots by the estate officials should be reported to the raja of Khallikote and Athagada estates; (ii) the raja of Khallikote should allow the ryots to take timber from the adjoining forests on free permit; (iii) a request should be made to the raja not to collect arrears from those poor ryots on whom pattas had been tendered; (iv) to request the raja to grant remission to the ryots at 4 annas, 5 annas, 6 annas, in the rupee, instead of 0-3-6, 0-4-6 and 0-5-6 in the rupee already granted by the estate; (v) to request the raja to preside over a ryots’ meeting; (vi) to request the raja not to be misled by the reports of his subordinates who troubled the ryots very much.243

However the premier, Biswanath Das, who addressed the peasants at the Kudala meeting244 on 12 June, pointed out that

240 HPD, FNR, Ganjam, 8 March 1938, ACC-1057.241 HPD, FNR, Ganjam, 26 April 1938, ACC-1057.242 Ibid.243 HPD, FNR, Ganjam, 25 June 1938 (ACC-1057).244 Ibid.


if the tenants did not pay their dues within “two weeks”, he would be compelled to offer police assistance to the raja to make distraints. He also asked the people to convey the message to peasants of other villages. In a way, the meeting signalled a warning to the no-rent campaign of the tenants. However, the very next day, Maharana convened a peasant meeting at Sasono where, referring to the speech of the premier, he observed that the minister who was “their creation” had been bold enough to say this as there was no unity among the peasants. He also added that ryots, not the zamindars, were then ruling the country and therefore the peasants must organize themselves to fight for their rights and due place in the estates. He advised the peasants to withhold 6 pais in excess of the amount of remission declared by the raja bahadur.245

Similarly, in another meeting at Polasara246 on 15 June, a local Congress activist called Muli Panda blamed the premier, saying that the CM enjoyed his position due to the votes given by the ryots. He further exhorted, “Even though the ryots have not paid their kist till now, the estate official could not do anything to the ryots on account of fear of Congress … So long as the estate does not grant the cut, the ryots should take shelter under the Congress.” He also advised the peasants to pay the estate at 0-10-0 a rupee after deducting on their own the proposed remission of 6 annas. It is in this context that the Kudala Taluk Congress Committee came to be converted into the Kudala Taluk Ryots’ Committee in June with Maharana as president.247 A Ryots’ Fund was also instituted to collect the subscription of 3 pais in a rupee from the peasants.

The demand for abolition of the mustajar system also gathered momentum.248 Under the system, when the zamindar leased out his villages, he also leased out hetta land (zamindari private land) along with the villages or separately, whatever suited him better. The zamindar of Shergada had sublet his hetta lands by 1 July to his sub-tenants. Govinda Pradhan, MLA of Takkarada

245 Ibid.246 Ibid.247 HPD, “Police Report on Kisan Trouble in Khallikote and Atagada Estates”, 22 June 1938, ACC-1648.248 HPD, “Letter of Revenue Divisional Officer (Ghumsar Division) to Collector of Ganjam”, 18 July 1938, ACC-1057.


(under Shergada estate), organized a zamindari ryot conference on 14 May and it was resolved that mustajari system be abol-ished. Pradhan also pointed out that a bill would be introduced in the assembly in this regard, enabling those ryots who would be in possession of the hetta lands by 1 July to have occupancy rights over them. Under the leadership of Pradhan, the villagers of Serankuda encroached upon the hetta lands already leased out by the mustajars and damaged the paddy plants. Following this incident, Govinda Pradhan complained to the police that the zamindar was ousting tenants who had been in possession of the hetta lands for more than 15 years.

The other noticeable feature of the peasant’s meetings was the condemnation of the magistrates, police and estate officials for their oppression. Interestingly, Maharana informed the tenants of Kudala in August that he had reminded the CM that he was a ryots’ man and that the ryots could unseat the CM. He added that because of his reminder, police protection to the raja to ef-fect the collection of rent had not yet been given.249

In September, Maharana again advised the peasants250 to ignore the speech of the premier in the Kudala meeting as he (CM) had to act according to Congress’ dictates. He warned that if the ryots’ associations and the Congress committee were unable to cope with the situation, blood would flow like water although the Congress creed was non-violence. He also warned that if the police were deployed, the Kudala taluk would turn into “another Bardoli”. The campaign by the local activists in Kudala emboldened the peasants to cut off the irrigation sources, to catch fish without permission of the estate, and to commit offences in the state reserve forests. Popular resentment against police zulum also increased. In fact, under the pressure of the activists of Kudala, who wanted the SI of Kudala to be punished, the DCC had to appoint an enquiry committee to probe into the conduct of the police and the magistrate.251

The Khonds252 of Barakhoma (Baliguda) refused to carry out demarcation of reserved forests as they opposed any reservation

249 HPD, FNR, 29 August 1938, ACC-1057.250 HPD, FNR, 14 September 1938, ACC-1057.251 HPD, “OPAI”, 24 September 1938; HPD, “Letter of DM (Ganjam) to CS”, 19 October 1938, ACC-1024.252 HPD, “Extract from D.O. (Demi Official) Letter from DM, Ganjam”, F. No. 88 of 1939, 13 November 1939, ACC-1717.


of the forest in principle. The officials also apprehended that the Khonds might step up their encroachment in the reserved forest in case the demarcation exercise was carried out by using imported labour.

At the peak of the no-rent campaign, the raja of Khallikote appealed for police assistance under Section 80 of the Madras Estates’ Land Act and also availed of police assistance for dis-traint during September. This distraint, which continued till November,253 was marked by an organized peasant resistance in many villages. For instance, Saibo Biswalo of Bakkyajhar, a local activist, who had vigorously taken up the campaign of no-rent, kept his womenfolk in the front room as a barrier against the police. In Mahura and Solobondho, people snatched away the lathi from the SI and threatened the revenue officers. People from the adjoining villages rushed into the village undergoing distraint to display solidarity and put up combined resistance. Often, grains and properties were concealed in the village mutts. The peasant resistance could be effective due to the intense mo-bilization taken up by the local activists. Maharana circulated printed leaflets asking the tenants to adopt satyagraha as a method of protest against the assault on some of the tenants by the revenue inspector of the Khallikote estate. He also pointed out that the move for satyagraha had the backing of the PCC president, Gopabandhu Choudhury.254

In the context of these developments, the DCC formed a committee to enquire into the distraints.255 Along with this, the DCC president, Dibakar Patnaik, advised the tenants to pay their rents and also asked the peasants to be prepared for “non-vio-lent action” after six months in case the Madras Estates’ Land Act Amendment Bill was not passed by that time. He promised that an enquiry committee would look into the excesses com-mitted by the police and estate officials during the distraints. In a meeting at Kudala on 15 October, he stopped Maharana when the latter tried to explain the reasons for non-payment of rent.256 The meeting of the Krushak Samaj Sangha at Kudala257

253 HPD, Report of Collector, Ganjam, to CS, 15 September 1938, 6 October 1938, 11 November 1938, ACC-944; The New Orissa, 7 October 1938.254 HPD, FNR, Ganjam, 29 October 1938, ACC-1057.255 Ibid.256 Ibid.257 HPD, FNR, Ganjam, 13 December 1938, ACC-1057.


(30 November) mooted the idea that a deputation be sent to the raja. The peasants were also advised against the adoption of violent and aggressive methods. In fact, the Krushak Samaj Sangha sprang up as a Congress-sponsored kisan sangha, and Maharana was conspicuous by his absence.

Sambalpur

As early as January, Congress socialists like Malati Choudhury and the DCC leader Bhagirathi Patnaik toured the district and held peasant meetings to popularize kisan sangha ideology.258 In these meetings, the speakers exhorted peasants not to pay rent, not to carry loads for police personnel, and to even as-sault government officials. At the Bijepur Peasants’ Conference, Tulsiram Giri, explaining the need for a separate organization for the peasants, observed:

The Congress is for all sects of people: rich, poor, capitalists and labourers, etc. In case the capitalists go against the interests of peasants and labourers, the latter should organise themselves and fight tooth and nail against the capitalists to safeguard their own interests. That is why it is necessary that every peasant should be a member of the Congress so that one day they may take control of the Congress.

Malati Choudhury asked the peasants to demand the aboli-tion of the gountia (village headman) system. In the Bargarh peasants’ meeting on 11 January, Padihary explained to the peasants that all government servants were servants of the three Congress ministers of the existing government. He called upon the people to boycott the courts and to solve their disputes through village panchayats.

At Fatapali (Laikera), Malati Choudhury, referring to re-pression by zamindars, advocated the formation of a krushak sangha in each union. At the Remenda meeting, she exhorted the people not to appear before officers even if notices were

258 HPD, FNR, Sambalpur, 22 January 1938, ACC-1056; HPD, “Report of SP on Bijepur Peasant Conference”, 13 January 1938, ACC-885; HPD, “Report of Additional Tahasildar, Baragarh on Bijepur Krushak Sammilani on 12.1.38 at Samlipadar”, ACC-1056.


served on them to do so when they visited the villages. She also asked people not to fear the police. Referring to a murder case in which a villager killed an excise officer and was even-tually acquitted, she advised the people to defend themselves through private defence if any police officer was oppressive. In all these peasants’ meetings, several resolutions reflecting local issues were passed:259

(a) Condemning the India Act of 1935, which treated Sambalpur as an excluded area

(b) Amendment of the Central Province Tenancy Act to the benefit of the tenants of Sambalpur

(c) Introduction of a standard measure for paddy in the dis-trict

(d) Allowing tenants free use of forest produce (e) Disposal of the conduct of Kolabira zamindar in not helping

tenants as promised at the time of election (f) Introduction of prohibition in Sambalpur

In Tulandi260 (Bargarh sub-division), the villagers teamed up against a rich Marwari moneylender who had amassed great wealth through “usury and had acquired interest in the landed proprietorship of village”. In fact, he got into trouble with a gountia who had taken Rs 50 worth of articles from him on loan. After a year, when the moneylender insisted on the repayment and used “abusive” language, the fellow villagers sided with the gountia and enforced a boycott of the moneylender. He was denied the services of barbers, dhobis, house servants and local coolies. Under the pressure of boycott, the moneylender thought of shifting to Barpali, but the villagers assaulted him and pre-vented him from leaving the village. The local leaders also took away property worth Rs 100 from his house. Bhagirathi Patnaik and Fakir Behera (DCC leaders) lent moral support to the action against the moneylender. The organization of the villagers was “made stronger by the intervention of Bhagirathi Patnaik”,261

259 HPD, FNR, Sambalpur, 22 January 1938, ACC-1056; HPD, “Report of SP on Bijepur Peasant Conference”, 13 January 1938, ACC-885.260 HPD, Report of SP, 17 August 1938, SR Case No. 18/1938, ACC-992.261 Ibid.


who advocated satyagraha on the issue. The police report on the issue pointed out that the villagers were conducting “non-violent non-cooperation” vis-à-vis the moneylender.

The local leader in Nawapara, Khariar and Borasambar es-tates, duly backed by the DCC, raised protest against high rents, grazing dues, pound rates, bethi, etc. Exploitation by police and estate officials also came to be opposed. Mobilization of ten-ants in these estates also had a Gandhian touch. For example, tenants were advised to give up intoxicants and foreign cloth and Gandhi caps and khadi were sold at the meetings.262 The DCC’s efforts at mobilization reflected a degree of reformative exercise on Gandhian lines. In a meeting at Sarandapali (Bara-pali) in September, Bhagirathi Patnaik complained that none of the MLAs, except Fakir Behera and Bisi Ganda, would speak in favour of tenants while the others would speak in favour of the rajas and zamindars.263 At the Sambalpur Praja Kisan Confer-ence264 (Baltikra, Bargarh: 3–4 December), Fakir Behera noted in his inaugural address:

Even during the Congress government, the conflict between the zamindars and the tenants had increased. The Congress members in the assembly forgot that they were servants of the people … That was why this conference is organized to clearly express the views of the peasants in the administration of the country. That is why it is more necessary for the peasants to combine and to march on the way of non-violence and truth. The main point which should be kept in view is to fight against those who go against the repre-sentatives of the peasants.

The State of Peasant and Tribal Movement, 1939

One of the important aspects in the peasant and tribal move-ment in 1939 was the distancing of the communists from the Congress socialists. The communists also became increasingly critical of the Congress ministry.

Phani Pal, who was away in Bengal in December 1938 to at-tend kisan meetings, came back in January 1939 and not only

262 HPD, FNR, SBP, 11 October 1938 (ACC-1056).263 HPD, FNR, SBP, November, ACC-1056.264 HPD, Report of SP on the Second Kisan Session of Sambalpur, ACC-1036.


actively organized the peasants of Sukinda estate but also tried to mobilize the tenants of the Keonjhar state, which bordered the former. A pamphlet issued by Pal around November for a proposed peasant rally in December 1938 at Gobandhanpur (bordering Keonjhar state) specifically exhorted the youth of Keonjhar to join the “anti-Raja” struggle in large numbers for destroying the “rule based on kingship” and to replace it by establishing a responsible government.265 The pamphlet reminded the tribals of Keonjhar such as Bhuyan and Ganda and Juanga that their ancestors could dethrone any raja for his slightest op-pression. The pamphlet also pointed out how people in British Orissa were struggling for a responsible government by forming melis (rebellions). It deplored how the people of Keonjhar state had been turned into destitutes after paying various kinds of taxes and how the freedom of speech and right to attend Con-gress meetings had been snatched away through the raja’s rules and regulations. The pamphlet also favoured the destruction of imperialism and the garjat rule. The proposed meeting at Gobardhanpur, postponed till 9 January due to Pal’s absence in Orissa in December, was banned by the authorities and restric-tions under Section 144 CrPC were imposed on Pal and other kisan activists preventing them from holding meetings. However, a protest meeting denouncing the order was arranged for the same day under the initiative of Bhagabati Panigrahi (editor of Krushak), but this was again prevented. It is interesting that as per the instructions of Pal, the people who came to attend the meeting had carried lathis with them.266

Similarly, Sachi Routray, with his communist outlook, ob-served at a peasant meeting (Korai, 14 January):267

The present leaders in the Congress have no mind or time to help the peasants … In the past struggles with the British Government, the workers from the capitalist section could not stand the trouble … during the struggle and they had to retreat … the peasants should have to be members of Congress or else the capitalists will capture the Congress. The conservatives compelled the Congress to accept office and the result was that the Congress Ministry had forgotten

265 “Keonjhar Praja Sammilani” (Oriya pamphlet).266 Ibid.267 Board of Revenue Records, Report of SP on Korai Meeting, 15 January 1939, Sl No. 102.


their fighting attitude. They are after compromises. Had the peas-ants captured the Congress, the 144 CrPC notice would not have been served on peasant workers.

At another protest meeting against the imposition of restric-tion of Phani Pal, at Duburi268 (Sukinda, 3 March), Nabakrushna Choudhury dubbed the orders against Pal as illegal and whimsi-cal. He also remarked that “it will be possible to get the mag-istrate punished by the Congress Government for issuing such order”. In the meantime, Pal was arrested in April while trying to organize peasant meetings in Sukinda estate, and was jailed. After his release, he strove vigorously to mobilize the tribals of the states. For instance, a pamphlet269 addressed to the tribals of Keonjhar and Mayurbhanj states, entitled “Congress and Salt Meli: A Word to All Men and Women”, talked about the “Salt Meli” organized “ten years ago” and how jails were “filled to overflowing”. It went on to say:

Your previous meli was crushed by the raja, Government officials by means of threat … You concealed yourselves and became destitute … Do not do it again as such action on our part is against the Congress creed … Congress is the biggest meli. If such melis are formed, the British Government will abdicate. There are several parties within the Congress. One of them is the socialist party. The socialists say that there should not be any raja, zamindar, big factory owners or rich men. Labourers will have all. All you labourers must combine. I will tell you later how to get rid of the rajas, zamindars and factory owners. Let the workers of the world unite. They will then win.

In June, Pal also put forward the idea of establishing schools in Sukinda area to train children in physical exercises. He was also planning to lead the refugees of Dhenkanal and Talcher states to offer satyagraha before the Secretariat at Cuttack as “a form of revolt” against the local rajas.270 It is in this context that the ever-widening gulf between socialists and communists climaxed. Malati Choudhury and Nabakrushna Choudhury resigned from the socialist group as they could not reconcile

268 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 14 March 1939, ACC-1082.269 “Congress and the Salt Meli” (Oriya pamphlet).270 HPD, “Letters of SP to CS”, 25 May 1939; HPD, “Weekly Confidential Diary of SP”, 8 June 1939, ACC-1134.


to the extreme views held by Bhagabati Panigrahi, Rath, Sachi Routrai, Pal, and others.271

In August, Jayaprakash Narayan and Swami Sahajananda visited Cuttack in connection with the Provincial Youth Con-ference (third session: 12–13 August). Elaborating on the pro-grammes outlined by JP, Sahajananda exhorted the youth: (i) to work among the peasants and to prepare them for a no-rent campaign during the struggle; (ii) to prepare the workers to go on strike during the struggles; (iii) to educate the masses to run a parallel government in case of future struggle. Criticizing the Das ministry for issuing of Section 144 CrPC notices, he said that the ministers had forgotten their main duties.272

During the Kisan Day celebrations (1 September 1939) at Jenapur, songs from booklet Rakta Sikha273 (collection of poems mainly addressed to peasants and workers written from a com-munist perspective) were read out. Similarly, in the meeting at Kosala, Bhagabati Panigrahi criticized the ministry’s resignation in November 1939. Pal, in the peasant meeting of Baragadia (Sukinda, 22 November), observed: “Only through the efforts of our Congress ministers you all were saved from bethi, etc. but the peoples’ representatives were not given enough powers.”274 Asking people to continue with the melis, he observed:

During the last CDM, Sarkar [government] oppressed many people, but this time there is a tiger pouncing upon Sarkar and this is the opportunity for us and we must take Swaraj forcibly. This meli will be carried on everywhere. Even people in Sukinda jungle are able to understand what the Congress is … In the meli, the individual who will not join will side with the Raja … I will ask his padhan [headman] to boycott him—he can’t get fire and water.

There is a reference to the warning issued by the krushak sangha of Sendhapur (Jenapur) to the labourers, asking the latter not to reap the fields of one Kanhu Patnaik275 who had been boycotted by the sangha for being the proprietor of Chausath-

271 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 14 July 1939, ACC-1082.272 HPD, Report of SP, “Youth Conference at Cuttack”, 12 August 1939, ACC-1790.273 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, First half of September 1939, ACC-1082.274 HPD, Report of SI (Sukinda) on the Speech of P. Pal, 22 November 1939, ACC-1771.275 HPD, Report of DM (Cuttack) to Revenue Commissioner, SPL Report Case No. 37/38, ACC-1831.


ipara estate. They reaped the crop from the disputed land. In Aul estate, the discontent of the tenants against the raja climaxed in an attempt on the raja’s life. One Narayan Samal, who had often been beaten up and framed in cases by the raja’s men, defended his action against the raja observing that: “Raja, who oppresses and spoils the unmarried girls of his tenants is not fit to govern his people.”276

In Angul, the demand for the abolition of haat tolls contin-ued to be voiced. The tenants boycotted the haats established by the government and set up new haats outside the jurisdic-tion of the lessees. The no-haat-toll campaign was vigorously pursued. The local Congress activists threatened the officials as well as the lessees who tried to collect haat tolls.277 The socialists also organized training camps for the youth. One such camp functioned in Ahiyas278 (Jajpur) under the overall guidance of Nabakrushna Choudhury. They were given training in physi-cal exercises such as dagger fights and country games. Besides, discourses on world geography, economic drain, the anti-impe-rialist struggle of India, the 1857 revolt, and on Gandhi, Tilak, Nehru and Marxism, were imparted. Choudhury himself taught history to the participants. The trainees were instructed to read newspapers like Amrit Bazaar Patrika, the Samaja, the Desakatha, and the Krushaka. The camp was financed by raising subscrip-tions from the locality.

Puri

Pal toured the rural areas of Puri and addressed many peasant meetings. At Chhatabar (Chandaka PS, 20 February), he exhorted them to unite and not to cultivate rich persons’ lands.279 In the peasant meeting at Mendhasal280 (Chandaka PS, 28 February), he maintained:

276 HPD, “SDO Kendrapara to DM”, Cuttack, 15 November 1939, ACC-1764; HPD, Report of DSP, Cuttack, 22 November 1939, ACC-1764.277 HPD, “Extract of DM (Cuttack) Letter”, 15 April 1939, ACC-1145.278 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 15 May 1939, ACC-1082.279 HPD, “DM’s Letter to Revenue Commissioner”, 26 February 1939, ACC-1212; HPD, Report of SP to DM, Puri, 22 February 1939, ACC-1212.280 HPD, “Report of SP to CS on Chandaka Kisan Meeting”, 1 March 1939, ACC-1725.


The Ministers with their limited powers could not possibly render any substantial help but the only facility the people could get was that they could develop mass consciousness by holding meetings and opening organisations, so that they might be better mobilised for the impending fight with British Government.

He also reminded the people that the few concessions granted to the peasants were the result of their combined agitation. The meeting, among other things, demanded 50 per cent reduction of rent and the abolition of the sarbarakari system.281 The mo-bilization of peasants led to the withholding of rent and the repayment of takavis (loans from the government to cultivators) in Gop area and the petition against the local zamindar by the villagers of Vchupur, Oruali and Malagaon.282

At the Puri District Peasants’ Conference283 (Astaranga, 19 May), Bhagabati Panigrahi made scathing attacks on leaders like Nilakantha Das and Godabarish Mishra for being responsible for the imposition of Section 144 CrPC orders on kisan activists. In this connection, Panigrahi maintained that the Congress and kisan sangha were not two different organizations. He pointed out that previously the peasants stooped to violence to revolt against the oppressive zamindars in order to take immediate action against the magistrate who had issued the Section 144 CrPC notice on kisan activists and pointed out that ministers did not accept office to crush popular movements but to encour-age them. Prananath Patnaik advised the peasants not to pay rent if the scheme of federation was imposed on them and thus paralyzed the government. In such a case, he pointed out, the British government would not get sufficient money to maintain the military forces or bureaucracy. Gokul Mohan Raychudamani called upon the peasants to turn every village into a fort and to stand by the Congress in case of a showdown. Raychudamani also distributed a pamphlet titled “Dhwansara Mukti” (Libera-tion through Destruction) which advocated the destruction of the zamindari system.

In a peasant meeting at Gamharipada (Kakatpur PS), Mo-han Das congratulated the audience for attending the meeting

281 Ibid.282 HPD, Report of SP, Puri District Peasants’ Conference, 19 May 1939, ACC-1180.283 Ibid.


without being afraid of local zamindars.284 At the Mukunda Prasad meeting on 2 October, Raychudamani mooted the idea of “jungle satyagraha” if Khurda forest laws were not amended. He pointed out that the laws would not be amended without a fight. Prananath Patnaik said that the purpose of the meet-ing was not to condemn the Congress ministry but to train the masses to agitate for their legitimate demands.285

A training camp was organized at Tonkol near Khurda on the model of the Cuttack one. The 15 volunteers who received training in the camp included persons from the princely states of Nayagarh and Khandapara. The participants were given training in sanitation, parade formation and how to arouse mass consciousness. Socialist leaders like Bhagabati Panigrahi, Nabakrushna Choudhury and Mohan Das as well as the local intelligentsia looked after the camp. The local kisan sangha unit arranged the accommodation for the participants.286 Similarly, in Balasore, a training camp was organized at Soro to train of-fice bearers of rural Congress units.287 Congress activists from each chowkidari union of Soro, Khaira, Simulia and Basudeb-pur were trained. The camp offered training in constructive activities such as spinning, sanitation, panchayat work as well as Congress propaganda. A plan was equally afoot to open a “political school” at Bhadrak.

Ganjam

The peasant movement in Khallikote and Athagada estates continued to be characterized by the demands of peasants for remission of rent and amendment to the Estate Land Bill in the face of the ministry’s support to the raja. Jagannath Mishra (President, DCC) toured the estates exhorting the peasants to be ready for observing satyagraha if amendment to the said bill was not passed by 31 May. In this situation, the raja offered to seek a compromise with the ryots by granting a remission of 6 annas in a rupee in the Madras Estates Land Act Amendment

284 HPD, CID Report of the Political Conference at Gamharipada, Puri, 13 May 1939, ACC-1176.285 HPD, Report of Police Inspector, 3 October 1939, ACC-1758.286 HPD, FNR, Puri, 14 June 1939, ACC-1085.287 HPD, FNR, Balasore, 13 January 1939, ACC-1084.


Bill.288 Despite this offer, the Ganjam District Ryots’ Committee resolved on 12 May to go ahead with the plan of civil disobedi-ence. Maharana and Govinda Chandra Mishra thought of trying out satyagraha as a legitimate protest for the grievances of the peasants. Interestingly, Nilakantha Das, with his usual anti-min-istry stance, also backed the proposal. The Ryots’ Committee advocated non-payment of taxes and disobedience of laws from 1 June and also asked the ministry to resign in case the bill was not passed by 31 May.289

Accordingly, in a meeting organized in Kodala on 1 June, 14 satyagrahis congregated and started their journey to Berhampur sub-collector’s office, mobilizing peasants in the villages on the way. In his speech, Maharana exhorted the peasants not to agree to any compromise with the landlords and hoped that if 15,000 ryots followed him, the Viceroy’s assent to the bill would be obtained. However, DCC leaders like Dibakar Patnaik and Jagannath Mishra backed out from the proposal of launching a satyagraha right away. Jagannath Mishra suggested that as the PCC had not approved of the proposed satyagraha, it should be postponed to a future date. Dibakar Patnaik pointed out that even if the bill was passed, there would be considerable delay before the ryots could reap its benefits. In this situation, he sug-gested that the peasants should first try to “dictate” the terms of the compromise to the zamindars through campaigning or some other kind of civil disobedience. Further, the satyagrahis were advised not to go to Berhampur, but to travel through the villages and mobilize the peasants for future satyagraha, if it eventually became necessary. Maharana and Govinda Mishra had to finally accept the decision to postpone the satyagraha.290 In this connection, Biswanath Das undertook a visit to Ganjam and advised the ryots to pay up to 50 per cent of their rent and then ask for remission.291

At the peasants meeting at Phasi on 14 June, Das pointed out that the delay in the passing of the bill was due to the fact that no decision had been arrived at on the proposed compromise between the ryots and the zamindars. He went on to add that

288 HPD, Report of SP, Ganjam, 28 May 1939, ACC-1186.289 HPD, Report of Collector, Ganjam to CS, 29 May 1939, ACC-1186.290 Ibid.291 HPD, FNR, Ganjam, 25 May 1939, ACC-1080.


it would be profitable for the peasants to accept the terms of a compromise. He warned the peasants against any no-rent campaign without the permission of the All India Congress Committee (AICC). In the same meeting, Maharana expressed his opposition to Das’ view of waiting for the AICC’s orders.292 Rent payment virtually stopped around May–June and the ryots’ hope of the announcement of remission rose high.

In July, the raja announced remission for the estates. For Khallikote and Athagada estates, it was 4–6 annas in a rupee with additional remissions in particular cases. For Birdi es-tate, remission of 4 annas in a rupee was conceded. Besides, a month’s time was given to pay the rent to take advantage of the remissions. The announcement of remissions was “fairly well-received” in Athagada estate, but in Khallikote, where Ma-harana was “more influential”, the response was not favourable. Maharana continued to advise peasants not to pay more than what they had paid until then and asked them to be prepared for distraints.293

By August, however, there was a clear-cut improvement in the collection of rent, followed by the grant of remission as well as imposition of distraints in particular cases.294 Maharana continued to advise the peasants to pay the rent if they were capable, and in case they could not, to “keep their door open” for distraints without fear. However, the popular resistance to distraints was not successful and peasants in most cases paid the rent. Nevertheless, we come across evidence of combined and forcible opposition to distraints as late as September in the Borida village of Athagada estate. Here, the distraint had to be given up.295

Maharana organized a youth association in Kudala around July. The association stepped up its activities on Maharana’s call for satyagraha. The association demanded the removal of non-Oriya clerks (especially the Telugu ones) of the estates and demanded for the appointment of residents of the estates.

In September, the Khonds of Luhagudi and Mohana refused to do bethi in connection with agency civil work even after being

292 HPD, FNR, Ganjam, 28 June 1939, ACC-1080.293 HPD, FNR, Ganjam, 28 June 1939–13 July 1939, ACC-1080.294 Ibid., 13 August 1939, 29 August 1939, 13 September 1939, ACC-1080.295 Ibid.


offered advance payment by the authorities. They demanded 4 annas a day for the work. The Khonds pointed out to the authorities that the Congress workers had assured them of the order against bethi. In fact, the DCC had circulated a leaflet in the agency, explaining that “Collectors have been instructed to punish the person demanding unpaid labour and none should render bethi services to anybody and report such cases to Congress authorities.” The DCC also organized meetings in the agency and explained to the Khonds that no one should render any bethi service and that the police and magistrates should be defied. The campaign was so effective that the of-ficial report noted that “unless Government at once broadcast information in the Agency clarifying the position and saying that the customary ‘bethi’ labour of the Agency has to continue … it will be practically impossible to get any civil work done in the Agency.”296

Jeypore Estate

What was noticeable in Jeypore estate in 1939 was the estab-lishment of Congress houses and ashrams in many parts. These ashrams were usually constructed by the “graduates” at the Nuaput camp referred to earlier. The objective of raising these ashrams was that they would be used as Congress offices and schools with the dawn of swaraj. In fact, a vigorous drive for raising subscriptions towards the construction and maintenance of these ashrams was undertaken. Those who refused to con-tribute money were coerced to contribute paddy and wood. For example, Jagabandhu Das (alias Bhim Singh), a trainee of Nuaput camp, raised subscriptions by way of imposing fine and even preached that villages not contributing would be “destroyed” by “Congress force” or “balls [read bombs] would be thrown” on those villages. Such ashrams sprang up in Bodonaikoguda, Duddari, and Godala in Borigumma and Dasmantpur areas.297

Two Congress activists named Kuruma Naiko and Bania Bin Naiko had the Congress flag hoisted at the top of their houses.

296 HPD, “Kandhamal Anchalare Bethi” (Oriya pamphlet issued by Ganjam DCC), September 1939; HPD, Report of Collector (Ganjam) to Revenue Commissioner, 12 September 1939, ACC-1805.297 HPD, “OPAI”, No.106, April 1939, ACC-1138.


Kurumo Naiko also offered puja in the house and contributions of rice, vegetables and money were raised.298 In many cases, such ashrams were built by procuring timber illegally from the reserved forest of the estate. The DCC defended the right of people to cut timber for the construction of such ashrams and protested to the forest authorities regarding cases involving confiscation of timber.299 In one case of theft of timber for the construction of a Congress house, the SI who conducted the enquiry was mobbed by 50 villagers who demanded that they all be arrested, claiming they were Congress members and had stolen the timber for the construction of the Congress house. The emboldened tribals, while mobbing the SI, raised slogans like “Gandhi ki jai” and referred to one another as sainiks (soldiers) and called their leaders senapati (commander).300 In Nowrangpur, timber stolen for ashram construction seized by the authorities under the Forest Act was recovered by the people. Another interesting feature was that the ashrams with their collection of subscriptions in the shape of paddy were used as coopera-tive societies. In the final analysis, the ashrams can be seen as headquarters for popularizing Congress ideology.

Interestingly, the tribals were advised to attend Congress houses instead of magistrate’s courts. For instance, Radha Mohan Sahu (MLA) advised the people charged with the clearing of the jungle for podu cultivation to attend Congress offices before appearing in court.301 We come across a reference to the tribals who refused to attend the court in connection with a timber-cutting case in Jeypore. However, they appeared later in the court under the leadership of a Congress gumasta and told the judge that they were kept at the Congress office where they had been instructed not to fear the magistrate. A Congress pleader defended the case involving timber cutting.302

The idea of swaraj, with its attendant infringement of laws and defiance of authority, was a trend which started in 1938 and was further intensified in 1939. For instance, the Khonds refused to pay fees to the excise staff for keeping salapo (palm

298 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 27 March 1939, ACC-1083.299 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 26 April 1939, ACC-1083.300 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 27 May 1939, ACC-1083.301 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 12 April 1939, ACC-1083.302 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 13 May 1939, ACC-1083.


juice) toddy. In one case, the Khonds even assaulted the excise peon.303 In Kotpad, an activist named Kapilo Patro appointed village officials superseding those appointed by the estate. He advised people to ignore the estate officials and report directly to Maharana.304

Danardan Singh, who was fairly active in 1938, started telling people that the premier would have the police prosecuted and the DM removed.305 The Khonds of Kanakbandi (Bissemcuttack) opposed the move by the authorities to reserve the jungles.306

Medingi Sisa, a follower of Marri Kamaya (Vizagpatnam), along with a local Congress activist of Nandapur, advised the people to refuse to work in government construction programmes. Simi-larly, the naik of Wardah refused to repair the school building at Padwa307, and a Congress gumasta (clerk) in Jeypore circle instructed a village gonda (chowkidar) to hand over his gonda lands to Punu Domb, who was proposed to be appointed as a Congress gonda of the village.

In Tentulikhunti PS, in Nowrangpur, two constables who went to Lakidipalli village to execute a non-bailable warrant against Congress activist, Sanyasi Domb, were robbed of their purse and assaulted by the villagers under the leadership of Bhagat Majhi, the Congress gumasta of Konga and the village naiko. Their turbans and shirts were torn by the villagers. The constables were then taken to Ananda Behera, the president of the Congress unit of the area. They were detained for two hours in the sun. Finally, the president noted down their names. Then their handcuffs were removed, but they were handed over to the village naiko.308 In this connection, the DCC leader Sadashiba Tripathy, the MLA and the villagers lodged a counter-case against the constables for preventing them from attending the Congress meeting. The villagers also admitted that they had got together against the constables.309

The DCC extended full support to them on the issue. In a meeting organized at Tentulikhunti, people were encouraged to

303 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 30 February 1939, ACC-1083.304 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 12 April 1939, ACC-1083.305 Ibid.306 Ibid.307 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 26 April 1939.308 HPD, “Spl. Report Case No. 13/1939”, Koraput, 13 May 1939, ACC-1171.309 Ibid.; HPD, FNR, Koraput, 13 May 1939–27 May 1939, ACC-1083.


resist the law. Those who declined to give evidence in support of the Congress activists were threatened. The villagers were told that the ministry would be asked to resign if the demands of local leaders were not fulfilled. Under pressure of the anti-police campaign, the SI at Tentulikhunti fled to Madras without reporting to the authorities.310 In Nowrangpur, the market lessees were prevented from collecting tax by the people who claimed that the Congress had abolished the tax.311

There is also evidence of the looting of a granary in Sep-tember. The tribals, led by Congress gumastas, approached the moneylenders, government officials and police inspectors in connection with paddy loans. This development, however, occurred in the context of general withholding of paddy loans to the people by the mahajans and moneylenders in view of the Congress ministry’s proposed moneylenders’ bill, which promised a reduction in the rates of interest chargeable for loans of grain.312 Interestingly, a sympathetic SDO of Koraput, enquiring into the grain-looting incident, sought a compromise with the local activists and settled the matter by obtaining an undertaking from the people not to repeat such an act. The SDO’s action was interpreted by the police as “abdication in favour of parallel Government”.313

In this context, it is important to note that one of the objec-tives of the formation of Congress houses was to use them as cooperative lending societies. For this, subscriptions in the shape of paddy were raised by the Congress activists even under the threats of imprisonment. In fact, two grain-golas were organized in Koraput taluk around June 1939 for storing ragi.314 Biswasray had appealed to the people in a meeting at Dasmanthpur in April for contribution of grains for the Congress cooperative houses.315

310 HPD, Report of IG Police, Orissa to CS, F. No. 207/1939, 9 June 1939, ACC-1776.311 HPD, FNR, 13 May 1939, ACC-1083.312 HPD, FNR, 27 August 1939–13 September 1939.313 Ibid.314 HPD, “Examples of dangerous tendencies …”, Koraput, F. No. 142/1939, 25 May 1939, ACC-1122.315 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 26 April 1939, ACC-1083.


Another form of popular mobilization existing in the estate was the circulation of Gandhi khatuli316 (a small wooden seat), which kept moving from village to village. People in the village kept the khatuli for some days and worshipped and made offer-ings before passing it on to the next village. The idea behind the circulation of the khatuli, said to have originated in the Madras Presidency, was intended to mobilize and indoctrinate the trib-als with Gandhian ideology.

In April, the DCC in its meeting decided that Congress ac-tivists would tour villages informing people that swaraj had been achieved. It also decided to enrol women and children as Congress members.317 However, the enrolment for 1939 was carried out in a low key.318

In the context of a fall in the number of Congress members, Biswasray talked of preparing people for the revival of civil disobedience around May.319 Sadashiba Tripathy mooted the idea of satyagraha against plough and forest taxes. The DCC too often stood by actions at a popular level. For example, it instituted non-official enquiry committees comprising local Con-gress activists in cases which had already been dealt with by the authorities.320 The DCC even sanctioned Rs 50 for the defence of certain Congress activists.321 The local newspaper Prajabani sought to highlight police excesses and repression by the estate authorities by equating the prevailing condition in Koraput with that of “pre-Russian revolutionary period” and a “condition where European countries overthrew the Government”.322

Biswanath Das toured the district with Nilakantha Das in June and addressed meetings where popular grievances concerning bethi, gudem (a form of feudal levy) and mustajari system and oppression by forest officials were conveyed to the PM. The premier, conceding that conditions prevailing in the estate were not satisfactory, appealed to the estate authorities to take

316 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 13 May 1939, ACC-1083.317 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 26 April 1939, ACC-1083.318 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 13 May 1939, ACC-1083.319 Ibid.320 HPD, “Examples of dangerous tendencies ...”321 Ibid.322 HPD, “Question of Allegation against Prajabani”, F. No. 207 of 1939, 9 June 1939, ACC-1776.


up necessary reforms.323 Nilakantha Das brought out a report titled The Truth about Jeypore on the basis of his enquiry into popular grievances. The report laid stress on the abolition of the mustajari system, issuing receipts in Oriya for every payment, and recognition of Congress committees by estate officials as well as the raja. It also pointed out that in cases involving forest matters, the Congress committees should be consulted.324 The official report in connection with the campaign by Congress leadership observed that it was meant to undermine the au-thority of officials.325 When the authorities wanted to prosecute Biswasray as well as the editor of the Prajabani for “encouraging the inhabitants of the district for breaking laws”, the premier observed in his note to the CS:

I have tried to use my influence with the MLAs, whose activities are legitimate and open, and have also appealed to the estate ... Sanction of prosecution under the circumstances necessarily implies a break up of the peaceful atmosphere already created ... I would not allow the Magistrate or any other official to proceed against the people concerned or Government taking any steps.326

This position taken by the premier was indicative of the fact that the ministry was defensive of DCC leadership and its activi-ties. In other words, movements at popular levels were allowed openness and initiatives and such trends were strengthened by the overall support of the top leadership in the ministry and the PCC.

In the Khariar sub-division, Congress activists took upon themselves the task of detecting excise offences, especially illicit possession of alcoholic drinks, and, in certain cases, arresting people for such crimes.327 Similarly, popular assertion against oppression by the zamindar’s officials and the police continued in the Khariar estate. The tenants’ opposition to the payment of ranua and chari (grazing tax) also continued.328

323 Ibid.324 The Observer, 10 June 1939.325 HPD, “Question of allegation against Prajabani”.326 Ibid.; HPD, “Congress Activities in Koraput”, F. No. 142 of 1939, 25 May 1939, ACC-1122.327 HPD, FNR, SBP, 27 September 1939, ACC-1079.328 HPD, FNR, SBP, 10 February 1939–25 February 1939, ACC-1079.


The review of the state of peasant and tribal movements in the province during 1935–39 clearly indicates that by its diverse forms of struggle as well as various methods of mobilization, it transformed the existing peasant consciousness. Besides, by projecting and popularizing various demands on class lines, the peasant movement distinctly eroded the legitimacy of the landed elements. Hence, it created a climate for the radical transformation of the existing agrarian structure. Another sig-nificant aspect of the movement was that it was based on the ideology of nationalism.

In the course of the mobilization of the peasantry, not only the demands of peasants but also the message of anti-imperial-ism percolated into remote and diverse areas of the province. Similarly, as observed earlier, kisan sangha meetings were also organized from Congress platforms. As in many cases and more particularly in Ganjam and Koraput, the Congress membership enrolment drive was basically the method used for mobilizing and enrolling peasants to the kisan sangha.

However, during peasant resistances involving satyagraha, civil disobedience and no-rent campaign as well as popular assertions against oppressive officials and police, many cases were encouraged by the Congress ministry. The latter helped to transform the notion of swaraj at a popular level. Besides, the left-wing leadership in terms of Congress socialists and communists exerted considerable impact on the movement. Moreover, it is important to note that wherever the socialists and communists backed the krushak sangha, they pushed the peasant movement to a militant pitch. The ministry explored solutions not only by bringing out compromises with landed elements, but also by more often backing the leadership at local levels. Further, by defending civil liberties of many radi-cal Congress and kisan activists, the ministry created space for the sustenance as well as progress of the movement.

The peopleÊs movements of the states remained a major issue for the political leadership in Orissa during the 1930s, providing a radical thrust to the national movement. There were 26 princely states in Orissa, each of which had similar practices and ways of life as their neighbours in British Orissa. They differed only in administration. The same literature inspired them and evoked common ideals and inspirations. These tracts were governed by the princely rulers or chiefs under the direct advice and guid-ance of British political officers. However, the social and political structures of these princely states were dominantly characterized by feudal oppression by rulers, officials and police.

The enquiry committee instituted by the Orissa State PeopleÊs Conference (OSPC hereafter) in 1937 to probe into the exploita-tion in the states held severity of bethi, requisitioning of goats and buffaloes for sacrificial purposes, fees for killing wild beasts who damaged crops in the fields, grazing fees and enhance-ment of land revenue as some of the major causes of popular discontent.1 The system of taxation was unbearable and did

Four

Struggling against the Rulers:Popular Movements in the Princely States

1 Orissa State PeopleÊs Conference, Orissa StatesÊ Enquiry Committee Report, (hereafter OSER), Cuttack, 1939, pp. 5 25.


not take the peasantÊs capacity to pay into consideration. Land revenue was pitched higher than that of British Orissa. The rates of rent prevailing in different states is shown in Table 4.1.2

2 Ibid.

It is worth noting that the rate of rent in British Orissa was very high. If it was 1.1.0 in rupee in Singhbhum, in the neigh-bouring state of Kharswan it was Rs 4. Besides, almost all the states levied special fees for permission to use double-plank doors, any head-dress and palanquins. There was also a tax on ploughs. The prevalence of bethi, wherein a peasant spent over a hundred days in a year doing forced labour, caused great

Table 4.1

Rates of Rent per Acre

States Rs Annas Paise

Tigiria 2 11 5Narasinghpur 3 12 5Keonjhar 3 0 0Gangpur 2 7 0Daspalla 3 4 1Baramba 3 8 3Mayurbhanja 4 5 7Kalahandi 6 11 0Pallahara 2 12 0Nilagiri 5 0 0Kharswan 4 0 0Nayagarh 3 4 1Bonai 1 13 0Athagarh 3 8 3Patna 1 8 0Sareikala 4 0 0Khandapara 2 5 6Hindol 4 11 0Boud 2 10 0Bamra 3 8 3Athamalik 2 11 0Dhenkanal 2 11 9Talcher 3 4 1Ranpur 2 11 0

Struggling against the Rulers 149

hardship. In case of refusal, the person in question was beaten, fined and even imprisoned. Rasad and magan were two other obnoxious systems. Rasad was the system of forced requisition of provisions and failure to supply rasad could result in the ejection of the tenant from his holding. Magan was the forced requisition of money on ceremonial occasions, such as thread or ear-piercing ceremonies of the raja or his heir-apparent. The gift was 0.0.6 in the rupee of the rent.3

Economic exploitation apart, the existence of civil liberties was marginal as the state authorities prohibited holding of any meeting and did not recognize the prajamandal. (Prajamandals were formed in the princely states to ventilate the grievances of people with the dominant objective of establishing a responsible government.) Along with the absence of freedom of speech and association, newspapers were banned so as to prevent people from getting in touch with political ideas developing beyond the border. Any attempt to raise protest over any of the illegalities was ruthlessly suppressed by the oppressive state machinery. The state officials as well as the police were instruments of ter-ror in the region of the ruler.

However, these restrictions led to the emergence of popu-lar protest and, ultimately, powerful anti-feudal movements. The spur for such movements came in the wake of the Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM)·indicating the deep inroads of the national movement into the dark zones of the princely states.4 We come across several instances of popular protest in the princely states in Orissa in the context of the national move-ment. Some of them are briefly discussed here.

3 Also see: B.C. Rath, Unrest in Princely States of Orissa (1938 47), Cuttack, 1993, for a detailed discussion on social and agrarian structure of the states.4 Though it is not possible to have a detailed discussion here on the aspect of the nature and extent of the mobilization occurring in the princely states, it is worth noting that the initial attempts at organizing subjects of the princely states were undertaken by the nationalist leadership after the Gandhi Irwin Pact. For details, see: The Samaja, 6 September 1931; The Prajatantra, 30 May 1931, 27 March 1931; Home Political Department (hereafter HPD), „Letter from Political Agent and Commissioner, Orissa Feudatory States to Chief Secretary (CS)‰, 26 April 1931; HPD, „Order Issued by Raja of Dhenkanal‰, 13 April 1940; HPD, Report of SP, Cuttack, 2 May 1932; HPD, „District MagistrateÊs (DM) Letter to CS‰, 6 July 31; HPD, Report of CS, 6 July 1931; Desakatha, 4 May 1931.


Around June 1930, a new settlement came into operation in Boud and there was a fourfold hike in the land revenue. This resulted in a gathering of 2,000 people who sought to meet the ruler for redressal. When they were refused a meeting with the ruler, a group of 27 Khonds approached the political agent of Sambalpur. On the way back, they were beaten up and impris-oned.5 Much earlier, in Nilagiri, during the course of an agita-tion against bethi and magan in 1928, nearly 2,000 people left the state for Balasore. Ultimately, with the intervention of the British government, a settlement was arrived at.6 It is obvious that the heat of the CDM had its natural repercussion in the neighbouring state pocket of Balasore. In 1932, an association named Yubak Sabha Samiti was organized in Ayodhya with the object of carrying on constructive activities under the initiative of local leaders like Pranabandhu Agasti and Balram Raj. But they were arrested in May. In Talcher too, a movement against miscellaneous cesses took place in 1932.7 As a mark of protest and to commemorate the incident, the youth of Ayodhya village continued to hold meetings on 2 May every year since then. Talcher also saw a movement against miscellaneous cesses in 1932.8 In Dhenkanal too, resentment against new forest laws and revision of rent existed.9

A conference was organized at Cuttack in August 1931 with the object of discussing the problems of princely states.10 The public activists who organized the effort included Provincial Congress Committee (PCC) activists like Radhanath Rath, Bal-unkeswar Acharya, Madhusudan Patnaik and Govinda Chandra Mishra. The initiative got a definite direction with the formation of the State PeopleÊs Conference in 1937. The second session of the conference, which was held at Cuttack in 1937 under Pat-tabhi SitaramayaÊs presidentship, proposed the setting up of an enquiry committee to probe into the condition in the states of

5 OSER, 1939, pp. 5 10.6 Radhanath Rath, „The Story of Freedom Movement in Orissa State‰, in M.N. Das, ed., Sidelights on History and Culture of Orissa, Cuttack, 1977, pp. 282 85. We have also references to the no-rent campaign in Bamra in 1920 as a protest against Meefar settlement which hiked the land rent.7 OSER, 1939, pp. 51 57.8 Radhanath Rath, „The Story of Freedom Movement‰, pp. 282 85.9 Ibid.10 Ibid.


Orissa.11 Thus, the popular protest in the states came to be ef-fectively organized only with the formation of the State PeopleÊs Conference in 1937. The installation of the Congress ministry and the distinct intervention of Congress leadership in the af-fairs of the princely states provided a powerful thrust to popular movements. It was then that the restlessness that swayed the states became powerful and involved the participation of a new band of radical leadership through both the Congress and the Congress Socialist Party. Thus, the feudal oppression underly-ing the social structure of the princely states12 came under the attack of the national movement which swept the pockets of British India beyond the borders of the states. A contemporary pro-establishment newspaper, The New Orissa, made the above point clear:

Living as close as they do with the people in British Orissa the statesÊ people could not but be profoundly influenced by the rapid march of political events across their frontiers. Unfortunately, the political awakening of the stateÊs people has been rather rude, for which both the Rulers and their political gurus in British India are equally responsible.13

It further said, „Though the Congress as organisation has refused to lend its countenance to the peopleÊs movement in the state ⁄ Yet the states have been undoubtedly set in motion by Congressmen in Orissa at the instance of a few disgruntled statesÊ subjects like Sarangadhar Das.‰14 We have taken up Nilagiri,

11 Ibid.12 Interestingly, Sarangadhar Das, a prominent leader of state peopleÊs move-ment, in the course of a speech, revealed that he found a map of Orissa in a garden party of the rajas in which the feudatory states were painted in black. He asked the raja why it was so, and whether it meant to show that the princely states were the darkest zones of Orissa. The latter, in turn, requested him to make it all red. (HPD, Report of SP on Cuttack Town Hall Meeting, 29 October 1938, Accession no. 1005 (ACC-1005)). The rajaÊs comment, however, points to a close nexus between princely states and imperialism, i.e., the dark zones of the princely states being sustained by the red imperialism.13 The New Orissa, 22 October 1938, ACC-923. An article titled „Unrest in Orissa States‰ observes that the movement in the states did not come about as a spontaneous growth; it was engineered, controlled and carried on by the so-called leaders from British Orissa.14 The New Orissa, 27 September 1938, ACC-923.


Dhenkanal and Talcher to examine and identify the pattern of popular struggle in princely states of Orissa during 1937 39.

Nilagiri

The initial impulse for a peopleÊs organization against the auto-cratic feudal chief of Nilagiri dates back to 1928, when over 1,000 tenants left the state for Balasore protesting against the systems of sikar and bethi of the state. They were, however, persuaded to return to the state with the intervention of noted Gandhian C.F. Andrews, and an assurance was obtained from the ruler to follow a policy of restraint in the above systems.15

In 1931, under the heat of the CDM, a yuvak sangha was formed. The activities of the sangha angered the ruler, who convicted a few of its activists. Under the banner of this sangha, a virtual underground movement co-existed with the CDM. The yuvak sangha had taken up programmes like Harijan uplift and literacy campaign, which points to the impact of Gandhian constructive and reform activities. The sangha also used to organize common feasts during which both high and low castes ate together and the ration was contributed by the villagers. This feast naturally ensured a congregation and at-tendant discussion on different issues ranging from the national movement to the rulerÊs administration. The political orientation of this practice became overt with Congress activists openly sharing the feast around 1937; and the ruler proceeded against Hadibandhu Raj and others for spreading the Harijan Uplift Movement on the grounds of „violation of ancient customs and usages‰ (which was punishable by the state!)16 Fired by the imagination of some of the activists, who had gone to attend the State PeopleÊs Conference held at Cuttack in February 1938, the sangha was revived in May 1938. Further, the installation of

15 HPD, CID Report, 10 June 1938. C.F. Andrews had met the Governor and the Viceroy over the issue. The raja, under pressure, had to „prohibit‰ the system (ACC-957).16 HPD, Report of DI, Balasore, on Political Agitation in Nilagiri State, 10 June 1938. See also Nilagiri Prajamandal History Compilation Committee, Nilagiri Praja Andolanara Itihasa (NPARI hereafter; Oriya), Balasore, 1982, pp. 65 70; All India State PeopleÊs Conference (AISPC hereafter) Papers, F. No. 124, 1938 40.


the Congress ministry inflated their hopes of a similar change in the state itself.17 In a meeting at Ayodhya (1 May 1938), a group of leaders such as Hadibandhu Raj, Maheswar Pradhan, Pranabandhu Agasti (involved earlier with the sangha, right since the CDM, and convicted) and Banamali Das (a student activist, doing his matriculation) spoke to a gathering of some 200 people and announced the formation of the yuvak sangha.18 The meeting essentially focused on the Congress agenda and resolved to send out volunteers to villages in the state to carry on the propaganda. The demands it stressed were, mainly, (i) popular control of state budget, (ii) reduction of land revenue, (iii) right to cut timber from the state forests and (iv) introduc-tion of prohibition in the state.19

Behind the re-organization of the sangha, the moral and ideological support of the local intelligentsia and the rural rich, apart from the support of the Congress activists of Orissa province, particularly Balasore district (being the border district of Nilagiri State), was crucial. For instance, the leading sympa-thizers of the sangha at the initial stage were Kailash Chandra Mohanty (Bachelor of Arts and Bachelor of Laws, i.e., BABL; a pleader), and his brother Sarat Mohanty (a mukhtear, i.e., petty lawyer, of Balasore), Kumar Udayanath Birbar (a matriculate, zamindar and relative of the ruler), Sadhu Prasad Bidyadhara Mohapatra (sarbarakar, i.e., headman of Patapur village), Surendra Chaudhury (sarbarakar), Chintamani Behera (sarbarakar of Alsuan village) and others.20 The very nature of leadership suggests that it was the petty landlords, village headmen, and the rulerÊs officials who volunteered to lead popular mobilization against the ruler. In response to the developments, the ruler served an order enjoining that for organizing a meeting or demonstration prior approval of the administration had to be sought through

17 HPD, CID Report on Notes on the Recent Political Agitation in Nilagiri State, 4 June 1938, ACC-957.18 Ibid.; village Ayodhya was 3 miles from the then Nilagiri State border. The other prominent members of the sangha comprised Ram Chandra Mohapatra, Purusottam Raj, Balram Raj, Pranabandhu Parida, Lakshmidhar Mishra, Shyam Chandra Choudhury and Agani Mishra (all convicted in politi-cal cases earlier).19 HPD, Report of DI on Political Agitation in Nilagiri State, 11 June 1938, ACC-957.20 Ibid.


an application on stamped paper; selling of Krushak·considered to be the ideological inspiration for popular organizations·was banned in the state.21

The move only redoubled the popular resolve to defy the rulerÊs promulgation. The headquarters of the sangha was then shifted to Alasuan in Soro PS. In an apparent move to curb popular mobilization, Pranabandhu Agasti, Giridhari Panda (Cuttack) and Chaitan Mishra (Daspalla) were arrested for delivering „seditious‰ speeches vis-à-vis the state on 23 May.22 This was followed by the incident when nearly 200 people joined a pro-cession and marched to jail to congratulate the arrested leaders for their bold stand against the ruler. The processionists carried both national and red flags and sang revolutionary songs.23 The ruler again resorted to the arrest of some of the organizers of the procession and kept them in jail.24

The sequence of events had pushed popular excitement to new heights by June. By then, Mahatab and other PCC leaders had firmly committed themselves to the cause of the Nilagiri people. A meeting organized at Cuttack on 9 June, known as the „Nilagiri Protest Meeting‰, sympathized with the hunger strike of Nilagiri stateÊs political prisoners and observed that the movement in the state should never stand in the name of the Congress but the Congress should always welcome it and extend it the required assistance. The meeting passed a resolution extending total support to the Nilagiri movement in its fight for civil liberty and hoped the Durbar (the Nilagiri administration under the control of Raja of Nilagiri) would ensure „its early fulfilment‰.25 By June, a full-fledged organization called Praja Mandal Sammilani started functioning with its headquarters at Alasuan with Kailash Chandra Mohanty as president. Alasuan, more or less projected as a Congress ashram, housed the refugees who sneaked into the place to avoid arrest by the state police. Chintamani Behera and Sadhu Prasad Bidyadhar Mohapatra (a rich merchant of Balasore) came out with financial support for the organization. Chintamani BeheraÊs house was used as pra-

21 National Front, Vol. I, No. 18, 19 June 1938.22 HPD, CID Report on Nilagiri Agitation, 4 June 1938, ACC-957.23 National Front, Vol. I, No. 18, 19 June 1938.24 HPD, CID Report on Nilagiri Agitation, 4 June 1938, ACC-957.25 HPD, CID Report on Nilagiri Protest Meeting, 9 June 1938, ACC-957.


jamandal office and he arranged food for the activists. Besides, the wife of Udayanath Birbar was appointed as the treasurer of the association and she undertook to meet the expenses of the association. Contributions for the association were also collected from the villages. The association established a rapport with the Congress leadership of Orissa and coordinated contracts with the OSPC.26 The Congress leaders of Orissa and Balasore District Congress Committee (DCC), including Mahatab and Sarangadhar Das (Secretary, OSPC), frequented the place.

The prajamandal highlighted popular demands such as the abolition of bethi, salami (salutation or complimentary present), unjustified fines, state monopoly of articles except excise items and wood rent. Besides, scrapping of the sarbarakari system and its replacement by appointment of tehsildars with salary, reduction of rent to half, forest reforms, judicial and jail laws and steps to check corruption in the state administration and humanization of police administration were focused upon. In this way, the misrule and illegal exactions of the administra-tion were sought to be removed. With its long-standing contact with the Gandhian reformist trend, the association also stressed on welfare measures to be sponsored by the state in terms of provision of roads to villages, establishment of registration of-fices, hospitals, greater number of primary and high schools, provisions of drinking water, employment for the youth, vil-lage industries and stopping of gambling. Civil liberties such as the right to hold public meetings and the recognition of the prajamandal were also emphasized upon.27

The prajamandal met on 11 June and decided to press before the ruler the demand to recognize the prajamandal as well as the right of citizenship, failing which civil disobedience would begin. Sarangadhar Das also attended the meeting.28 On 22 June, the State PeopleÊs Committee reached Balasore to conduct an enquiry into the affairs of the Nilagiri State. Nearly 200 people from the state appeared before the committee, which included leaders like Balwant Rai Mehta, Mahatab, Sarangadhar Das,

26 HPD, Balasore DIÊs Report, 11 June 1938, ACC-957.27 HPD, Balasore SPÊs Report on Nilagiri Agitation, 25 June 1938, ACC-957.28 HPD, SP Report on Nilagiri Affairs, 17 June 1938, ACC-957.


Lal Mohan Patnaik, Mukunda Prasad Das (Speaker of Orissa Assembly) as well as other prajamandal and local activists.29 The popular grievances discussed above were put up before the committee. The enquiry was followed by a procession and a meeting in which the leaders addressed the audience. Sarangadhar Das advised the people of Nilagiri to „violate the ordinances‰ of the ruler prohibiting the meeting and to „over-crowd‰ the jail.30 This had an instant effect on the people. In their bid to disobey state laws by holding meetings, several people were arrested. The arrested included persons both from the state and Balasore district.31 A few young participants also got themselves arrested.

The prajamandal further intensified its move for satyagraha. On the day of the Rath Yatra (car festival of Lord Jagannath), about 4,000 people resisted the „collection of fines and attach-ment of property‰. The novel feature in this resistance was the participation of tribals with „bows and arrows‰, who had gathered in Nilagiri to celebrate the car festival.32 This led to the arrest of 98 people. By 14 July, the number of arrests reached 116. A few state officials like Purna Chandra Naik (a school sub-inspector under Nilagiri administration) were dismissed for their association with the prajamandal. The rent-free tenures (lakhiraj) of certain Brahmins were taken away for siding with the movement.33

At this point, the Congress leadership extended whole-hearted support to the prajamandal. On 21 July, Mahatab and Sarangadhar Das addressed a meeting at village Ambodia (near the border of Nilagiri). Warmly received by villagers under the leadership

29 HPD, Balasore SP Report, 25 June 1938, ACC-957.30 HPD, FNR, Balasore, 10 July 1938, ACC-870.31 Ibid. In fact, the DM, Balasore, in his report observed: „It is a matter for serious consideration how far we should allow our people in the district, especially the youth of our district to become involved in the political agitation in a neighbour-ing ÂfriendlyÊ state ⁄ Nilagiri Darbar finds that Balasore in becoming a centre of disaffection directed against its administration‰, thus signifying massive popular support beyond the border and mainly from the Congress activists.32 HPD, „Telegram to GovernorÊs Secretary‰, 25 July 1938, ACC-957. The reason for the resistance was the attempt to defy the rulerÊs imposition and collection of fines from the „arrested‰ and „prosecuted‰ leaders.33 HPD, FNR, Balasore, 25 July 1938, ACC-870.


of Purna Chandra Naik, amidst chanting of „Mahatma ki jai‰, Mahatab advised the gathering to lend all support to the Nilagiri movement. Importantly, he asked the people to form primary Congress committees which would ultimately help redressing popular grievances. This advice was tendered apparently to hold back the Nilagiri PrajamandalÊs possible move to launch a no-rent campaign and violation of forest laws in case the attempt at compromise with the Nilagiri Durbar failed. The meeting was also addressed by Kailash Chandra Mohanty and others.34

In yet another meeting35 held on the same day at Gariamal (in the British Orissa territory) and mostly attended by Nilagiri subjects, Sarangadhar Das made an appeal for the enrolment of volunteers so as to „stand together‰ to condemn such repression of the poor tenants as at Patna village. In fact, the people of Machuapatna had resorted to non-payment of tax and in turn, the state administration had unleashed terror while undertaking attachment of household properties for default of tax payment. In this collective resistance of Machuapatna, more than a thou-sand villagers, including tribals, participated. The resistance continued for over five days, inviting massive repression by the state police.36 In view of this, Sarangadhar Das advised the tenants to remain firmly non-violent in their struggle against the Raj. He observed that the authorities were not likely to physically hurt the tenants so long as they stuck to non-violent agitation against the oppression of the state authorities. Further, he pointed out that the tenants would get full support from the Congress if they abided by the Congress creed. The meeting also gave a call to observe Nilagiri Day on 27 July. Goura Chandra Das, another Congress leader of DCC, Balasore, promised to remain regularly in touch with the locality to lend support to the non-violent fight launched by the tenants. He also said that he would equally shoulder the responsibility of forming a primary Congress committee in the area covering the villages of Patna, Chandipur and Gorimal.

The left-wingers in the prajamandal (mostly younger ele-ments represented under the leadership of Banamali Das) had a tendency to steer the movement towards violent resistance

34 Ibid.35 HPD, Sub-inspectorÊs (SI) Report on Goraimal Meeting, 22 July 1938, ACC-957.36 The Statesman, 16 August 1938.


to the state. The collective resistance against the illegal fines imposed by the state administration drew sympathizers from the neighbouring villages too. It also enlisted support of the trib-als and the prajamandal activists. These were the areas where the communists had gained an effective hold. This strand of violent resistance co-existed with the broad Gandhian trend of non-violent movement vis-à-vis the state.

By the end of July, the broad pattern of popular mobilization in the face of repression in the state revealed a very interesting dimension of the movement. Almost all the political activities originated near the border areas of the state. For instance:

(a) Speakers of the meeting in Balasore town inciting the people of Balasore district as well as those of the state to break laws and regulations of the state

(b) People collecting along the border of the state to break forest laws of the state

(c) People collecting along the border of the state and taking out processions without the stateÊs licence to defy state regulations

(d) People collecting along the border of the state and using vio-lence, attempting to cut forest timber, damaging property and marching as a body to preach no-rent campaign

(e) Ashrams in the border area having cyclostyling machines bringing out leaflets with anti-raja sentiments and appeals to break state laws

(f) Ashrams smuggling proscribed literature into the state (g) Burning of effigies of the ruler and political agent (h) Staging of dramas and jatras (popular plays) in which the

ruling chief or political agent was mocked at (i) Assaults on people who refused to subscribe to the Nilagiri

agitation (j) Persons carrying timber from Nilagiri forests to the railway

station being harassed and threatened37

The ashrams, though planned initially as Congress and Gandhian training centres in terms of ideology and activities,

37 HPD, SP to DM, Balasore, 25 June 1938, ACC-957. The points were posed as queries by the SP, Balasore, seeking guidance of his superior authority, to handle such „law and order‰ problems in the Balasore


came to accommodate the trend towards violence·indicating the weight of left-wingers on the movement. Equally, with the declared policy of non-violence, use of force, assault and violence were undertaken for sustaining the movement. Importantly, the above trends also reflect a picture of mobilization wherein political activities had their origin at the borders of the state and ultimately got concentrated on the Nilagiri as the centre, representing the Durbar. It meant a challenge from the periphery to the centre. One must equally emphasize the fact that the left-wingers, who could promote their activities under the Congress ministry, were firmly behind the prajamandal struggle of Nilagiri. The stateÊs relation with the Balasore district administration got strained. This broad support of the Congress to the movement often led to poor coordination between the state administration and the police of the British territory, because of the impression that the police of the British districts was under the control of the Congress ministry. Besides, the ministryÊs refusal to provide police assistance to the state also strengthened such thinking on the part of the administration. As a result, the state police often suspected the district police of being spies, and thus did not cooperate with them in providing information or planning joint strategy against the struggle.38

In the context of these developments, the state administra-tion was under pressure to explore the possibility of a settle-ment. Thus, on 25 July, the political agent volunteered to sign an agreement with the prajamandal leaders. According to the agreement, it was decided to allow the formation of an elected prajamandal for redressal of popular grievances and the stay-ing of fines imposed on the leaders till their cases were heard. Simultaneously, an assurance was sought from the leaders that a mass movement would not be adopted to resist the collection of state dues.39 Accordingly, the ruler recognized the prajamandal on 29 July. This ensured a short-lived lull in the movement against the state administration·yet the popular mood was buoyant

district itself. The DM in turn expressed his helplessness in ensuring police intervention with regard to points 1 8, as laws under the Indian States (Protec-tion) Act did not permit such intervention.38 HPD, SP to DM, Balasore, 4 August 1938, ACC-957. The above point is candidly detailed in the Balasore SPÊs report.39 HPD, „Letter to DM, Balasore‰, 26 July 1938, ACC-957.


about scoring a victory against the ruler. For instance, the Dis-trict Magistrate (DM), Balasore, was critical of the permanence of the solutions brought in through the agreement:

Indeed if the agitators insist on all their demands (which incidentally have been given the widest publicity by means of cyclostyled leaf-lets issued from Balasore district), it is difficult to say that a speedy solution of the trouble is at hand, unless the Durbar is willing to face with equanimity the prospect of a complete surrender. In the event of the DurbarÊs holding out (and up to the present apart from „recognizing‰ the Prajamandal the other demands of the agitators do not appear to have been conceded), the agitation, in my opinion, is bound to be intensified unless, as appears unlikely, more moderate counsels prevail among the leaders, who at the moment appear to be in a somewhat exultant mood.40

The DMÊs view of „exultant mood‰ points to the sense of victory existing at popular levels. This mood must equally have been shaped by the rulerÊs promise of giving the right to the people to elect their representative to the state assembly·a status at par with the neighbouring British territory. The idea of the assembly was, of course, immediately withdrawn and the promise was restricted to the recognition of the prajamandal only.41 It is, in fact, interesting to look into the conditions offered by the prajamandal (after it was recognized by the ruler on 29 July) to the ruler to enable it to participate in the discussion to effect a compromise with the ruler. The conditions were: unconditional release of all satyagrahis, cancellation of fines imposed on satyagrahis, return of the property attached by the ruler, reinstatement of officials dismissed by the ruler in con-nection with the movement, allowing the entry of the Krushak newspaper, scrapping of Section 144 CrPC, allowing the people expelled by the ruler to return to their villages and, finally, stopping of the state-sponsored violence.42 These conditions point to the fact that the prajamandal was assertive, fired as it was by a sense of victory.

40 HPD, „DM to Secretary on Political Agitation in Nilagiri‰, 5 August 1938, ACC-957.41 HPD, Detective Sub-Inspector (SIÊs) Report (Balasore), 2 August 1938, ACC-957.42 Ibid.


The prospect of satyagraha, including violation of forest laws, by the end of the first week of August remained the alternative in case the ruler did not concede to the demands put forward by prajamandal to facilitate a compromise. As against this, the rulerÊs only concession was in terms of recognizing the praja-mandal. At this juncture, Congress leaders including Mahatab and Sarangadhar Das addressed a meeting at Garaimal Ashram on 1 August.

The meeting43 was largely attended by many leaders from the Balasore DCC, the people of Nilagiri state as well as those from the bordering villages of Balasore district. The attendance of a sizeable section of Santhal tribals (nearly 500) out of a total of more than 2,000 is a broad pointer to the increasing participa-tion of tribals in the movement. The meeting began with the chanting of songs composed by the tenants of Nilagiri detailing the rajaÊs oppression and the hoisting of the national flag. Kai-lash Chandra Mohanty spoke at length tracing the history and prospects of the Nilagiri movement. Talking about the objective of the movement, he observed: „If the people have a voice on the budget of the state when the Assembly is formed, then and then only can they have some relief.‰ Besides, he appealed to the Santhals and other tribals to join in large numbers so that the prajamandal get strengthened and the ruling chief is forced to come to terms. Thus, an effort was made to broaden the base of the movement by ensuring larger participation of tribals in the struggle. However, he advised the audience not to resort to any kind of movement against the ruler until a decision was evolved through talks with the ruler. Finally, he appealed for funds to carry on the struggle.

Sarangadhar Das, in his speech, made an appeal to maintain unity and „faithfulness to prajamandal‰. He cited the instance of satyagrahis in Machuapatna who behaved in an „orderly fashion‰ when the political agent visited the village to conduct the enquiry. It may be noted here that, Bazelgette, the political agent, as part of his efforts to explore a negotiation with the prajamandal and the ruler, visited Machuapatna village around July end, and conducted an enquiry into the peopleÊs resistance to the collection of fines and attachment of property by the

43 Ibid.


state. During his visit, under the advice of the prajamandal, the people sang Ramdhun and remained peaceful. Mahatab, in his speech, held the British imperialism responsible and as the root cause of all the problems and asked the people to remove the root cause. He also appealed to the people to support Congress, for Congress alone was capable of relieving the distress of the masses. In fact, it was at his initiative that a primary Congress committee came to function at Gariamal, headed by Purna Chandra Naik.44 Karunakar Panigrahi, who presided over the meeting, advised the people not to fear the police and state of-ficials but to carry on the struggle. The ruler was also condemned for requisitioning police forces from Keonjhar, Mayurbhanj and Dhenkanal states.

The Ashrams

At this stage, a look at the organization of ashrams and train-ing of volunteers as part of the overall movement against the state would be worthwhile. As noted earlier, the prajamandal headquarters came to function in Alasuan (in Soro, bordering the state) right since May. But around July, the centre of activi-ties shifted to Gariamal (near Ambodia and Chandipur villages) and it became the official headquarters of the prajamandal. As observed earlier, Congress leaders visited the place and meet-ings were organized in this pocket. The initiative for opening an ashram45 at Gariamal came from some local activists. Most prominent among them were Purna Chandra Naik (who had been dismissed from the post of school sub-inspector because of his involvement in the Nilagiri movement) and Udayanath Birbar (who generally financed the prajamandalÊs expenditure by providing ration and money).

Das (secretary of the prajamandal), who had just completed his matriculation, represented the younger element of the move-ment and was known for his communist orientation. He held the post of Secretary, StudentsÊ League (Balasore Branch), and was thus active in the youth movement. By August, he was in the

44 NPARI, pp. 75 77.45 HPD, Detective SIÊs (Balasore) Report, 2 August 1938, ACC-957; HPD, SPÊs Report, Balasore, 10 August 1938.


ashram along with 60 volunteers for carrying out satyagraha in the state. The number of volunteers went up to 200 on certain occasions. For example, during the visit of the political agent to Nilagiri, the numbers swelled, requiring special arrangements for their food. The rise in numbers can perhaps be explained by the fact that the prajamandal at times issued calls to get ready for any kind of eventuality, for instance, the visit of the political agent, Bazelgette, which warranted the readiness of volunteers for such an eventuality.

The ashram was also used as an armoury of lathis and axes to be used by tenants for resisting the state administration. It was also used as a centre for Nilagiri refugees who had left the state to avoid harassment. The ashram also facilitated the publication of a cyclostyled daily newspaper titled the Rana Dak („War Cry‰), besides printing several pamphlets on behalf of the Nilagiri prajamandal. The news sheet was first edited by Goura Chandra Das and subsequently by Purna Chandra Naik. Gour Chandra Das (Secretary, Balasore DCC) had, in fact, sup-plied the cyclostyling machine. He frequented the ashram and coordinated the affairs of the prajamandal with the Balasore DCC. The Rana Dak was secretly sent to different ashrams, as well as interiors of the state such as Machuapatna and Patpur (pockets of intense popular mobilization) through volunteers. Every day, a volunteer would go on a cycle to Kantapara post office to receive the Rana Dak and post it. Usually, the ashram received letters from Mahatab, Sarangadhar Das, Radhanath Rath, editor of The Samaja, and prajamandal leaders from other states. Similarly, letters of the Nilagiri Prajamandal officials were typed out (on a typewriter provided by Purna Chandra Naik) and sent to the press and different addresses.

Besides, the ashram also physically trained the volunteers. Drills were conducted by inmates along with lathi exercises under the guidance of „Commanders‰. They usually preferred evening hours to go out in a procession, devoting the daytime for parade exercises. During processions, they carried lathis and axes along with Congress flags, and chanted nationalist and anti-ruler slogans. The nature of activities suggests that praja-mandal sustained the movement by coordinating its develop-ments with the leaders outside the state and through extended media coverage. Moreover, the Rana Dak became an important


means of popular mobilization and helped in boosting popular morale in the face of strong repressive tactics often resorted to by the state.

Yet another interesting feature was the tribals (mostly San-thals) becoming inmates of the ashram. This is to be seen in the context of the leadershipÊs effort at attracting tribals to join the prajamandal in order to broad-base the movement. Tribals were also trained and recruited as satyagrahis to offer civil resistance. Reduction in the high rent charged from them compared to fel-low non-tribal tenants and the abolition of licence fees on handia (alcoholic drinks brewed from rice) and puchwai (unprocessed alcoholic drinks) were the promises made to them by prajamandal activists to spur them on to take to the movement.

Banamali Das, representing the communist line of leadership, did a lot in mobilizing the tribals. This strand of leadership often clashed with the typical Gandhian style of functioning within the principles of non-violence. But these clashing strands were often reconciled in the larger interest of the prajamandal movement. Both helped in popular mobilization and sustained the movement, providing fresh dimensions. By August, several ashram units sprang up in villages like Ayodhya and Iswarpur. A branch was opened in Nilagiri proper (around July end), also at the initiative of the prajamandal. The ashrams46 oper-ated more or less as rural-level Congress units, initially being affiliated to the prajamandal. Thus, the objective was to further the Congress organization in the entire Nilagiri state. In fact, under the initiative of the Balasore DCC and Mahatab, a primary Congress committee was inaugurated in Gariamal on 1 August 1938. As pointed out earlier, it was under the overall banner of the Congress ashrams that communists like Banamali Das could carry forward their secret activities, otherwise not permissible. These Congress ashrams with their trained volunteers, includ-ing tribal recruits, and the trend of inculcation of Left ideology, often lent militancy to the prajamandal movement.

As expected, the possibility of a compromise between the ruler and the prajamandal broke down, as the ruler did not ac-cept prajamandalÊs demands, submitted as a pre-condition for any negotiations. Consequently, the prajamandal intensified its

46 Ibid.


activities and stepped up the satyagraha campaign. GariamalÊs ashram remained the centre of hectic mass campaigning and the source for sending regular batches of volunteers to offer satyagraha in the state. The response of the ruler was to resort to sheer repression. Banamali Das, considered as the potential force behind the popular mobilization with his ashram activi-ties at Gariamal, was arrested on 4 August while urging the people not to join a meeting to be addressed by the ruler.47 This inflamed popular anger and the Gariamal ashram organized a satyagraha on a large scale to protest the arrest.48 On the eve-ning of 8 August, the volunteers led by Purna Chandra Naik marched to a nearby field in Ambodia, shouting slogans like „Nilagiri atyachar dhwansa heu‰ („Down with the atrocities of the Nilagiri raja‰) and „Biswasghataka dhwansa hua‰ („Down with the traitor‰), „Gandhiji ki jai‰ („Victory to Gandhiji‰) and „Swadhin Bharat ki jai‰ („Victory to independent India‰). Later, drills were practised under the command of Bansidhar Behera. Batches of satyagrahis were despatched to Nilagiri on 9, 10 and 11 August. The state administration resorted to firing and even trampling by elephants to force the agitators out of Nilagiri. On 9 August, during the course of a lathi charge by the state police, Arjuna Jena, an activist who undertook courier activities of prajamandal, was brutally assaulted. Many others were also injured. After this incident, for a long time, Jena was not to be seen. There were rumours that he had been killed by the rajaÊs hired Muslim goons from Cuttack, and was buried in the jungle of Nilagiri mountains. But when he reappeared after a few days, another story about the death of one „Singh‰ was aired. In fact, after every round of suppression of the satyagrahis, the state administration had to face a larger number of fearless satyagrahis the next day.

Such incidents also tend to provoke violent retaliation. The anti-ruler slogans raised at the time smacked of intense hatred towards the ruler. However, the prajamandal leaders as well as other Congress leaders of Balasore DCC, who were monitoring the development, advised the people to remain non-violent. After the developments of 9 and 10 August, a selected number of

47 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 17 August 1938, ACC-1059.48 HPD, FNR, Balasore, 13 August 1938, ACC-870; HPD, Detective SIÊs (Balasore)


satyagrahis were flagged off to Nilagiri from Gariamal ashram. The procession was preceded by a mass meeting where more than a thousand people gathered (who were asked to carry on the struggle in a non-violent manner). The prevailing mood was best reflected in the DMÊs report of 10 August. Advising the raja to appoint an escort and seek police protection while moving out in public, he went on to observe:

As anticipated, the situation in Nilagiri has deteriorated ⁄ If the agitators were shouting in this district on the border „Down with the drunken raja‰ and „Down with the traitor‰ even before the clash (of 9/10 August), it is likely that after the clash, in which one person is thought to have been killed, their feelings will be further embittered.49

At this stage, a fresh initiative for opening negotiations be-tween the prajamandal and the Durbar was taken up with the intervention of Mahatab. A comprehensive list of 31 demands of the prajamandal was submitted by Mahatab.50 The negotiation began on 19 August with the tendering of a „guarded‰ regret by the prajamandal to the Durbar (the raja had taken prajamandalÊs slogans like „Down with the drunken raja‰ and „Down with the traitor‰ as ridiculously offensive). Of the 31 demands, the ruler immediately conceded to most of them, but rejected seven important ones. This stance of the Durbar led to stiffening of the prajamandalÊs position and the negotiation faced the prospect of breaking down again. The rajaÊs proclamation highlighting the concessions was set to fire in protest and a call for boycott was given. The prajamandal even advised the people to leave the state while intensifying the struggle against the Durbar. However, a crisis was averted with the joint initiatives of the Congress leadership and Major Bazelgette, the political agent. The raja was forced to fulfil most of the demands by 28 August.

The seven demands on which the ruler expressed reserva-tions were referred to the Resident, Eastern States, in Calcutta.

Report, 10 August 1938, ACC-957. The details of the events of 8, 9 and 10 August are built on the above sources.49 HPD, DMÊs (Balasore) Report, 10 August 1938, ACC-957.50 HPD, FNR, Balasore, 29 August 1938, ACC-870; HPD, FNR, Balasore, 24 September 1938, ACC-870.


By October, however, the ruler had agreed to accept six of the eight demands not conceded to by then. Some of the demands over which the ruler showed his reservations were grant of general amnesty by the ruler, discussion on the budget, and a responsible government. However, the demand on the budget was also partly accepted. In fact, the agreement raised the pres-tige of the Congress in the eyes of the state subjects.51

Some of the demands granted by the ruler were:52

(a) Abolition of bethi and magan or contributions to the ruler on days of his family celebration and sorrow;

(b) Abolition of bethi used in shikar (hunting); (c) Abolition of the system of taking permission before transfer

of land, except the transfer of land from tribal to non-tribal persons, in which case too there should be no fees;

(d) Mutation fee to be paid at the rate of three times the rental in case of sales and gifts only and in court sales, mutation fee or Rs 8 per month to be paid;

(e) The commuted rent of jagir land to be reduced by 25 per cent;

(f) Abolition of salami; (g) Killing/wounding of elephants to be penalized, though

animals damaging crops could be killed on the spot; (h) No state machinery to be used in social matters, only moral

impact of the ruler to be exercised in this regard; (i) Ban on the Krushak to be lifted; (j) Permission to use the forest; and (k) Abolition of taxes on the sale of bamboo by Dombs brewing

alcoholic drinks for home consumption.

While recognizing the prajamandal, the rulerÊs proclamation pointed out:

I cannot take any action irrespective of what my brother princes think about it. Surely, Nilagiri is not the state to begin experiments with. I may assure the subjects that Nilagiri will not lag behind

51 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 17 December 1938, ACC-1059.52 Linlithgow Collection (hereafter LC), „Hubback to Linlithgow‰, Vol. II, 19 September 1938; NPARI, op. cit., pp. 86 88.


when other states in the agency take steps in this direction ⁄ I have recognised the Prajamandal for the purpose of representing the grievances of the people in a regular manner to the Durbar, as I want the administration to be popular.53

Thus, people scored a victory over the ruler by forcing him to concede certain fundamental democratic demands. The prophecy of Sarangadhar Das that Nilagiri would be „the torchbearer for the suffering millions of the Orissa state‰54 had come true.

However, the agreement was violated by the ruler around No-vember. In response, the PCC reaction was sharp. Sympathizing with the consistent struggle of the prajamandal, it condemned the rulerÊs highhandedness in banning the prajamandal and obstructing meetings and processions.55 Thus, the ruler had to draft a rejoinder, giving an assurance that concessions already granted would not be cancelled and that the princes of Orissa states would meet to discuss the initiative for the examination of the scheme for introduction of representative institutions in future.56 The Congress leadership reacted strongly, and the PCC warned:

If a pact by political department can be treated like a scrap of paper in this way, then we have to give up all hopes of ever influencing the British administration ⁄ It will be impossible for us to continue as a part and parcel of British administration where such a breach of pact is countenanced.

Clearly stating that the option of the ministryÊs resignation was open in that eventuality, the PCC further observed: „If this mighty force of British administration is used to subdue the claims of people for elementary rights of human beings ⁄ we would be left with no option but to resign.‰57 Unfortunately, the murder of Bazelgette at Ranpur in 1939 slowed down the pace of movement everywhere.

53 Ibid.54 The Statesman, 16 August 1938.55 AICC Papers, „Secretary PCC to Secretary, AICC‰, F. No. 21, 14 December 1938.56 Ibid.57 Ibid.


Dhenkanal

The impulse for organization of the state subjects of Dhenkanal, Talcher and Hindol dates back to 1938 when Girija Bhusan Dutta (Congress MLA) and Sarangadhar Das convened the Garjat Praja Sammilani and enthused about 400 subjects to resist the oppression of the state and secure their rights by focusing on the comparison of their condition with that of the tenants of British India.58 The preliminary steps towards the organization of prajamandal in Dhenkanal state were taken in the context of the visit of the enquiry committee appointed by the state peopleÊs organizations to probe into the conditions of the states. When the enquiry committee visited Dhenkanal and camped in Angul (26 and 27 June 1938) to compile information by interviewing the people of the state, the move to form the prajamandal was formalized. A 13-member working committee headed by local activists like Artatrana Patra (president), Purna Chandra Mo-hapatra (secretary) and others was floated.59 Behind this effort at the prajamandal organization, Maheswar Subahu Singh and Purna Chandra Mohapatra (who had organized popular protest against rent enhancement in Parjang, Kant and Kantanali way back in the 1920s)60 took the crucial lead. In fact, it was basically from Parjang, Palasuni and Upardesh bisos61

(parganas) that

people volunteered before the enquiry committee to present their grievances regarding the stateÊs role. These pockets had experienced popular resentment and political mobilization right since the 1920s against state oppression. It is equally important to note that the state had come under the impact of Gandhian nationalism since the days of the non-cooperation movement. The students of Dhenkanal High School had boycotted classes during this movement and later progressively sought links with Congress activists of the British Indian territory. The youth leadership, comprising Harmohan Patnaik, Laxmidhar Sahu, Baisnab Charan Patnaik and Dayanidhi Patnaik, which had

58 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, Dhenkanal, 26 June 1938, ACC-1058.59 Krushak, 2 July 1938.60 Dhenkanal History Committee, A Short History of Dhenkanal Freedom Struggle, Undated, p. 4.61 AICC Papers, F. No. 9-35/1938.


steeled itself in such activities, afterwards became the substantial force behind the stateÊs struggle.62

After the formalization of the provisional prajamandal, mass meetings were organized in different parts of the state and primary units of the prajamandal were organized at the village level. Membership and fund collection drive for the prajaman-dal was also stepped up. Strict loyalty to the prajamandal was enjoined upon and expulsion and ostracization could be the result of breach of trust; for example, anyone hobnobbing with state authorities was considered a traitor. Payment of fines as well as admission of faults were done in open meetings at vil-lages; volunteer groups did the job of organizing meetings and processions and guarded the villages.63

With the formation of the prajamandal, protest against the stateÊs misrule surfaced in an organized manner. For instance, the subject of state monopoly over paan (betel leaves)64 came to be opposed seriously around July 1938. The meeting organized at village levels resolved to boycott paan chewing. People were mobilized on this issue by kirtan parties, which moved around the village singing about songs boycotting paan. The boycott was nearly total and the daily import of betel leaves went down by 95 per cent. Here again, the Parjang and Palasuni bisos took the

62 Harmohan Patnaik, Dhenkanal Andolan, Dhenkanal, 1983, pp. 1 10. As the author (an ex-student of this school) nostalgically recalls, every Saturday stu-dents organized meetings and critiqued British imperialism as well as the state administration. This encouraged the students to establish secret links with the Congress activists beyond the borders of the state. They secretly associated with those officials of the rulers also who were hostile to the rulers. Some of the teachers of the school had „graduated‰ from the Satyabadi Centre (an educa-tional institution with a nationalist perspective). Besides, revolutionaries from Bengal and British Orissa, who frequented Dhenkanal to evade arrest, carried political ideas and strengthened political contact in these pockets. However, the state authorities ruthlessly repressed these groups by dismissing the teachers and terrorizing or rusticating the students. Harmohan Patnaik and Laxmidhar Sahu, for example, had to leave the school and further their studies in Cuttack, where they became active in youth politics in the mid-1930s.63 See B.S. Das, Dhenkanal Unrest: A Review, Cuttack, 1938, p. 9. The blowing of conch shells in one village got immediate response by counter-blowing from other villages, resulting in the congregation of people at a particular place.64 AICC Papers, F. No. 9-35/1938. The paan sold in the state at prices three to four times higher than in the neighbouring Angul market.


lead.65 The mass meetings organized in villages were primarily intended to instil confidence in the people by discussing and criticizing the state authorities and thus shaking off their fear of the repressive organs of the state. It was incredible at that time even to contemplate anything against the state authorities, and to hold open meetings meant offering a challenge. These meetings also legitimized and popularized the existence of the prajamandal by declaring it as the sole representative of the people of Dhenkanal. In the process, the imparting of political educa-tion at popular levels began. For instance, when Sarangadhar Das and Lal Mohan Patnaik conducted an enquiry on behalf of the State PeopleÊs Enquiry Committee into bribery, torture and oppression committed by the state police and issues like forest tax, road cess, bethi and school tax, they urged people to shed their fear of the ruling chief. In a meeting, they advised them to join the prajamandal movement and contribute an anna each to strengthen the organization.66 Interestingly, this meeting was held in Banrpal within the Angul PS, in British India territory to escape prohibition by the state authorities.

By August, the prajamandal put forward two major demands: the grant of civil liberties and complete responsible government based on the rule of law.67 Besides, its other notable demands were the abolition of bethi and magan, export import restrictions, enactment of tenancy laws in the state in light of the Orissa Tenancy Act, the overhauling of the forest laws to the benefit of the tenants, abolition of monopoly on necessities of life like betel leaf, and the grant of the right to protect crops from the ravages of wild animals·indicating a protest against the rajaÊs feudal privilege of indulging in shikar sprees.

In response to the prajamandalÊs demands, the ruler adopted a conciliatory approach by promising a few concessions,68 and

65 AICC Papers, F. No. 9-35/1938. Meetings were held simply to satisfy the peopleÊs feelings that they were free to hold meetings. 66 HPD, „DM to CS‰, D.O. (Demi Offical) No. 327, 9 September 1938, ACC-916.67 Ibid.68 Krushak, 27 August 1938. Also HPD, Dhenkanal State Gazette, 29 August 1938. The report mentions that „Brahmins were asked to dissociate themselves from the movement on the threat of losing their lakhiraj (rent free) tenure. Besides, Brahman Samitis were given powers to decide cases of ex-communication from the society.‰ This points to the rulerÊs efforts to marginalize the prajamandal by creating division on caste lines.


also instituted a counter-association called the prajamandal Samiti supposedly to look after the welfare of the people. However, these steps hardly helped in weakening the peopleÊs enthusiasm for the prajamandal, and it was increasingly accepted as the organ of popular representation.69

Along with the formulation of its demands, an organizational revamp of the prajamandal took place around August, with more youthful radical elements taking over. For instance, Harmohan Patnaik was elected president with Laxmidhar Sahu and Baisnab Charan Patnaik as secretaries.70 Another student leader, Srikanta Rout, was nominated as the captain of the volunteer corps. This kind of leadership offered the prajamandal a new dynamism and a great deal of radical thrust. Under this new leadership, mass meetings were organized in the interiors of the state. The speeches generally harped on village reconstruction and orga-nizing the prajamandal as a peopleÊs movement. Those who attended the meetings were also warned of the rulerÊs divisive tactics to weaken the prajamandal movement by winning over the Brahmins to his side through concessions.71 Participation of women in the meetings was another noteworthy feature. On the occasion of the All India Kisan Day celebrations on 1 September 1938, a conference was organized in Jenapur under the initiative of the Cuttack District Kisan Sangha. Nearly 60,000 peasants, including women, marched to attend the conference from Dhenkanal, carrying national and red flags. The second day of the conference, declared as the Dhenkanal Day, was spe-cifically devoted to development issues in Dhenkanal and was clearly intended to demonstrate solidarity with the oppressed subjects of the state.72 Resolutions supporting the Dhenkanal Prajamandal and its demands were also passed.

Maheswar Subahu Singh was appointed as vice-president of the prajamandal, as he was a leader with tremendous mass appeal. As noted earlier, under his initiative, Parjang biso had remained at the forefront of popular protest in Dhenkanal State

69 AICC Papers, F. No. G-35/1938.70 Krushak, 13 August 1938.71 Krushak, 10 September 1938.72 National Front, Vol. I, No. 32, 25 September 1938. For a detailed report of the conference, see HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 13 September 1938, ACC-1058; AISPC Papers, F. No. 127, 14 September 1938; AICC Papers, F. No. G-35/1938.


since the 1920s. In his message on the occasion of the Kisan Day, Sarangadhar Das advised the peasants to unite and carry on the agitation under the prajamandal to achieve freedom through the policy of non-violence.73 Referring to the developments in states in general and Dhenkanal in particular, as well as to the conditions of the peasantry, Nabakrushna Choudhury, on the opening day of the conference, observed:74

The raja of Dhenkanal has no right. We are the rajas of the country. The country is of the subjects. For this, we are ready to be assaulted. We are now prepared to invite assaults, so that these illegal assaults, become extinct for good. No party wins a battle without death. The peasants and workers are dying like insects through oppression. These things should not recur. Now we shall fight unitedly. We shall not fear if our enemies are armed with guns ⁄ Lakhs of us will say come and assault us and letÊs see how powerful the Brit-ish Government is ⁄ The real meaning of „Inquilab Zindabad‰ is that whether a sweeper, Pana or Brahmin, we will remain united. If you shout this slogan properly, then it will spread like fire, and all these oppressions will be burnt into ashes.

This fiery exhortation sought to instil in the Dhenkanal participants the confidence and determination to transform the existing state of affairs. At the conference, the subjects of Dhenkanal were asked to contribute an anna each towards the Dhenkanal fund. The other significant features of the confer-ence were that caste taboos disappeared and both high- and low-caste people interacted freely and the hitherto politically indifferent villagers started addressing the issues of responsible governance and the right to vote.

The state administration, in the face of these developments, geared itself for full-scale repression, even while maintaining a conciliatory position on the surface. Around August, the prajamandal leaders were called by the ruler for discussion. Maheswar Subahu Singh, who proceeded to meet the ruler, was followed by a huge gathering of 40,000 people, shouting slogans against tyranny and serfdom and demanding a responsible government. Despite the rulerÊs wish to meet Subahu Singh

73 Krushak, 10 September 1938.74 HPD, „PeasantsÊ Meeting at Jenapur‰, 1 September 1938, ACC-913.


alone, the people, who accompanied him all the way, refused to go back, thereby forcing the ruler to convene a mass meeting at the nearby playground. In the meeting, however, the ruler justified the existing tax structure of the state, which led to frustration of popular expectation. The state authorities came out with a few concessions on 29 August, but the prajamandal rejected them.75 However, popular confidence had touched new heights. The people virtually stopped the payment of sunia bheti (gifts on the occasion of New YearÊs Day).76 Besides, they also resorted to social boycott of the corrupt and loyalist elements of the state administration.

Contrary to the promise of meeting the prajamandal delegation on 11 September, the state police raided its office in Dhenkanal town and arrested 15 leaders including Harmohan Patnaik, Subahu Singh and Laxmidhar Sahu. The people responded by garlanding the arrested leaders and accompanying them to jail.77 Nearly 1,000 people accompanied every single arrested leader to the jail gates. People from the remote villages of the state joined the crowd as a mark of support. Despite the efforts to terrorize the accompanying crowds by severe lathi charges, chasing them away by horses and elephants, the people remained non-vio-lent. The leaders instructed the people to adopt social boycott of state police and officials.78 On 12 September, the authorities sealed Dhenkanal town to prevent mass gatherings, but defy-ing prohibition, people from the interiors of Dhenkanal state as well as the neighbouring states of Talcher, Athgarh, Baramba, Tigiria, Hindol, Narsinghapur, etc.,79 assembled at the Alasuan market, near the railway station, to deliberate on the course of action following the arrest of the leaders. The people were encouraged with the names of Gandhi and prajamandal. The

75 HPD, Dhenkanal State Gazette, 29 August 1938, ACC-946. It announced certain concessions, such as reduction of land rent, compensa-tion in case of land acquired by the state, reduction of fee in case of land sale, conceding tenants the right over fruits and flowers, abolition of grazing fees, remission on arrears of land revenue for the people of Saurik and Palasuni bisos on grounds of economic backwardness, abolition of state monopoly on betel leaves and grant of concessions regarding forest products.76 Amrit Bazaar Patrika, 21 August 1938.77 AICC Papers, F. No. G-35/1938.78 Ibid.79 B.K. Dhal, Bhulibu Nahin (Oriya), Bhubaneswar, 1980, p. 89.


people of Dhenkanal town undertook the responsibility of feed-ing the satyagrahis.80 By evening, nearly 20,000 had gathered demanding the release of their leaders. The police opened fire on the mob to prevent people from entering the town and to dissuade them from gathering in the haat, seriously injuring at least 100 people.81 The people fought back by pelting stones and bricks collected from the railway tracks.82 In the clash with the police, the state officials were also injured. On the whole, the people remained non-violent.83

On her way back to Cuttack on the evening of 12 September following her meeting at Parjang biso, Malati Choudhury took eight seriously injured persons with her and admitted them in the Cuttack hospital. At the Dhenkanal railway station, she advised the irate crowd to remain non-violent in the face of provocation, but they protested saying that the state had unleashed repression on them, as they remained essentially non-violent.84

As the number of people who had gathered in the town demanding the release of arrested leaders swelled, gauging their mood and in order to avoid any further untoward inci-dent, such as forcible capturing of the jail by the people, the authorities released the leaders at midnight on 12 September.85 On 13 September, Nabakrushna Choudhury and Sarangadhar Das came to Dhenkanal and addressed a huge gathering. While congratulating the people on their determination and unity, Choudhury asked them to disperse to their own villages and wait for further instructions by the prajamandal for any fur-ther action.86 In his fiery address, Das advised the gathering to open volunteer training centres in villages to train the youth in the skill of lathi exercise and to boycott the state officials as well as their families in the interiors. He added that the state administration would collapse if the officials left their posts for fear of torture and social boycott. He further advised them

80 Patnaik, Dhenkanal Andolan, p. 26.81 AICC Papers, F. No. G-35/1938.82 B.K. Dhal, Bhulibu Nahin, p. 112; HPD, „Weekly Diary of SP‰, Cuttack, 15 September 1938, ACC-916.83 AICC Papers, F. No. G-35/1938.84 Ibid.85 AICC Papers, F. No. 237/1938.86 HPD, „Speech of S. Das‰, 13 September 1938, ACC-942.


to encroach on reserved forests for fuel, and to boycott the collection of excise revenue and the licensed haats of the state. Instead, he advised, people could sell their articles in any place they liked. He said:

We must make the raja shed tears and surrender his Government to our hands ⁄ Be bold and donÊt be afraid ⁄ Have no fear for jail and handcuffs ⁄ Think of the mighty Congress party of British India. How it has obtained self-government. Think of their great feasts and sacrifices. The Congress has obtained the release of politi-cal murderers from British prisons. If they were capable of obtaining independence from the powerful British, canÊt we obtain liberty from the raja earlier than the British Indian Congress brothers?

No wonder, people dispersed with a great sense of victory.In the following days, the popular assertion expressed itself

in the harassment inflicted on state police and other officials, even though the prajamandal had issued instructions to the contrary.87 The movement was guided apparently from the areas of British Orissa bordering the state, especially Angul. Angul became the asylum for the Dhenkanal refugees and a hotbed of anti-raja politics. Pamphlets, protest literature and all kinds of propaganda made their way to the state from there. Besides, railway station areas, which were not under the jurisdiction of the state, were equally used as places for political meetings and popular mobilization.88 A contractor named Dhamjee, who was a resident within the railway land of Dhenkanal, even possessed gunpowder, swords and arms.89 Thus, such areas also came to be used by hardcore militants as places for smuggling arms to the state.

In the meanwhile, the ruler recognized the prajamandal90 and offered to consider popular grievances. Besides, he offered to set up a committee involving Mahatab to enquire into the fir-ing of 12 September.91 In a bid to seek a compromise, Mahatab

87 Ibid.88 HPD, „The Officer Commanding, Presidency and Assam District, Jalapahar to CS, Government of Orissa and Copy to Resident for the Eastern States‰, 24 September 1938, ACC-923.89 HPD, Police Report, 21 September 1938, ACC-923.90 Ibid.91 Ibid.


held talks with the ruler as well as the prajamandal leaders.92 Prajamandal in turn lifted the boycott of state officials to help further negotiations. In the negotiations, the prajamandal insisted on the acceptance of twin demands of the grant of civil liberty and responsible governance conditions that the ruler could hardly accept.93 The ruler alleged that violence was rampant in the interiors and asked the prajamandal leaders to go back to these areas to quell it.

The negotiation virtually broke down. This was followed by another spree of terror by the ruler. The prajamandal was declared unlawful.94 The state also gagged the pro-movement press. For instance, Krushak, a socialist weekly that championed the cause of the people and acted as the philosophical guide for the movement, was banned in the state.95 Massive arrests of the prajamandal activists were undertaken. The office bearers of the prajamandal sneaked into Cuttack to avoid arrest. Harmohan Patnaik was arrested in Cuttack on the strength of a warrant issued by the state. So was Brajakishore Dhal. Men, women and children in the interiors of Dhenkanal were mercilessly looted and assaulted indiscriminately. The house of Subahu Singh in Parajang was razed to the ground, but he braved the state police by staying in Parajang. The state deployed elephants and horses and, apart from the police, local goons in its efforts to terrorize the people. Images of deities were broken and Bhagabat texts were vandalized as people used to take oath of their loyalty to the prajamandal in temples.96

In contrast, the state authorities forced people to accept a ticket swearing loyalty to the ruler to qualify for stateÊs pardon and avoid torture. Parajang biso, the stronghold of the praja-mandal, was the first target of the ruler, followed by Bhuban, the biggest village of the state. In the face of merciless repres-sion inflicted on Parajang biso by the state and British troops combined, the idea of hijrat (mass exodus) caught the peopleÊs imagination. The idea was endorsed by the prajamandal too.97

92 Amrit Bazaar Patrika, 21 September 1938.93 AICC Papers, F. No. G-35/1938.94 National Front, Vol. 3, No. 32, 25 September 1938.95 HPD, Dhenkanal State Gazette, 20 September 1938, ACC-946.96 National Front, Vol. I, No. 32, 25 September 1938.97 National Front, Vol. I, No. 35, 16 October 1938. However, the prajamandal later on dropped the idea and called for mass mobilization to fight state repression.


Five bisos out of 24 were completely evacuated. People left the villages along with their cattle to the bordering zamindaries of Sukinda, Madhupur, Chausathipara, Jenapur and Darpan, all in British Orissa.98 As observed earlier, these were the pockets which experienced massive peasant mobilization against oppres-sion by the zamindars around the same time under Phani Pal and other radical Congress leaders. The concern for the stateÊs subjects was the usual theme harped upon in the kisan meet-ings organized in these areas. The refugees were accommodated practically in every home. Besides, some refugees also escaped to Angul and lived there in makeshift camps. The exodus was, in a sense, partly in response to the massive repression by the state and partly an expression of the popular determination to stay outside the state until the wrongs were righted.

However, the prajamandal called off99 the idea of exodus on 1 October, and instead thought of offering satyagraha in the state. It instructed people to return to their homes. The practical difficulties associated with the exodus and staying in camps as well as loss of property and fear of the police back home had no doubt dampened popular enthusiasm to a certain degree.100 However, this was compensated, to some extent, by holding of mass meetings and effective organization of volunteer and refugee camps beyond the state borders.

The Congress leadership, mostly the young socialist and com-munist volunteers, did a great job for the refugees and tried to keep the morale of the people high. The repression was, however, stepped up during the whole of October. Bhuban, considered the „citadel of revolutionaries‰ from the beginning,101 became the target of a raid on 10 October with a view to arresting the activists. Eight people were arrested from the village; but as usual, those arrested were followed by large crowds to the police station, demanding their release. This gave the police an excuse to open fire.

98 AICC Papers, F. No. G-35/1938.99 Ibid.100 Ibid.; Das, Dhenkanal Unrest, pp. 9 13.101 The New Orissa, 16 October 1938. It mentions how people on several occasions had threatened and assaulted the police and the forest officials of the state, and refers to the incidents of 19 August, 12 September, etc.


One person was killed on the spot, while another died on the way to the hospital.102 Another firing took place, 2 miles away from Bhuban, at a ferry ghat. People had gathered there after news of the firing at Bhuban had reached them.103 When the police party returning from Bhuban reached the ferry ghat with the arrested persons to cross the river, private operators of the boat refused to take them across. This led to a conflict and the police used force to take over the boats. This resulted in a firing in which four persons, including a boy of 12 years, died on the spot. Two more died in the hospital.104 The boy, named Baji Rout, became the symbol of the Dhenkanal struggle and the sacrifice of the people of the state. The six bodies were car-ried to Cuttack via Jenapur by train. People instantly collected Rs 150 for transportation of the bodies by train. The dead bod-ies, which reached Cuttack during night, were taken out in a procession on a bullock cart, and were marched through the streets of Cuttack. People paid their respects to the departed souls. Two Brahmin kisan activists carried the dead bodies along with two Harijans.105

The repression continued106 until November, with police firing taking place at Hindol Road (17 October), Tumusingha (12 October), Kutumunda (2 November) and Kandar Singh (11 November). The virtual reign of terror in Dhenkanal attracted widespread attention in Orissa. We come across popular lit-erature on this situation seeking support for the people of Dhenkanal from different parts of Orissa. This is evident from two manuscripts of the period. Dhenkanal Guli Fayarra Dukha Kahani („The Sad Story of Dhenkanal Firing‰) and Dhenkanalra Daman Lila („The Repression in Dhenkanal‰), written by one Hamid of Cuttack, contained moving poems which detailed the developments in Dhenkanal leading to the firing. It narrated how students had boycotted schools and shouted slogans of „Inquilab zindabad‰; how leaders like Malati Choudhury and

102 AICC Papers, F. No. G-35/1938.103 Ibid.104 Ibid.105 HPD, „State PeopleÊs Meeting at Jenapur‰, 25 October 1938, ACC-1002.106 For detailed description of the events, see AICC Papers, F. No. G-35/1938. Also, Das, Dhenkanal Unrest, pp. 7 10; Krushak, 23 October 1938; National Front, Vols 35 and 36, 16 28 October 1938.


Bhagabati Panigrahi·the Communist leader, described as „the rising sun of Orissa‰·had been bravely and non-violently re-sisting the oppressive rule of Dhenkanal. It also described how archways were erected to give a moving welcome to the leaders who were released from the jail.107

Interestingly, the book contained another poem titled „The Communiqué of Raj Durbar‰, which offered a mock narrative of the incident from the rulerÊs standpoint. The third poem, titled „Dhenkanalara Damana Lila‰, vividly referred to the increasing violence perpetrated by the state on the subjects and the untold misery it brought to the people. It also described how people left the villages for Jenapur, Sukinda (in British Orissa) or for the jungles.108 Another poem, „The White Soldiers Have Re-turned‰, pointed out the large-scale violence in the state with the conflicting cries of „kill/catch‰ on one hand, and „Oh! Mother, Oh! Brothers‰ on the other. The poem appealed to carry out the orders of prajamandal and remain firmly non-violent against any provocation.109 The poem remained fairly optimistic about

107 The poem „Dhenkanal Guli Fayer Ra Dukhha Kahani‰ narrates: „They [people] cried aloud ÂHari bolaÊ [ÂPronounce the name of GodÊ] and stood firmly and courageously, O brothers, demanding the release of the leaders ⁄ On the 12th night, the political prisoners were suddenly released from the jail unconditionally. O brothers! The people placed pitchers full of water in front of their houses, erected gates, and shouted ÂHari bolÊ and ululated [shrill sound generated through tongue by women on joyous occasions] wishing the leaders well, and to show respect to their leaders.‰108 For instance, it reads: „The subjects fear for their own lives and may have fled away leaving their hearth and home. Some people could not find their way and are hiding in jungles out of fear without any food. Thousands have fled to Jenapur, Angul and Sukinda in their anxiety. They have been given shelter there; women in advanced stages of pregnancy gave birth to children in the jungles out of fear.‰109 „The White Soldiers Have Returned‰. The poem reads as follows:

Somebody says, „Oh Mother ! come out ⁄Let us take shelter in the jungles.‰Somebody else says, „Oh Brother!‰ Let them beat us as much as they can, we should bear everything peacefully. Let them kill us with bullets ⁄We should bear everything remembering God ⁄It is the order of Prajamandal to obey it bravely ⁄Our sorrows and sufferings would certainly be removed.

The writer being a Muslim, goes on to say:„Though the raja is a Hindu, the image of Kanaka Durga was broken, Oh Brother! Oh Brothers! What an infamous thing it is for the country:


the success of the popular struggle. That the books, printed at the Muslim-owned Kohinoor Press in Cuttack, ran into at least two editions by October 1938, indicates the popularity of such literature.110

Clearly, the objective of the police firing was to marginalize prajamandal activities through an overdose of terror. During the raids in these rural pockets, the villagers were forced to sign loyalty tickets. We come across the evidence of a robbery committed by the villagers (mostly Panas, the low castes) of Kurumunda (a stronghold of prajamandal) in Kaisa village to arrange funds for the prajamandal,111 which ultimately provoked action against them by the police of Dhenkanal and Talcher, killing a few. However, the villagers, both the Panas and non-Panas of Kurumunda, resisted police presence in the villages, thereby signalling the unity of high and low castes against police repression.112 At another level, it implied popular support for the robbers.

Organization of Satyagraha

The prajamandalÊs decision to revoke the call for mass exodus and substitute it with the method of satyagraha vis-à-vis state repression around October was an exercise at sustaining popu-lar enthusiasm. The prajamandal, accordingly, emphasized on the building of volunteer corps in every village to carry on the satyagraha.113 Besides, as usual, the call to boycott state police, officials and forest guards, to defy government orders at the cost of inviting repression as well as to organize meetings in the villages against prohibitory orders and to contribute towards prajamandalÊs fund as per personal capacity were stressed to make the satyagraha a success.

The Jaban (Musalman) Kala Pahar had broken images of God and Goddesses; the raja did the same thing, though he is a Hindu.Taimur and Nasiruddin plundered the territories of other countries to take care of their own kingdom but the raja plundered his own country.‰110 Desakatha, 12 17 October 1938.111 Sub-Divisional Officer (SDO) Record Room, „Talcher ruler to Political Agent‰, 4 November 1938, cited in B.C. Rath, Unrest in Princely States, p. 185.112 Ibid.; P.C. Joshi, „Dhenkanal Defies Death‰, National Front, 22 January 1939. The latter mentions that Kasi Naik and Dhobei Naik died on the spot.113 Ranaberi (Prajamandal leaflet), No. 4, undated; HPD, 12 October 1938 (Police report).


The Gandhian principles of non-violence, anti-untouchability and village reconstruction formed part of the moral training of volunteers. Physical exercise was also stressed upon. The vol-unteers marched on to the villages singing revolutionary songs and blowing conches and trumpets as the indication of a call for action or a discussion with fellow comrades.114 Incidentally, the boy scouts of the state became the leading volunteers of the prajamandal. The leadership of the movement offered instruc-tions to the people by smuggling pamphlets which explained the course of action to be followed and the preparations to be made by the people. These were promptly banned.115 As men-tioned earlier, one such pamphlet, Ranabheri, was edited and published by the socialist leadership. The Ranabheri called for opening up prajamandal branches in every village, appointment of commanders to steer the satyagraha movement by provid-ing necessary directions and establishment of volunteer camps at every biso and village. Further, it instructed the volunteers to rush to any part of the state to brave the police, in order to enhance the morale of the people.116

The state however came down heavily on those who proceeded to offer satyagraha in batches consisting of 10 20 volunteers. For example, on 2 October, as soon as the locals had assembled at Kualao village for a meeting in response to a call given by the satyagrahis,117 the police surrounded the village and forced the people to enter and stand in the tank in waist-deep water, besides looting property and dishonouring the women. Later, to meet this kind of eventuality, the volunteers took up the re-sponsibility of protecting women and children. They were often sent to adjacent forests to take shelter in temporary leaf-huts built for the purpose. However, the very nature of repression made the satyagrahis question the viability of non-violence as a method of protest.118

114 B.K. Dhal, Bhulibu Nahin, p. 120.115 For instance, Krushak, the socialist weekly, which championed the cause of Dhenkanal movement, was banned by the authorities on 20 September 1938 (HPD, Dhenkanal State Gazette, 20 September 1938).116 Ranabheri, No. 6, undated. It also asked people (i) to boycott the state officials, (ii) to court arrest with-out protest, (iii) to enroll at least 500 volunteers in every biso camp. Further, it instructed the commander to proclaim his successor in case he was arrested.117 AICC Papers, F. No. G-35/1938.118 Ibid.


At the meeting held in Jadupur119 (near Jenapur) on 25 Oc-tober, the president, Kulamani Acharya (kisan sabha leader of Chausathipara fame), declared that the objective of such a meet-ing was to forewarn the people to prepare themselves to pay heavy prices in future for the sake of independence. He cited the death of Baji Rout as an example. Addressing the gathering, Nabakrushna Choudhury, as „Secretary, Cuttack DCC‰ and not as a „socialist‰, reassured the people that the Congress fully supported the prajamandal. He described the claim that the prajamandal was different from the Congress and that it had no connection with the latter as part of the „underhand policy of traitors‰. He further pointed out that unless there were respon-sible governments in the states they would not be in a position to join the Congress movement. He quoted Gandhi, Nehru and Bose to support this line of thinking. He explained that though initially there were signs of violence in Dhenkanal, „people were quite peaceful‰. He referred to NehruÊs personal wish to lead the struggle in Dhenkanal. Sarangadhar Das maintained:

In America, Spain and China when there were such fights for free-dom, the wives, mothers and sisters of the soldiers used to send their relations to the war cheerfully ⁄ [as] freedom requires sacri-fices. These 12 martyrs had proved this fact and had also warned the rest to be ready for such sacrifices in the future struggle in case the scheme of federation gets imposed.119

Besides, Phani Pal, who had earned a mass appeal around this time as a peasant leader, held both the Dhenkanal ruler and the political agent responsible for the oppressions and forcefully advised the audience to remain firm in their belief in non-violence. He also argued that the atrocities in Dhenkanal had been the result of a complicity between British imperialism and the ruler.

The Cuttack DDC, under the leadership of Nabakrushna Choudhury and with the support of Sarangadhar Das, Malati Choudhury (secretary, krushak sangha), Biswanath Pasayat (secretary, studentsÊ federation) and Bhagabati Panigrahi (Sec-retary, Congress Socialist Party), called for an All Utkal Garjat

119 HPD, „State PeopleÊs Meeting at Jadupur‰, Cuttack, 25 October 1938, ACC-1002.


Day on 29 October. Massive propaganda was taken up to make the event a success. Several pamphlets, issued jointly and separately by the leaders, were distributed,120 which pointed out that the objective of the day was to extend support to the cause of Dhenkanal people in their resistance against oppression and provide them courage. It specifically appealed to peasants, labourers, cart-pullers, rickshaw-pullers, shopkeepers, traders, ordinary citizens and students to observe hartal on the day by suspending work and boycotting schools, colleges and to join processions and meetings so as to create a strong public opinion in favour of the people of Dhenkanal. Besides, it appealed to the people to contribute generously for the Dhenkanal fund. The call evoked an overwhelming response: shops were closed and business suspended. People marched on the streets of Cuttack, carrying Congress flags, shouting slogans and singing songs depicting oppression in Dhenkanal. A public meeting121 was organized in evening at the Cuttack Town Hall. The speakers included Prananath Patnaik (MLA), Sarangadhar Das, Nabak-rushna Choudhury and Shyama Sundar Mishra (Servants of India Society).

The overall thrust of the speeches by the leadership was to boost the morale of the people of Dhenkanal. There was a distinct effort to locate imperialism as the source of oppression in Dhenkanal through the ruler, thereby whipping up an anti-imperialist orientation of the movement. The Left leadership within the PCC criticized the „rightists‰ who were not so open in their support to the Dhenkanal movement. As seen in the texts of the speeches, the Left characterized the Congressmen opposing the movement as traitors. Even Mahatab was targeted for his efforts at exploring a compromise with the ruler,122 and it was also indicated that he was not successful, at least in Dhenkanal, due to the stubborn stance of the prajamandal. The role of conservative newspapers like the Desakatha and the

120 An Oriya pamphlet titled „Garjat Divas, ÂAll Utkal Garjat DayÊ‰ issued by Cut-tack DCC, Congress Socialists, StudentsÊ Federation, etc., Undated, Cuttack.121 HPD, „Proceedings of Meeting at Cuttack Town Hall‰, 29 October 1938, ACC-1005.122 HPD, „Orissa Police Abstract Intelligence‰ (OPAI henceforth), No. 44, 5 December 1938, ACC-923.


Lokmata was roundly condemned in mass meetings for their pro-ruler attitude.123

Apart from repression, the state simultaneously followed a policy of conciliation in terms of announcing certain conces-sions to the people. It also made several attempts to organize meetings and use force to make people attend such meetings but met with little success as the prajamandal had decreed to boycott the meetings.124 On his birthday on 31 October, the ruler did grant certain concessions,125 but the main issues like recog-nition of the prajamandal and the grant of civil liberties and responsible governance were not addressed. Around November, a pamphlet titled „Dhenkanal Calls for Help‰ was released by the prajamandal, highlighting the repression of the state subjects and appealing to the Congress leadership of different ideologi-cal persuasions to support the Dhenkanal struggle with a view to making it another Rajkot.126 In this context, when popular enthusiasm for the movement seemed to peter out in the face of repression through martial law and terror, the Left leader-ship in the Congress thought of joining the state people in the satyagraha in November.127 The objective was to demonstrate to the suffering people of the state that the leadership was with the people in their struggle and that the prajamandal still backed them, so that the movement does not lose its momentum.

123 HPD, „Proceedings of Meeting at Cuttack Town Hall‰, 29 October 1938, ACC-1005.124 Ranabheri, Nos 8 and 10, Undated; HPD, Dhenkanal State Gazette, 31 October 1938.125 The concessions, broadly economic in nature, granted reduction of cess from Rs 0.2.6 to 0.2.0, abolition of betel leaf monopoly, right to kill wild animals dam-aging crops, opening of reserved forests for fuel and release of a few prisoners. However, the ruler pointed out that the concessions were liable to be cancelled unless people gave up agitation within a month.126 National Front, Vol. I, No. 42, 4 December 1938. The pamphlet read: „Comrades, citizens, congressmen! Organise demonstrations everywhere. Declare support to the people of Dhenkanal. Demand withdrawal of British troops, condemn the reign of terror. At every demonstration, collect funds and enroll volunteers, pour money and volunteers into Dhenkanal. Make Dhenkanal another Rajkot.‰ This points to the prajamandalÊs attempt at organizing the movement with external help and ostensibly calling for assistance from the nationalist leader-ship of Orissa Province.127 LC, „Letter to Linlithgow‰, Vol. II, 19 November 1938; National Front, Vol. I, No. 42, 4 December 1938.


Around this time Sachi Routray, the young student commu-nist, who was later to become an influential Oriya poet, wrote a poem titled „Sarbaharara Ude Nisana‰ („The Banner of Those That Have Lost Their All is Unfurled‰), wherein he referred to the developments in Dhenkanal and forcefully pleaded for a violent revolution against the raja-imperialism nexus. The fol-lowing is a free prose rendering of the text:128

Light the fire of revolution, march on, labourers, coolies and kisans ⁄ See how the raja and the government have combined and are hunting human beings. The butcher is throttling human beings. Hold fast your weapon. Destroy the foreign rule. That is at the root of all exploitation. Break the prison of the person who broke your backbone with bayonet; he keeps your brother behind iron bars. Dance today in the orgy of blood. Death will bring you deliverance ⁄ The bondage of slavery round your neck would be torn ⁄ Hark! Baji is sounding the bugle ⁄ Nata, Hrushi and Guri [who died in the Dhenkanal firing] are calling you ⁄ You, Red Soldiers, unfurl your banners. Establish the reign of labourers in the world. That is your Konark, that is your Taj.

The Left leadership within the PCC was fully committed to the cause of Dhenkanal and it decided to offer satyagraha during December. The exercise was primarily meant to send a positive signal to the people in Dhenkanal that the leadership fully backed them at every step. Accordingly, Nabakrushna Choudhury resigned his assembly seat in the face of mount-ing pressure by „influential Congressmen‰ to desist from his Dhenkanal programme.

On 3 December, Nabakrushna Choudhury, Bhagabati Pani-grahi and Gouranga Charan Das approached Dhenkanal state from three different directions. Nabakrushna entered from the Nuahat Camp (Angul), Bhagabati from the Budhapank camp and Gouranga Charana from the Jenapur side.129 These leaders were given a warm send-off by fellow comrades as well as a number of college students at the Cuttack railway station on 2 and 3 December amidst great cheering. On the evening of 2 December, a meeting was organized in Cuttack Town Hall to

128 Krushak, 3 December 1938.129 HPD, „OPAI‰, No. 44, 5 December 1938, ACC-923.


extend a send-off to the first batch of satyagrahis under the leadership of Nabakrushna Choudhury.130 Speaking on the occa-sion, Prananath Patnaik pointed out that satyagraha at that stage was necessary to combat the federation scheme and warned the British government of taking recourse to the no-rent and no-tax campaign in case the non-violent satyagraha failed to move the British authorities.

On the same evening, a meeting was organized at Budhapank camp131 (Angul PS). Bhagabati Panigrahi had reached the camp to offer satyagraha in the state from 3 December. Girija Bhusan Dutta, who presided over the meeting, explained that the objec-tive of the satyagraha by the socialist leadership was to protest against the oppression meted out to the people in Dhenkanal.

However, in their attempt to offer satyagraha, the three lead-ers, Choudhury, Panigrahi and Das, were arrested on 7 Decem-ber.132 However, the state authorities immediately released the top leaders and the satyagrahis from other states except those of Dhenkanal. The state police behaved decently with the more prominent leaders like Panigrahi and Choudhury, but tortured the less prominent ones. For instance, Gouranga Charana Das was mercilessly beaten. Ananta Patnaik, the student socialist who had gone to Bhuban to distribute a donation of Rs 500 given by the Bombay socialists, was picked up by the state police at Kabatbandh and severely beaten.133

Socialists from different districts as well as other states came forward to offer satyagraha. For instance, Gokul Mohan Ray Churamani planned to lead a batch of satyagrahis to Dhenkanal from the Banki side (Gholpur satyagraha camp). Prananath Patnaik and Sadhu Charan Mohanty from Khurda and Laxmi Narayan Mishra and Bhagirathi Parichha from Sambalpur reached the Budhapank camp with volunteers, which included women too. The Ganjam DCC also sent out a contingent. Mohan Das,

130 HPD, „Meeting at Town Hall‰, Cuttack, 2 December 1938, ACC-1031.131 HPD, „Dhenkanal Satyagraha Meeting at Budhapank Camp‰, Special Branch Report, 2 December 1938, ACC-1031.132 HPD, Special Branch Report on Dhenkanal Affairs, 7 December 1938, ACC-1031. The satyagrahis entered the state carrying the national flag and shouting slogans.133 Ibid. A search party under the leadership of Baideo Lal of Jenapur, which went to Kabatbandh to locate Ananta and enquire about the incident, was also beaten up.


a Congress socialist and MLA from Nimapara (Puri) during the period of Congress ministry, planned to send a batch of vol-unteers from the Gop Kakatpur area of Puri. Similarly, Kailash Chandra Mohanty from Nilagiri promised to send men, money and satyagrahis to Dhenkanal.134 Prananath Patnaik wrote to Val-labhbhai Patel to allow him to participate in the satyagraha and enrolled satyagrahis from Khurda. Giridhari Panda, Secretary, Balasore StudentsÊ Federation, led six volunteers from Nilagiri to Dhenkanal. With the arrest of the first batch of satyagrahis, the vacuum was immediately filled up by fresh batches. For example, Braja Mohan Patnaik, second in the Dhenkanal Praja-mandal hierarchy, left for the interiors of Dhenkanal leading a batch of satyagrahis on 5 December. He was followed by another batch under the leadership of Debraj Burma on 6 December.135 For proper organization of these satyagrahis, Sarangadhar Das stayed back in Cuttack.136 These developments suggest that there was an effort to enlist volunteers from all parts of the Orissa Province. Even after release, the top leaders again planned to offer Satyagraha. For instance, Nabakrushna Choudhury ex-pressed resentment against the preferential treatment meted out to the satyagrahis in terms of releasing the top leadership and non-Dhenkanal satyagrahis while detaining those belong-ing to Dhenkanal, and planned to lead the satyagrahis again to Dhenkanal.137

It is also interesting to note that during this period, it was mostly the students and the youth who actively participated in the organization of the satyagraha. Baidyanath Rath (law student), Rabi Ghose and Motilal Tripathy (medical students), Sachi Routrai, Ananta Patnaik and Nilamani Routray (BA stu-dents of Ravenshaw College) and Biswanath Pasayat (Secretary, Utkal StudentsÊ Federation) performed a substantial role in the organization. Rabi Ghose, Sudhir Ghosh, Srikant Rout, Ananta Patnaik, Baidyanath Rath, Sachi Routrai and others involved

134HPD, Special Branch Report on Dhenkanal Affairs, 7 December 1938, ACC-1031.135 Ibid.136 HPD, SPÊs Report on Dhenkanal Affairs, 7 December 1938, ACC-1031; HPD, „OPAI‰, No. 44, 5 December 1938, ACC-923.137 Ibid.


themselves in the maintenance and organization of volunteers and refugee camps placed along the borders of the state.138

Interestingly, Nabakrushna Choudhury was seriously con-templating the stepping up of satyagraha activities in Dhenk-anal itself, defying Gandhian instruction.139 However, training camps were opened in British Orissa to train the workers of Dhenkanal.140

In the face of massive efforts undertaken by the leadership to organize satyagraha, the Dhenkanal ruler employed one S.P. Sharma, the correspondent of The Hindustan Times and The In-dian Nation, as an advisor to suggest a scheme of constitutional reform for the state.141 Under these circumstances, the ruler favoured the idea of prajamandal association as part of the administration of the state, but his announcement was rejected by the prajamandal, seeking real control over administration.142 However, the murder of Bazelgette in Ranpur also inspired the ruler to heighten repression against his subjects. In response to the development, the OSPC decided against any mass action in the states. However, the popular agitation finally reaped dividends by June when under pressure, the ruler announced certain concessions with a view to democratizing the admin-istration.143 These measures naturally failed to fully satisfy the prajamandal leadership.144

Organization of Volunteers and Refugee Camps

It is important to look into the organization and affairs of the volunteers and refugee camps145 which sprang up beyond the border of Dhenkanal state following massive repression against

138 Ibid.139 LC, „Hubback to Linlithgow‰, Vol. I, 8 January 1939.140 The Statesman, 22 December 1938.141 Ibid.; Mr. Sharma advised the ruler to set up a committee to enquire into the alleged police excesses.142 Amrit Bazaar Patrika, 12 December 1938.143 HPD, „RulerÊs declaration‰, 26 April 1939. This promised, among other things, panchayats at the village level, praja sabha at the tehsil level and a „praja parishad‰ (a representative body) at the top.144 Amrit Bazaar Patrika, 5 July 1939.145 HPD, „SDO to Deputy Commissioner (DC)‰, Angul, 4 June 1939, ACC-1226.


its subjects. The volunteer camps were referred to as Congress camps by the people. One such important campsite was Budha-pank in Angul. The Angul Sub-Divisional Officer (SDOÊs) report on the camp in June 1939 makes interesting reading. We quote a substantial portion of the text here:146

Budhapank camp consists of a refugee camp known as „hizrat‰ [exodus] and a volunteer camp.They are at a distance of a quarter mile from each other. The volunteers along with their leaders stay in the volunteersÊ camp whereas others remain in the hizrat camp ⁄ [They say that] about 20 volunteers [stay] in the volunteersÊ camp though they are exaggerating their number. They all belong to Dhenkanal state and are now under the guidance of Netrananda Naik of Damalu in Dhenkanal state who is known as their leader. There are about 30 huts in the hizrat camp whereas the volunteerÊs camp consists of a house with compound fencing. The volunteers have taken to spinning, attend to prayers and take drill exercise under the command of Netrananda Naik in the volunteerÊs camp. The refugees are maintaining themselves by bringing foodstuffs from inside the state. The leaders and the people there intend to stay there till the Durbar releases their political leaders already ar-rested and withdraws the extraction warrants issued against some of the leaders. They also say that they want the abolition of miscel-laneous case of anna 2 and in the long run to have Self-Government. Police officers are not freely allowed to visit the volunteersÊ camp at any and every time at the instance of Malati Choudhury. It seems that they probably avoid the visit of persons of importance, par-ticularly persons of authority, including police officers, as two of their important leaders Maheswar Subahu Singh and Srikanta Raut against whom extradition warrants are pending for execution often come to their camp for consultation. They hold meetings and issue pamphlets for distribution inside the state. Pamphlets are meant to encourage people not to be afraid of Durbar. Some of them go inside the state in the night to bring their foodstuffs as also ask people who express their unwillingness to stay in the state to come out and stay with them.

The Budhapank Camp, which was established in October in the wake of Dhenkanal firing, started functioning under the overall leadership of socialists and communists. Rabi Ghose, a socialist student, was managing the affairs till Choudhury took

146 Ibid.


over.147 Besides, Bhagabati Panigrahi and Nabakrushna Choud-hury were the other organizers of the camp. The volunteers would regularly pray and sing national songs in the morning and evening under the Congress flag. A placard was posted inside the camp apparently to keep off state officials and the police.148 Drills, parades, classes and lessons on satyagraha were regularly held in the camp to prepare and send the „graduates‰ into the state for mobilization of people. The leader explained different ideologies to the cadres in the camp. This is indicated from the kind of songs composed and sung by the volunteers daily while doing parades and exercises.149 We come across a few handwritten pamphlets containing poems composed essentially from a socialist and communist perspective. The poems,150 as can be seen from the free English rendering given below, were obviously intended to inflame the sagging morale of the fighting subjects:

1. Wake up the exploited brothers of Dhenkanal ⁄ Fight for your rights. Our blood is not so frozen; it is like the stream of hot oil ⁄ [it will] definitely destroy the oppression of Dhenkanal. Our weapon will be truth and peace, our object will be freedom; cour-age is our armament. We built the building of „Jatannagar‰ [the palace of the Dhenkanal ruler] breaking hard rocks. Remember the oppression of the past, and rise with firm fists. The age of peasants and labourers has come: raise up your weapons.

2. Sing the song of victory of Dhenkanal. March forward to join the peaceful fight. (Chorus) Bethi has reduced us to skeletons. Still we have taken a vow to bring light to the „dark kingdom‰. We are not afraid of death. Let the swords of the state be coloured in our blood but we will upset the bondage of slavery.

147 HPD, SPÊs Report, 12 May 1939, ACC-1226; HPD, „SDO to DC‰, Angul, 15 November 1938, ACC-931. The centre as per certain official observations seemed to be a communist training centre. However, leaders like Nabakrushna Choudhury, Girija Bhu-san Dutta (MLA, Angul), Bhagabati Charan Panigrahi (with his experience of Bombay summer school of politics, a communist outfit) and a host of student leaders and Congress activists like Phani Pal, Ananta Patnaik, Sudhir Bose, Raghunath Mohanty and Biswanath Pasayat were ideologically involved in the making of the centre.148 HPD, DMÊs Report, 30 April 1939, ACC-1226.149 HPD, SPÊs Report, 12 May 1939, ACC-1226.150 Handwritten Oriya note sheets prepared in Budhapank camp in October 1938.


3. March forward, O Labourer! unfurling your banners and blowing bugles; one who has befriended death is certain to win. We the mazdurs [labourers] are bahadur [brave]. We would build a new world. We would form our Government/Society and establish socialism.

4. „Ame Manishara Yuga Anibu‰ [composed on 29 October 1938]: We will bring about the Age of Man. Kill as many as you like today; will one who dies every day by bethi and begari [a form of forced labour] fear to die one day? (Chorus) One who would have died like insect will die today like a hero. We have given our tears, we are now prepared to give our blood. Our [sic] fear is your greatest weapon. Your soldiers are maintained at the cost of our wealth. DonÊt belittle this dry skin. It is like the blacksmithÊs furnace in which iron is melted. Have you thought of suppressing by show of arms? This is the race in which Baji, a boy in the cradle, gave up his play in the dust and died in the face of bullets. Awake! Lifeless awake, shake off fear. Crores of fists are being raised up today. Peasants and labourers have awakened. They will bring about the Age of Man.

5. „Amar Sahid‰ [„The Immortal Martyr‰, by imprisoned soldiers, composed on 22 October 1938]: Sharpen your weapons with your blood against the kingdoms/rulers which you set up by the sweat of your brow. Come Lakshman, come Nata, Raghu and Gouri: blow the trumpet of death (invoking the people who died in the firing). The 12 year old Baji is not dead. He built a temple bigger than Konark. Where is fear [repeat]? Baji has personally declared to the world that „there is no raja‰. Hundreds are dying daily of disease, starvation, and flood. Oh, the slaves of death! Speak how many died here to build history? Keep aside judgment, reason, learning, morality and your arguments before the savage who is ruling. Wake up and die for the country.

6. „Ahwana‰ [„The Call‰, 22 October]: Oh Dhenkanal, do not give up the hope of victory out of regret for todayÊs defeat. Today is the day of battle of the destitute and the uncivilized! Fight for your rights and die for the country. After the death of the evil spirit, the good will appear cheerfully.

7. We will bring about red morning dispelling dark night. Let the earth, sky and the exploiters tremble. Let the strength of equality be established on earth.

8. Come, ye swaraj soldiers! Come to the people of Dhenkanal. We will destroy the rule of the English; destroy oppression. The rich have become powerful, men hound down men. The blind Durbar has lost its wisdom, in anger its strength is failing. The achievement of the last few days has set the exploiter thinking.


[His] blood has turned into water. Victory to the peasants and labourers!

These songs were essentially inflammatory in nature and not only were dotted with references to the Dhenkanal ruler but also were charged with a deep spirit of anti-imperialism. The optimism expressed in the poems in terms of achievement of swaraj, and establishment of peasant/workers raj was basi-cally to enthuse the people to keep up the fight against the Dhenkanal ruler.

The meticulous organization and building up of the cadres by the Left leadership in the camp was really momentous. It is in fact, the volunteers in Budhapank camp who organized the refugee camp in the British Indian territory to avoid any pos-sible repression. Under the guidance of Rabi Ghose, who took charge of the camp before Malati Choudhury (who assumed charge only in March 1939), a lithographed Oriya pamphlet called „Hushiar‰ („Alert‰) was regularly published.151 Such pamphlets were carried to Dhenkanal state secretly and distributed there by camp volunteers to induce people to leave the state for the campsite.

As newspapers were banned in Dhenkanal, the pamphlets kept the people of Dhenkanal abreast of the developments in the outside world. The ruler had curtailed the peopleÊs right to read newspapers by banning the entry of the Krushak and The Samaja.152 Besides regular columns by Maheswar Subahu Singh, vice-president of the Dhenkanal Prajamandal (who had been evading arrest by the state authorities), which referred to the peopleÊs struggle against the rulerÊs tyranny in the Dhenkanal State, such pamphlets also contained information about the All India StatesÊ Conference, the Congress, etc. For example, in one of his columns, Subahu Singh warned:153

If we are misled today by rajaÊs cajoling, then know it for certain that you and your next generation will rot under oppression ⁄ on this

151 HPD, „OPAI‰, Nos 9 and 10, 9 February 1939 13 March 1939, ACC-1187.152 „Hushiar‰ (Series of Oriya pamphlets), 25 February 1939, 3 March 1939, 24 March 1939.153 „Hushiar‰, 3 March 1939, ACC-1187. Also see „Hushiar‰, 25 February 1939 and 24 March 1939, ACC-1187.


Dola Purnima day, resolve like Prahlad that you will carry on the agitation through justice and non-violence, despite oppression.

Under the overall leadership of Rabi Ghose and Malati Choudhury, the volunteers as well as the refugees had really inculcated a strong sense of resistance and defiance to the Dhenkanal administration and its ruler. This is evident from the report of Major Hennessy (Assistant Political Agent, Orissa states), who undertook visits to a few refugee camps of Talcher and Dhenkanal in a bid to resolve the deadlock arising out of refugee problems through negotiations between the ruler and the people. He visited the Budhapank camp on 10 March 1939 and made the following observation:154

From a careful study of the conditions and the people there, I am confident that if action is not taken in the very near future to close down Budhapank camp and their administrative headquarters and to arrest [the leaders], it will become the nucleus of a dangerous revolutionary centre, as the Bengal movement started in a similar way a few years ago. Except on the occasions of open mob violence, I have not met such blatant sedition, open threats and indications of smoldering violence as I witnessed yesterday in Budhapank.

His visit to the camp was marked by the inmatesÊ show of hostility and the „leaders remaining aggressive and insolent from beginning to end, refusing to discuss matters with him‰. The inmates pointed out that Major Bazelgette (who was killed in Ranpur) was dead and now the raja of Dhenkanal and Major Hennessey, the political agent, must also go, and that they would soon have full civil liberties and self-government.

In fact, the training imparted by Rabi Ghose had made the inmates „hot headed‰ and instilled in them „a defying attitude‰. The arrest of Rabi Ghose on 22 March 1939 and his subsequent imprisonment in Dhenkanal had its repercussions in terms of slowing down the movement.155 The state police often cracked down on the camp to apprehend wanted leaders like Subahu Singh and Srikanta, who evaded arrest. The inmates bravely faced the situation and never allowed their leaders to be arrested.154 HPD, Report of Major Hennessy on Budhapank Camp, 25 March 1939 (ACC-1226).155 HPD, Report of SDO, Angul, 28 January 1939, ACC-1226.


Such police raids on the camps were also seriously resented and petitions were drafted to the Congress ministry, highlight-ing the police excesses committed on them.156 Prof. N.G. Ranga visited this camp on 12 January 1939; such visits boosted the morale of the people, who narrated to the leaders the tales of police brutality. The leadership and activities of Rabi Ghose were deeply appreciated by the member of British Parliament Miss Harrison.157 Expressing serious concern over the Dhenkanal and Talcher Refugee Relief Fund to provide for the necessities of the refugees, Prof. Ranga pleaded for the active intervention and assistance of the Congress to defuse the crisis. He also warned against any attempt to abandon the refugees just because of the Ranpur incident (the killing of Bazelgette) and argued in favour of the Congress ministry providing police protection to the refugees against harassment by the state officials who entered the camps.158

Efforts were undertaken to open new branches of refugee camps for Dhenkanal tenants at Nuahat, Haripur (near Sukinda), Tangi and Pandubharania. Some people even thought in terms of converting the camps at certain places into permanent settle-ments.159 The establishment and continuance of refugee camps, the training imparted there, the impact of the peasant movement in the adjacent zamindaris of British Orissa and the sympathy expressed for their cause by the leadership emboldened the peasants of Dhenkanal to a considerable extent in spite of the repression carried out by the state. The Dhenkanal refugees who stayed in Sukinda carried back with them the ideas and inspira-tion of peasant activities when they returned to Dhenkanal. For instance, some tenants of Arilajhar village near Bhuban cut trees from the Gunduchipasi forest (along the Dhenkanal Sukinda border). When arrested by Sukinda forest guards, they argued

156 HPD, „Petition to PM, Orissa by the Refugees‰; 17 March 1939, ACC-1709.157 HPD, „OPAI‰, No. 21.36/27 January 1939 7 February 1939, ACC-1226.158 HPD, „OPAI‰, No. 2/23 January 1939, ACC-1226. Prof. Ranga maintained: „Such an isolated tragedy like Ranpur ought not to be allowed to result in the stoppage of a legitimate non-violent struggle by the people in the Orissa states, especially when these people have so bravely abandoned all their worldly possessions and left their homes in order to free themselves from oppression‰.159 HPD, „OPAI‰, No. 47, 56, 83, 10 February 1939/22 February 1939 and 13 March 1939 (ACC-1226).


that the forest belonged to the Dhenkanal State, which, in fact, had the jurisdiction over Sukinda estate. This was followed by an attack by some more tenants on the forest guards, in which one guard was killed in a bid to release the arrested people.160 In this connection, it is important to note that the kisan leaders of British Orissa, particularly Phani Pal, were active in peasant and tribal mobilization in Sukinda, resulting in massive tree felling. Pal was also planning to intervene in Dhenkanal affairs. He had earlier organized peasant meetings in Hatibari (a place bordering Dhenkanal).

Talcher

The prajamandal in Talcher was provisionally organized in July 1938, when nearly 400 villagers from 92 villages resolved to support it, with Kosala (a village on the border of Talcher) as headquarters. However, it became functional only in September 1938. Local leaders·namely Pabitra Mohan Pradhan, Dasarathi Pani, Maguni Chandra Pradhan, Gouri Shankar Pradhan and Kritibas Rath·were elected as office-bearers.161 Pabitra Mohan Pradhan and his associates had taken up the task of organizing the people right since 1934 35 through secret association of the people in rural pockets like Poipal (PabitraÊs village), Nadikul, Bajrakote and Deranga.162 The impulse which motivated Pradhan

160 HPD, SP Report on Sukinda Forest Case, Special Report No. 4/39, 8 February 1939, ACC-1202.161 Talcher Prajamandal Itihasa Committee, Talcher Prajamandal (Congress) Ra Itihasa, Cuttack, 1950, p. 12. Pabitra Mohan Pradhan, a graduate from Ravenshaw College, had joined Talcher High School as an assistant teacher. He acted as the president of pra-jamandal. Maguni Pradhan (an electrical engineer) and Dasarathi Pani (lawyer) were elected as joint secretaries, Gourishankar Pradhan (lawyer) assumed the charge of treasurer and Krutibas Rath became the secretary.162 Talcher Prajamandal (Congress) Ra Itihasa, p. 12. Pabitra Mohan Pradhan visited the rural pockets of Talcher to speak to people and widen his contacts with the people on holidays and Sundays. He also enlisted the support of the influential people and intelligentsia of Talcher state. Such meetings in rural areas were intended to inspire people about the Congress movement. Newspapers were read in the meetings to mobilize public opinion. People from the other neighbouring states like Pallahara and Bamra also attended such meetings. The meetings were usually nightlong affairs. Around 1937, villages like Jarada, Kumunda, Bijipola, Damara, Handidhua, Jhulla


emanated from the influence of the CDM and his association with Congress satyagrahis as a student of Ravenshaw College.163 Besides, his „nationalist uncle‰ had considerable influence on him. However, his secret activities could not thrive owing to massive repression in the state. The only course left open for him and others like him was to leave the state for Angul (the bordering British district).164 Pabitra, meanwhile, had resigned his job as a teacher at the Talcher High School and come to the camp at Panigola.

Paniola, the first rural camp, was strategically placed in terms of its proximity to collieries. Coal miners hailing from Talcher and Angul could be instilled with revolutionary ideas. Around August, labourers in one of the collieries went on a strike.165 One gets a clear glimpse of the planning for prajamandal organization

Khuntia, Rengali, Gurujang Kankilli, Biru, Seepur, Suleipal and Kankilli had become active centres of nationalist activities. Maguni Pradhan organized the coal mine areas while Madan Pradhan took charge of organizing Khemei area. Congress leaders like Girija Bhusan Dutta (Angul MLA) as well as the OSPC extended considerable help and support to their activities. Angul, bordering Talcher State, remained the hotbed of their organization and politics against the state in the face of stateÊs repression.163 Pabitra Mohan Pradhan, Muktipathe Sainika (Oriya), Vol. I, Cuttack, 1973, p. 31. Here, Pradhan also recalls how he was inspired by his uncle Bankanidhi Bhaktaballabha, who was jailed in 1933 by the ruler for championing the cause of the people and was also equally a great sympathizer of the Congress move-ment. He had also helped Pabitra to further his higher education at Cuttack. The influence of the national movement was so great on Pabitra that he thought of quitting his studies to join the movement and realized the necessity of initiat-ing a struggle in the princely states to end the misrule of the rulers. In fact, his uncle had set in motion the process of secret organizations of people in the rural pockets of the state and imbued the people with nationalist feelings.164 P.M. Pradhan, Muktipathe Sainika, Vol. I, p. 60. Pabitra Pradhan left the state for Angul around July 1938.165 A police report on Pabitra Pradhan observed that „he was the most intimate friend of Jubaraj [crown prince] of Talcher and an influential person too. As he was tired of the rajaÊs alleged oppressions who did not spare his own fam-ily members; he strongly protested against this and got into trouble. Thus, he slipped off from the rajaÊs palace and formed the Talcher Prajamandal and be-came president thereof on 6 September 1938. He established his headquarters at Kosala (Chhendipada P.S.) and secured the support of some oppressed people. With their help and after consulting some of the Congress leaders he formed his plans and pursued propaganda work throughout the state. By and by, he got several adherents and with their help formed camps at Kosala, Kampasala, Paniola, Changuria and similar bordering villages near Angul. Maguni Pradhan, Maheswar Pradhan, Balaram Mahapatra, Bankanidhi Pradhan and Chandra Sekhar Rajballav were his well-known supporters.‰


in Talcher towards the end of August under the leadership of Pabitra Mohan Pradhan. Pabitra, Maguni Pradhan, Dasarathi Pani and Gourishankar Pradhan would meet regularly to dis-cuss the organization of the Talcher Prajamandal. They felt that it would not be possible to follow the examples of Dhenkanal and Nilagiri movements in Talcher as people there were very attached to the ruler. His suggestion was to camp outside the state and get hold of the workers from the nearby collieries and railways. This would help them to get enough people to exhibit their strength to the villagers. Pabitra knew that simply going to the people and asking them to join the struggle would not be enough. So Maguni Pradhan, who enjoyed a mass ap-peal, would try to foment a „general revolt and strike‰. In his view, since the kisan sangha and prajamandal were against the princely states and capitalists, the kisan sangha would support their cause in case they succeeded in stopping the colliery work, which would divest the capitalists and the rajas of their extra income. He also suggested flouting of forest laws by felling of trees without permit and stopping the payment of cesses and fees as this would paralyze the administration and usher in „our own government‰. Occasionally, they even threatened the state police, if it tried to overhear their discussions, by saying, „We are out to oust the Raja and bring the administration to a standstill. We will go out of your clutches to stay in Angul to befool you.‰166

The local Congress activists sympathized with their cause. For instance, Girija Bhusan Dutta backed the plan of the Talcher leaders to open a volunteer training camp at Angul to send vol-

The report of inspector of Angul (HPD, 10 December 1938, ACC-931) stated, „He [Pabitra Pradhan] called upon the oppressed people to leave their homes and come away to British Orissa with their friends and relatives to get rid of the oppression of the raja and his police. With extradition warrants against him, he had been concealing himself, and stayed at no fixed place, but yet looked after the prajamandal affairs. Thousands of people are coming away to Angul elaka [region] and putting up in leaf huts because of him. None of them however is inclined to give information of his whereabouts ⁄ He has now become a renowned figure for the tenants and has given birth to the agitation in Talcher state. He is an intelligent, educated and influential pro-Congress man‰. This testifies to the mass appeal of Pradhan.166 HPD, „Raja, Talcher, to Collector‰, Cuttack, 12 September 1938, ACC-916. The other local leaders associated with Pabitra Mohan Pradhan in Paniola camp included Maguni Pradhan, Bamdeb Mishra, Srinibas Sahu and Krutibash


unteers to the state for mobilization of the people. The Talcher Prajamandal office was first housed at his residence in Angul.167 In a kisan meeting at Angul, L.N. Mishra, the Congress leader from Sambalpur, threatened the SDO, Angul, with a transfer to Koraput as he was harassing the refugees and their leaders from Talcher who had crossed over to Angul by pointing out that the Congress ministry disapproved of such interference.168 In due course, several volunteer training camps as well as refugee camps sprang up in various rural centres like Kosala, Paniola, Natada, Kamsala and the Santrabandh in quick succession beyond the border of the state and meetings were frequently organized at these centres. People from Talcher would visit their leaders in these centres with foodstuff and other necessities and go back with fresh ideas.169

A meeting organized in Kosala170 on 6 September 1938 to formally constitute the prajamandal was attended by nearly 5,000 people of Talcher and Angul. It focused on the abolition of bethi system, as well as non-payment of illegal taxes·such as taxes on marriage and funeral ceremonies, on betel, bidi, kerosene and salt·to the Talcher raja. The people were advised to put up a determined and united fight „peacefully‰ against the oppression of the state police, forest officials and the raja. Besides, the meeting demanded the stopping of auction sale of lands for non-payment of rent and the right to jobs in the Talcher coal mines, as well as the right to free forest products. The demands for hike in the pay of the Paikas, and giving them privileges to cultivate jagir lands free of rent and the enforce-ment of the Orissa Tenancy Act in the state were also stressed upon. The meeting also resolved to seek linkage with the OSPC. In fact, the meeting registered the beginning of popular protest against the Talcher rulerÊs oppression amidst shouts of „Gan-dhi ki jai,‰ „Bande Mataram‰, „Victory to Talcher people‰ and „Inquilab zindabad‰. When people left for Talcher after the

Rath. These leaders, while camping in Paniola (outside the state territory), retained their linkage with the state through their relatives and acquaintances who visited them and carried back information and ideas. This helped to fuel discontent among the agricultural classes against the state.167 HPD, Report of SI, Talcher, 29 August 1938, ACC-1195.168 HPD, „DM to CS‰, 9 September 1938, ACC-916.169 Ibid.170 HPD, „Meeting at Kosala‰, 6 September 1938, ACC-916.


meeting, the ruler reacted by ordering mass arrests, but here too a surging crowd followed the arrested and forced the ruler to release them instantly. The people, in turn, pressed the ruler to redress their grievances and allow them to organize meetings in the state.171

The people also resorted to a no-tax campaign and refused to pay the haat tax. We have noted earlier in the context of the peasant movement that a no-haat-tax campaign picked up around this time in Angul. The trend came to be reflected in Banibahal (Angul town) and Talcher haats around September 1938. Vendors in the haat refused to pay tax after being advised accordingly. Congress activists as well as prajamandal workers took the lead in this regard.172 Popular enthusiasm was further heightened by the developments in Dhenkanal during this time, and the impact of the Jenapur Kisan Conference held on 1 September, where the Congress leaders expressed deep sympathy for the stateÊs people and promised assistance, was no less significant.

The refugees at Paniola camp, ably supported by Congress activist Bhagaban Pradhan, went to the extent of asking the po-lice inspector of Angul to engage chowkidars for helping in the arrangement of their meeting to be held at Kosala. The meeting on 16 September was addressed by leaders like Nabakrushna Choudhury, Mahatab, Sarangadhar Das, Malati Choudhury and Lal Mohan Patnaik. They asked the chowkidars to collect fuel, leaves, ration, etc., for 150 people and not to report to the police inspector as „people pay the tax for the chowkidars and not to the police‰. They even instructed them to remain with and assist Bhagaban for three days in arranging for provisions and accommodation of the Congress activists and others.173

The Talcher Prajamandal released its printed charter of demands from the Paniola camp in September, highlighting the right to organize popular associations and meetings, the abolition of rasad, magan and bethi systems, modification of the

171 HPD, „SP to DM Cuttack‰, 12 September 1938, ACC-916.172 Ibid. Gatikrishna Sahu (Kosala, Chhendipada), who organized the no-tax campaign, was a Congress activist. However, when Girija Bhusan Dutta asked people in the haats to continue paying the haat tax until it was abolished by the govern-ment, his advice was not accepted.173 HPD, „SDO, Angul to DC‰, Angul, 19 September 1938, ACC-916.


state tenancy and forest laws in favour of the people and the right to form trade unions in the collieries.174 These demands were put before the raja when the latter asked the sarbarakars (village headmen) to meet and represent the grievances to him. However, when the ruler was served the charter of demands by the prajamandal and was asked to accord recognition to it, he responded by declaring it illegal and banned public meetings.175 This unleashed a reign of terror, with arrests and physical torture of innocent people. The raja secured the help of the political department in terms of additional troops after the failure of the attempts to seek the governorÊs intervention in imposing Sections 4 and 5 of the Indian StatesÊ Protection Act by the Congress government of Orissa in the villages border-ing Angul to monitor and suppress prajamandal activities.176 The Congress ministry rejected the proposal. Police atrocities were stepped up. Bika Naik, a Harijan peasant, was killed and five others were injured when they refused to push a police lorry from the sludge.177 Such repression generated progressive popular response; courts and offices of the ruler were boycot-ted, and parallel village-wise panchayats were organized.178 Defying prohibitory orders, meetings were organized at the prajamandalÊs call. Thus, a virtual non-cooperation movement prevailed, with people refusing to pay any illegal tax.179 The Krushak of 17 September 1938 reported:

The temporary camp of the Prajamandal is located in Paniola in Angul ⁄ Despite prohibition, hundreds of people are coming to the Prajamandal office without fearing police threats. The raja has ordered the sarbarkars of every village to arrest the political agita-tors and send them to the police station. A piece of paper in which it was written that articles covered by patta [a deed of lease], viz. pan [betel leaf], bidi, gurakhu [a semi-liquid substance made up of a mixture of tobacco and treacle] should not be used was affixed to

174 HPD, „Weekly Diary of SP‰, 15 September 1938, ACC-916.175 National Front, Vol. II, No. 17, September 1938.176 LC, „Governor, Orissa to Governor-General‰, Vol. II, 19 September 1938.177 National Front, Vol. II, No. 17, September 1938.178 Talcher Prajamandal (Congress) Ra Itihasa, p. 23. People supporting the ruler were boycotted and declared outcastes. This is equally borne out by P.M. Prad-han, Muktipathe Sainika, Vol. I, p. 65.179 Talcher Prajamandal (Congress) Ra Itihasa; Krushak, 17 September 1938.


a tree in Bijogole haat. When the SI turned it upside down, a tenant turned it up again and began to read. It was written on the patta that tenants of Talcher would not make roads by bethi. Thinking that it is illegal, people are not doing bethi and are even disobey-ing the police.

On 16 September, Kosala witnessed nearly 25,000 peasants and workers marching on to attend a meeting.180

The state took recourse of intense police repression for throt-tling the massive popular response to prajamandal-sponsored activities. The state police would conduct raids into the deep interiors to sweep out prajamandal activists, but the people bravely faced all the repressive measures. They refused to carry out the orders of the police, and often left the villages deserted by fleeing to the nearby jungles or paddy fields. However, those who could not escape had to bear the wrath of the police·houses were robbed or destroyed and women were molested.181 As elsewhere, the press was gagged in Talcher too and the entry of The Samaja and the Krushak was banned. This kind of police torture obliged the people to move beyond the state border and at times move to Bamra and Pallahara States. Thus, around November 1938, many refugee camps came to be established at the border of the state to accommodate them.

Satyagraha

Around October, the prajamandal leadership decided to launch satyagraha in the state.182 Trained volunteers (at least 20 per batch) marched in processions, shouting their demands and the prajamandal and Congress slogans. Paniola remained the most important camp for training of volunteers. The daily routine as well as the method of conduct of satyagraha is best revealed in the following report on the Paniola camp:183

All the Talcher refugees get up very early in the morning. Then a whistle was blown. All the volunteers gathered in the mango

180 National Front, Vol. II, No. 17, September 1938.181 For detailed description, see: AISPC Papers, F. No. 164; Krushak, 24 Septem-ber 1938.182 National Front, Vol. I, No. 35, 15 October 1938.183 HPD, „SDO, Angul to DC‰, Angul, 8 October 1938, ACC-931.


grove in front of their camp. When another whistle was blown all the volunteers stood up in a circular form round a bamboo pole. One Krutibas Rath of Talcher state hoisted a tricoloured flag on the bamboo pole. With another whistle, all saluted the flag [and it was] followed by singing of national songs. The total number of volunteers was counted and it came to 56. When asked how many were willing to go [to offer Satyagraha], all wanted to go. Then 20 of them were selected. They were instructed that they must go on telling the villagers not to do bethi [for] road work, not to give magan, bajekara [miscellaneous tax] etc. They should also tell men who were willing to go as volunteers to go to Paniola. They must go up to Talcher town by the evening. They should tell the villagers that they should not follow in a body. If they were arrested, they should not use violence. They should be singing national songs and crying out „Gandhi ki jai‰ while entering any village or being arrested. They should not care for beating or canning [sic]; they should rather cry out „Gandhi ki jai‰. If they were arrested far off from the town, they should fall down on the ground and demand a lorry for the journey up to the jail and should not move from the place. These instructions were given by Maguni Pradhan, Dasarathi Pani and Krutibas Rath [leaders of the Prajamandal]. With another whistle, the party dispersed. Again these 20 selected volunteers turned out with Gandhi caps and khaddar dress at 8.30 a.m. after taking their bath and meal. The same instructions were again given and the party left Paniola for Talcher singing national songs and crying out „Gandhi Mahatma ki jai‰. Another 36 volunteers and about 70 other men of Talcher are still at Paniola. They are having drills regularly in the evening. The volunteers were also given an Oriya pamphlet [titled „Muktira Patha‰ („Way to Freedom‰), authored by Pabitra Mohan Pradhan (President, Talcher Prajamandal)].

One important feature of this satyagraha was that various articles like salt, kerosene, tobacco leaves, paan, soap, soda, coconut, and bidi (items covered under the state monopoly system) came to be openly sold by the satyagrahis in defiance of the state law, braving arrest and confiscation of such goods. The satyagrahis also picketed and propagated against bethi used to build public roads and for other works of the state. The use of khaddar and Gandhi caps was increasingly resorted to as a symbol of protest.184 Around mid-November, the pattern

184 AISPC Papers, F. No. 164. Interestingly, khaddar and Gandhi caps were banned and people were arrested for using them.


of satyagraha was confined to holding meetings defying the prohibitory orders of the state.185 Later, a call for non-payment of land revenue was given, inviting confiscation of lands of defaulting tenants.186 Nearly 1,400 satyagrahis were arrested by November.187 Such arrests were followed by the brutal torture of the satyagrahis by the police, who even used hot irons to brand „NI-HA‰ (acronym for nimak haram, meaning „traitor‰).188 Important prajamandal leaders like Gourishankar Pradhan, Kru-tibas Rath and Dasarathi Pain, who had taken shelter in Girija DuttaÊs house, were arrested in November.189

On 9 October, the Orissa PCC condemned the policy adopted by the Durbar and expressed solidarity with the peopleÊs struggle for civil liberties and responsible governance.190 On 2 November, Pabitra Mohan Pradhan wrote to the Resident, Eastern States Agency, detailing the views of the prajamandal and exploring the possibility of negotiations between the Durbar and the pra-jamandal.191 The letter, while projecting typical Gandhian style of leadership, was important insofar as it strove to explain the leadershipÊs initiative at reaching a compromise (realizing the limits of mass satyagraha in the face of brutal oppression by the ruler). The following is an excerpt from the letter:

Though the formation of Prajamandal was constituted to restore the cordial and congenial relations of the Ruler and the ruled ⁄ Durbar without availing the opportunity, rather took opposite view and resorted to oppressions ranging from looting ⁄ [to] molesting the modesty of women. Despite all these, Prajamandal observed perfect non-violence and bore everything as dumb driven cattle ⁄ As a protest against such inhuman oppressions and torture, it began Satyagraha, which is repressed with inhuman cruelty. The Satyagra-his are in the jail and still undergoing hardships and untold misery ⁄ We are determined to die in peaceful and non-violent fight and Satyagraha to achieve our end. However, before having recourse to such final ordeal, we again send another letter to the Durbar. You are herewith requested to intervene and make an investiga-

185 AISPC Papers, F. No. 164.186 National Front, Vol. I, No. 35, 15 October 1938.187 P.M. Pradhan, Muktipathe Sainika, Vol. I, p. 66.188 Ibid.; National Front, Vol. I, No. 35, 15 October 1938.189 HPD, „IG to CS‰, 9 November 1938, ACC-1030.190 Ibid.191 HPD, „President, Talcher Prajamandal to Resident, Eastern States Agency‰, 2 November 1938, ACC-931.


tion into all the affairs in the presence [of both] the representatives of Durbar and Prajamandal to save any unfortunate situation that may ensue afterwards.

In the face of unabated repression, at a meeting at Angul, in which Girija Dutta and Mahatab participated, it was resolved to seek GandhiÊs intervention on the impasse at the Talcher.192 Gandhi, in his turn, proposed a mass exodus of the people of Talcher to the neighbouring British territory of Angul to force the attention of the British government and thus increase pres-sure on the ruler.193

Exodus and Refugee Camps

Consequently, the hijrat commenced from 8 November and as Pabitra remembers, people of 25 villages left their homes for the prajamandal camp at Kosala.194 Girija Dutta attributed the reasons for the exodus to the back-breaking rent structure of Talcher and massive repression by the state. He also pointed out the expanding social base of the movement as sarbarakars and rich people had started joining the movement against the raja. On 15 November, the state declared that people would have to pay two instalments of rent at a time instead of one, failing which their land would be confiscated. The state officials, in fact, took away the ripe paddy. The exodus swelled after this.195 By December, refugee camps put up on cooperative basis sprang up in different villages of Angul. However, the official records regarding the exodus by the second week of December put the number of refugees as conservatively as possible:196

192 Talcher Prajamandal (Congress) Ra Itihasa, p. 24.193 Ibid., pp. 25 30; HPD, „DM Cuttack to CS‰, 28 November 1938, ACC-922.194 P.M. Pradhan, Muktipathe Sainika, Vol. I, p. 69.195 The Samaja, 20 December 1938, ACC-931; HPD, Report of Commanding Officer, Mobile Column, 4/5 Mahratta Light Infantry, 20 December 1938, ACC-922. Similarly, The Statesman (20 December 1938) wrote that 20,000 refugees were staying in Angul leaving their homes and crops to escape state oppression. Though the report might have been a little exaggerated, there was the pos-sibility that the crops and homes were not fully deserted nor had people any intention of deserting them. For example, a member from a family attended the refugee camp for 24 hours, before being relieved by yet another member of the family.196 HPD, „SDO to DC Angul‰, 20 December 1938; and LC, „Hubback to Linlith-gow‰, Vol. I, 19 November 1938, ACC-931.


As against this, Girija DuttaÊs estimate of the number of refugees for the Kosala camp stood at 16,442,197 and Biswanath DasÊs visit to the Kosala and the Kampsala (7 December) refugee camps led him to estimate a total refugee population of 17,050.198 In any case, nearly a third of the population of the state had left their villages for different camps in Angul.199

The exodus was encouraged by the leadership. Malati Choud-hury, addressing a meeting at Kosala camp on 23 November, explained to the refugees GandhiÊs message to Mahatab on the Talcher issue and pointed out: „We canÊt help those who are afraid of their raja. We can help them if they come away to Mugalbandi leaving all their properties and promise not to enter the state until their claims are got.‰200 As per the police report, by 27 November nearly 6,000 people had crossed over to Kosala, Samilisahi and Takwa villages and attributed this to the speeches of Malati Choudhury and other Congress lead-ers.201 Besides, the rumour that Jawaharlal Nehru was to lead satyagraha in the state of Dhenkanal and the plan to force the attention of the Viceroy, who would visit Angul, to the plight of the refugees explained, to a certain extent, the reasons for the mass exodus. These apart, Nabakrushna ChoudhuryÊs intervention in Dhenkanal in terms of leading the satyagraha himself was another factor influencing the people of Talcher State.202 In any case, the camps were „unduly swollen‰ with the expected visit of political leaders·thanks to the efforts of the local leadership.203

The social basis of the movement broadened with sarbarakars participating in the struggle against the raja. For instance, some sarbarakars of the state came over to the refugee camps with ra-tions while their families back home faced harassment meted out by the state officials, a fact duly witnessed and supported

197 The Samaja, 20 December 1938.198 HPD, „Biswanath DasÊs Tour Diary‰, Angul, ACC-922.199 LC, „Boag to Linlithgow‰, Vol. I, 5 December 1938. Gandhi would note the figure of refugees at 26,000 by January 1939 (Harijan, 28 January 1939).200 HPD, „DM to CS‰, 28 November 1938, ACC-922.201 HPD, SPÊs Report, 28 November 1938, ACC-92.202 Ibid.; HPD, SDOÊs Report, 24 November 1938, ACC-922.203 HPD, „Cuttack SP to IG‰, Orissa, 10 December 1938, ACC-1039.


by Chief Minister (CM) Das on his visit to the camp at Kosala.204 The refugee camp at Kosala, in fact, had 50 sarbarakars along with people of high and low castes, indicating the growing fraternity between the rich and the poor and the high and the low castes.

It is really interesting to go through the impressions205 of Biswanath Das, who visited the Kampasala and Kosala camps on 7 and 8 December 1938. This at least reveals the ministryÊs concern for the refugee crisis and the sense of solidarity ex-pressed to the refugees. He pointed out that the determination to stay in the camp was more deep-seated among women than men, despite great privations like putting up with biting cold weather and the suffering of babies. Refuting the allegation that the migration of people was only a means of demonstrat-ing before the Viceroy, he argued that the cause of the exodus was chiefly the brutal repression by the state on the people. He pointed out that the rulerÊs insistence on the payment of all the kists (instalments) of rent in the context of pressing economic depression and in the case of failure, forcible attachment of standing crops, were stronger reasons for the immediate and huge exodus. He also pointed out the popular nature of the movement by noting that sarbarakars in large numbers had started joining the movement in spite of their dismissal by the ruler. Interestingly, he noted in his diary that refugees had a marked tendency to call everything provincial as „their own‰ and everything of the state as „foreign‰, indicating the popular identification with the people of British India and the expecta-tions from the Congress ministry.

While advising the ruler to create necessary conditions in the state for the return of refugees by waiving the arrears as well as the income of lands to avoid starvation conditions in the refugee camps, he did not rule out the possibility of „crimes‰ in case they were pushed to the brink of hunger. The scarcity of food in the camps was a definite reality that was forcing the refugees to go begging in Angul. Despite such hardship, the

204 HPD, „SDO to DC Angul‰, 18 January 1939, ACC-922; HPD, „Biswanath Das to Resident, Eastern States with an Enclosure of Tour Diary of Angul‰, 4 February 1939, ACC-922.205 HPD, „Tour Diary of B.N. Das to Kampasal and Kosala Camp‰, 7 8 Decem-ber 1938, ACC-977.


refugees had stayed on, indicating their intense discontentment with the ruler.

The December report of the superintendent of police (SP),206 after visiting some of the villages in Talcher as well as Kosala camp, held the state rule responsible for the emerging crisis. The SP wrote his impression as follows:

I believe this account [of heavy taxation and police brutality] to be approximately true. No doubt the refugees have relations left in their villages and do actually return home occasionally and bring food. In addition, an unduly large number of women and children are in evidence in the camp possibly indicating that some of the men are remaining in charge at home ⁄ I personally walked into Talcher village ⁄ The houses were empty but not abandoned, as I had been told in the refugee camp; there were obvious signs of occupation that day. I found an armed Talcher constable who said he had been there for 15 days with the tax collector. The people, he told, had gone across the border on seeing my car. Some of the refugees get food from their villages, and to the very poor, the Prajamandal gives relief. The recent visits of political leaders has [sic] led, I think, to unwarranted hope of relief among some of the people. At one place, my orderly was asked if it were true that Swaraj had come and rents to the raja would be abolished. Further visits of political leaders are therefore to be deprecated. There is a grave danger ⁄

The morale of the refugees was kept up by regular speeches of the leaders who visited from different districts of British Orissa. As noted earlier, Girija Dutta remained an active co-ordinator for the camps in Angul. He advised the refugees not to trust the police and even to „beat them, cut their nose with weapons‰207 if they approached their huts in the camps, a suggestion often enthusiastically received by refugees. The camps housed the refugees in leaf-huts or sheds raised in large numbers on compact areas. In the compound of the camps, a Congress flag was usually hoisted on a big pole and fixed at the centre of a wooden platform. The volunteers and the lead-ers marched round the platform, singing nationalist songs and

206 HPD, „SP to IG, Orissa‰, 10 December 1938, ACC-1039.207 HPD, „SDO to DC‰, Angul, 20 December 1938, ACC-931.


shouting slogans regularly in the morning and evening. The volunteers cleaned the compound and attended to sanitation. The Kosala camp conducted demonstration classes on spinning, managed by the female members of the Bari Gandhian Ashram of Jajpur. Besides, the children of the refugees were taught by the rural intelligentsia under leaf-sheds used as classrooms.208 By June 1939, the very nature of activities in the Kosala camp eventually generated the idea of opening a training school at Kosala modelled on the Gandhian (Wardha) scheme of education with the facilities of free boarding, lodging and training of the youth. The catchment area of the youth for the centre proposed to cover the states like Talcher, Dhenkanal, Bonai, Athamallik, Rairakhol, Baudh, Bamra and Pallahara.209 The camp, thus, in a fair degree emphasized on Gandhian constructive activities as part of the overall satyagraha against the state rule.

The refugees sometimes clashed with the state police and chowkidars. On one occasion, while some refugees from Neteli village of Talcher carrying small bags of rice were going to Natara camp in Angul, they were arrested by the constables of the state. Soon a larger group of about 40 people, who had gath-ered there, assaulted the constables and released the refugees. They tied the constables and intended to take them to Natada camp. They shouted, „Mar, mar, Natada campku nei jao‰ („Beat them, beat them; take them to Natada camp‰). On their way, the refugees were advised by the chowkidars and sarbarakars of Rajanipal village (in Angul) to report the case at the Angul PS. Accordingly, the refugees did so, hoping that the Angul police would take action against the Talcher constables for assaulting and arresting them.210 This incident, while indicating popular resistance, also reveals the faith of the state people in the ad-ministration of British Orissa and the way popular perception related itself to the installation of the Congress ministry.

208 HPD, „DM to CS‰, 10 February 1939, ACC-931. This contains a report on Natra, Kosala and Kampsal Camps for Talcher refugees.209 Board of Revenue Records, Special Branch Report, Angul, 26 June 1939, Sl No. 166.210 HPD, SPÊs Report on Abduction of Talcher Constable, 26 January 1939, ACC-1194.


Support to Refugee Camps by Congress Ministry and Leadership

The continuance of refugee camps caused serious concern to the administration. In his December report, the Cuttack SP211 observed, „There is a grave danger that the sections of these refugees who do not return early to Talcher may turn ugly.‰ He was also apprehensive of the increase in crime and suggested the deployment of more policemen in the Angul locality where the camps existed. Besides, he made a threefold recommendation:

(a) Immediate government enquiry by an experienced political officer in view of the serious effects of the agitation in this province;

(b) Prohibition of political leaders visiting the camps or their neighbourhood, including the whole of Angul; and

(c) „Famine arrangements‰ like work on roads and tanks may be undertaken and the cost thereof to be demanded from the Congress fund as „the Congress has fomented the agitation and has made collections to further it‰.

Responding to the crisis, Revenue Minister Nityananda Kanungo observed in January 1939:212

Popular Ministry canÊt afford to see famine condition prevailing in any part of the territory and we have to spend considerable [amount of money] to meet the situation which has resulted from mal-admin-istration in the states. So, possibility should be explored to restore normalcy in Talcher by returning the refugees to the states. As a civilised state, we canÊt deny them shelter as long as the condition in Talcher doesnÊt improve.

He went on to point out that, „a no-rent campaign is loom-ing large in the state.‰ The ministry pleaded for the Governor-GeneralÊs intervention to defuse the crisis and threatened resignation:

211 HPD, „SP, Cuttack to IG, Orissa‰, 10 December 1938, ACC-1039.212 HPD, „N. Kanungo to B.N. Das‰, 12 February 1939, ACC-1039; LC, „Hubback


If force is used for subduing the claims of the people for the elemen-tary rights of human beings [civil liberties] and we are helpless in influencing the Governor General to prevent such occurrences, then the least we can do is to dissociate ourselves from the responsibility of having a share in the administration.

The Congress ministry sanctioned Rs 3,250 as relief to the poor and refugees. Besides, Gandhi Seva Sangha obtained financial assistance from the government for opening a training school for spinning and for cottage industries on the lines of the Wardha scheme. As noted earlier, classes were conducted on spinning and weaving, offering avenues for self-employment. To deal with the problems of sanitation and water scarcity, the government allocated funds.213 Besides, the government also gave permission to cut timber for the construction of refugee huts at the campsite.214

Gandhiji was concerned over the developments and wrote several articles on Talcher in the Harijan. A.V. Thakkar, his representative, came to Dhenkanal and stayed in the refugee camps.215 He wrote to Gandhi, Nehru, Rajendra Prasad, Patel, Bose and Biswanath Das and recommended „some first class leaders‰ to visit the camps in Angul. He wrote:216

The sufferings of the refugees have been terrible and had it not been for the kindly services of the Marwari relief society of Calcutta and of the Charka activities of Malati Choudhury, even the modicum of relief that has been given would not have been given. The Talcher Durbar is still adamant and waiting for the refugees to get drenched with the first regular heavy rainfall in Angul and return to their houses with folded hands, falling at the feet of raja. I am sure this is not going to happen in 1939, because Orissa Government is alert in relieving the sufferings of the refugees.

Gandhi requested the Orissa government and a few charitable organizations to offer help to the refugees.217 He wrote in Harijan

to Linlithgow‰, Vol. II, 8 January 1939.213 Government of Orissa at Work: Work of Congress Ministry (1938 39), Cuttack, 1939, p. 13.214 Talcher Prajamandal (Congress) Ra Itihasa, p. 27.215 P.M. Pradhan, Muktipathe Sainika, Vol. I, p. 70.216 HPD, „Letter of Thakkar to Gandhi‰, 25 May 1939, ACC-1709.217 Talcher Prajamandal (Congress) Ra Itihasa, p. 27. Gandhi had also requested the political department of the government of India and the provincial government to redress the popular grievances.


(4 February 1939): „The Ministers in Orissa may not sit comfort-ably in their chairs ⁄ if they donÊt send back the 26,000 refugees of Talcher to their homes with an absolute assurance of safety and freedom of speech and social-political intercourse.‰ Charity in great sums was also forthcoming to the camps. The Marwari Relief Society alone spent about Rs 15,000.218 The refugee camps succeeded in winning considerable media attention as the press visited the camps regularly. Miss Agatha Harrison visited the camps and talked to the refugees and the leaders. She saw the problem in Angul refugee camps as essentially „human‰ and sought the immediate intervention of political department for a settlement between the ruler and the subjects.219 C.F. Andrews, the noted Gandhian, also championed the cause of the Talcher people.

With the approach of rains, the predicament in the refugee camps worsened. The nature of popular feelings inside the camps was best reflected in a pamphlet that was circulated on 7 June. It deplored the inadequate relief and poor attention of the top leaders to the refugee issue and earnestly sought the personal intervention of Gandhi to defuse the crisis. It noted:220

The exodus started about mid-November 1938 after a severe repres-sion in the state of Talcher, which means that subjects were very much exhausted when they arrived in the refugee camps. They experienced the bitter chill of the winter of Angul and at present, at the end of a severe summer (with temperature going up to 112 F). In spite of all this, they are holding out courageously, but the pub-lic sympathy was very poor and the attitude of the leaders most discouraging. During the last six months, they received altogether a financial help of Rs 6,000, including Rs 5,000 from the Marwari Relief Association. All this is intended for the refugees numbering over 20,000. It is admittedly the outcome of the agitations of the statesÊ people in India. But not even one member of the working committee except Mahatab cared to visit the camps ⁄ not even Rajendra Prasad has visited Orissa.

218 H.K. Mahatab, Sadhanara Pathe (Oriya), Vol. I, Cuttack, 1972, 1st edn, p. 189.219 Talcher Prajamandal (Congress) Ra Itihasa, p. 28; P.M. Pradhan, Muktipathe Sainika, Vol. I, p. 71; HPD, SPÊs Report, 3 February 1939, ACC-1200.220 HPD, Note by a well-informed friend; ref.: „Talcher and Gangapur states in Orissa‰, Undated (Author not known), ACC-1709.


It went on to add:

Had Gandhiji taken up the cause of the Talcher refugees, the success of the movement would have been an accomplished fact even about two months ago, as on account of the great faith of the people in Gandhiji, even the few that are now in the state would have come out leaving the state completely deserted. The peopleÊs capacity for such an undertaking is very well known and the recent exodus from Ranpur though it is on a different ground is a sufficient example.

The Leadership and Attempts at Negotiation

We have already observed the ministryÊs perception of the refu-gee camps. Immediately after the exodus, Mahatab and Girija Dutta had started exploring the possibility of a negotiation with the ruler of Talcher.221 While appealing to the „eminent people‰ of India to contribute financially to the refugees, Mahatab was striving to seek GandhiÊs intervention in the issue. However, the socialist leadership was critical of MahatabÊs intervention in the Talcher issue. The efforts by the Resident, Eastern States, and the political agent to pressurize the Talcher ruler for effecting a solution were a failure. As observed earlier, right since the exodus, the Congress ministry had expressed its serious concern over the issue and appealed to the Viceroy to intervene so as to reach at a solution.

Biswanath Das met the Viceroy on his way to Madras via Orissa and apprised him of the crisis.222 Das and Kanungo discussed the issue with the Viceroy as well as Major Searle, the political agent, and pressed for the establishment of a supreme appel-late court in each state and the grant of civil liberties (such as the right to free speech and forming associations) to the statesÊ people. KanungoÊs view was that „so long as people donÊt ad-vocate crime or violence, they should be allowed to speak and associate freely‰. The CM also emphasized on the release of an authoritative document detailing the promises and concessions of the ruler on property rights, bethi, magan, etc., on the basis of which refugees could be persuaded to return, in view of the lack of peopleÊs faith in the ruler.

221 HPD, CID (Special Branch) Report, 3 December 1938, ACC-922.222 Harijan, 20 May 1939.


In March, Major Searle, accompanied by Captain Wood (of the Salvation Army), met the refugees in Natada camp. They also asked the refugees to go back to their homes in response to the rulerÊs grant of a few concessions of bethi and rasad. But the refugees insisted on a written assurance from the political department for fear of non-implementation of such concessions as before.223 They also demanded the withdrawal of extradition warrants. Thus, under pressure from the ministry, the political department began negotiations in March. Accordingly, a meet-ing was arranged between Major Hennessey (Assistant Political Agent), Mahatab (the Congress ministryÊs representative) and Mr Ansorge (Revenue Commissioner).224 The meeting decided on an agreement between Hennessey and Mahatab as per which Mahatab would suggest proposals for the solution of the Talcher crisis. Accordingly, Mahatab offered the following proposals:225

(a) Three annas per rupee of rent and the undertaking that after the settlement, the rent and cess would not be higher than the rent in Angul for the same class of land

(b) Abolition of monopolies on the necessities of life except animal hide/skin, horns, and ganja (cannabis), opium and alcoholic drinks

(c) State administrative machinery should not be used for en-forcing fines and collection of fines levied by courts and panchayats

(d) Abolition of bethi except for public purposes and on pay-ment of wages at ordinary rates

(e) Abolition of special tax on industrial cess (f) No interference with freedom of speech and meetings pro-

vided there is nothing subversive and disloyal to the ruler or his administration

(g) Peasants should be allowed to kill wild animals in the state on their own property without any penalties

223 Amrit Bazaar Patrika, 15 March 1939.224 HPD, Report of Revenue Commissioner on Mahatab Hennessey Negotiation on Talcher Refugees, 21 March 1939, ACC-1793; LC, „Hubback to Linlithgow‰, Vol. II, 22 March 1939.225 LC, „Hubback to Linlithgow‰, Vol. II, 22 March 1939.


The ministry was eager to solve the problem before the ap-proach of the rainy season so that the peasants could resume work on their fields.226 However, the British Resident promised that except extradition cases, the rest of the demands would be conceded. On 1 May, the Durbar made the expected declara-tion, ignoring the issues of miscellaneous cesses and extradition cases. This stance by the Durbar did not resolve the deadlock.227 Following this, Gandhi wrote in Harijan on 20 May: „Talcher promises to be much worse than Rajkot. In Rajkot, it was the rulerÊs word that was broken ⁄ in Talcher it was paramount powerÊs.‰228 C.F. Andrews also appealed to the prajamandal for intensifying the struggle.229 In June, the ministry released those prisoners from the Talcher State who had extradition warrants against them. NehruÊs comment on extradition warrants against the leaders is worth noting: „It was a demand which no Congress Ministry could agree to without losing honour and betraying our comrades in the states and being false to our principles.‰230 The raja started seeking support from the princes of other states to forge a counter-strategy to crush the movement.231 Even then, the refugees refused to move back to the state unless the March accord was put into operation. Meetings were organized in the Khandapara State where people were called upon to carry on their agitation in the manner of Talcher and a great deal of sympathy was expressed.232

By June, with the onset of rains, and in the face of the con-tinuing deadlock, the news of the impending visits of Gandhi and the Viceroy to Angul to personally address the Talcher is-sue was spread by the prajamandal in an attempt to boost the sagging morale of the refugees.233 The idea was attributed to Mahatab. Besides, Mahatab and Sarangadhar Das were planning to hold the Feudatory States PeopleÊs Conference in Orissa and ask Nehru to preside over it.234 However, the objective of such

226 LC, „Kanungo to Hubback‰, Vol. II, 18 April 1939.227 Ibid.228 Quoted in the National Front, Vol. II, No. 17, 4 April 1939.229 Ibid.230 AISPC Papers, F. No. 187.231 AISPC Papers, F. No. P.L. 7.232 Ibid.233 HPD, „OPAI‰, No. 23, 26 June 1939, ACC-1709.234 Board of Revenue Records, CID (Special Branch) Report, 27 June 1939, Sl No. 166.


an exercise was to apprise the top leadership of the deadlock as well as to seek their intervention in it.

Looking at the situation, Nehru observed on 30 May: „Among all the states in India the Orissa state stands out today in their agony·Talcher of broken promises and starving and wander-ing, starving refugees ⁄ No one dare say that their freedom can wait until we are free.‰235

Viceroy Linlithgow also expressed his deep concern over the state of affairs in Talcher. He also desired to make an on-the-spot enquiry during his visit to Orissa. The ruler was warned that if the refugees did not go back to the state before the ViceroyÊs arrival in Orissa, Talcher would be confiscated and brought under direct management.236 On 23 June, the ruler made a proclamation fulfilling the demands of the prajamandal, abolishing bethi, magan, religious cess, and conceding those on protection from wild animals and collection of fines imposed by ecclesiastical courts. A promise was made to fulfil the other demands. The people, under the leadership of Pabitra Mohan Pradhan, accepted the proclamation and returned to the state on 21 June.237

The popular struggles in Nilagiri, Dhenkanal and Talcher may be seen as a broad pointer to the overall scene in many other states like Ranpur, Gangapur, Khandapara and Nayagarh. The remarkable radical character of the leadership and the militant aspect of the movement pointedly indicate the progressive thrust of a radical ideology inside the broad Congress movement vis-à-vis the autocratic states.238

Generally speaking, popular movements in the princely states of Orissa assumed a powerful thrust during 1938 39. The mass movement that enveloped the princely states of Orissa was primarily due to the terribly backward socio-political condi-

235 J. Nehru, in S. Gopal, ed., „Conditions in Indian States‰, Selected Works, Vol. 9, New Delhi, 1939, p. 439.236 Cited in Sadasiba Pradhan, Agrarian and Political Movements: States of Orissa: 1931 1949, New Delhi, 1986, p. 84.237 Ibid. Also, for the full draft of the rulerÊs declaration see: HPD, „DC, Angul to Governor of Orissa‰, 2 May 1939, ACC-1794.238 For this aspect, as well as popular movements in Ranpur and Gangapur states, refer to C.P. Nanda, „Civil Disobedience to Congress Ministry: A Case Study of Orissa (1930 39)‰. M. Phil. Thesis, Centre for Historical Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, 1986.


tions characterizing the states. The character of the movement was in part caused by widespread poverty (95 per cent of the statesÊ population being peasantry) and the attendant social dis-abilities. The mass or popular character of the movement was also evident from the charter of demands that the prajamandal brought out.

Another crucial factor was that the popular Congress minis-try provided the peopleÊs struggle with a lot of confidence. We have observed the nature of leadership as well as the pattern and extent of popular mobilization in at least three states, which suggests the refreshingly open-ended character of the movement backed by insights and innovations of the leadership from top to bottom. These aspects have been specifically focused upon in this study while dealing with the refugee and volunteer camps as well as Congress ashrams. Even caste rules were ignored through mass meetings and common dinners organized by the prajamandal. In Dhenkanal, sankirtans or bhajan melas (devotional group songs with music), performance of puja and jajnas (sacred fire performance along with religious discourses) became vital components of the mass mobilization drive by the prajamandal activists and leaders.239

Most importantly, these upheavals aroused intense feelings of solidarity among the people of different states. For example, the Dhenkanal Prajamandal ordered that every adult man and woman must contribute 1 paisa to the Nilagiri satyagraha fund. The Khandapara people would express their deep concern for the Talcher refugees.240 The Krushak, which had a low circula-tion in 1934 (the year of its foundation), sold in thousands in 1938. This paper lent a tremendous ideological support to the movement. Besides, the impact of the peasant movement in the neighbouring British Orissa, the intervention of kisan leaders in the popular struggles in the states and the specific impulse generated by the Jenapur Peasant Conference (held in September 1938, devoting one whole day to Dhenkanal, calling it „Dhenk-anal Day‰) helped push the struggle to new heights.

239 National Front, Vol. II, No. 25, 30 July 1939.240 Hindustan Standard, 10 March 1939; AICC Papers, G.35, Part-I; Rabi Ghose, the Jana (Oriya fortnightly), 15 April 1960. Quoted in B.C. Rath, Unrest in Princely States, p. 154.


A contemporary column contributed by P.C. Joshi on the cadres and leadership of the Dhenkanal movement really makes valuable reading. He introduces the leaders as follows:241

Sarangadhar Das: He was a sugar technologist, and hailed from a landlord family. The woes of the victims of state terror led him to the movement. He is no socialist, yet he is with the comrades as they work and help the people. From his ambition of becoming a leading industrialist of Orissa, he has become the true leader of the movement.

Nabakrushna Choudhury: As leader of CSP, the political strategy comes from him. He helped to link up the Congress with the Dhen-kanal Movement.

Malati Devi: She looks after the victims of terror and the hospital arrangements as only a woman can, and wins the respect of all.

Subahu Singh: A true son of the soil. He is to Dhenkanal as Swami Sahajananda is to kisans of Bihar; led a mass movement in 1921 against enhancement of rent and rigidity of forest laws. He has a mass appeal; knows how to move people. He could arrange huge gathering of people. He is a great enthusiast. When he knew that Nehru would be personally leading the state peopleÊs movement, he was ready to collect Rs 10,000 (he would have got the people to sell their cattle and utensils to make Rs 10,000), which would en-able Nehru to come to India in „hawai jahaj‰ to personally lead the Dhenkanal movement.

Laxmidhar Sahu: His slogan is „No settlement with Raja without responsible Government‰; Secretary of Dhenkanal Prajamandal, a teacher in Mission High School in Cuttack, aged 25.

Harmohan Patnaik: A Law graduate, enjoys respect of all includ-ing the raja.

Baisnava Patnaik: A painter on the BNR [Bengal Nagpur Railway]; he got attracted to Marxism and Leninist ideology, would talk of Lenin, Marx, Russia, Freedom. Regularly writes for The Krushak; collects information from the state in coolie dress (worker-socialist).

Srikanta, Rabi Ghose, Banamali: All students. They work as cap-tains for collecting volunteers and funds. All of them had joined the CDM and CSP after coming back from jail. Banamali leads the Nilagiri Prajamandal. They are of the material of which Bolsheviks are made.

241 National Front, Vol. II, No. 25, 30 July 1939.


Reflecting on the character of peopleÊs struggle, Sarangadhar Das observed:242 „It is a true case of masses seeking contact with leaders. The Congress leaders have long looked for opportunity of moulding this freshly awakened mass and of linking it up with the great movement for freedom.‰ He went on to note:

The Congress began to come into contact with the masses and discovered the whole gamut of their political, economic and so-cial disabilities which are constantly eating into the vitals of the people ⁄ The mass awakening in British India today is, therefore, the culmination of the continuous hard work of the leadership of the Congress during the period of last years, which was marked by the entry of Gandhi to Indian Politics.‰

Ministry and the Movement

Since its formation in 1937, the Congress ministry proceeded rapidly with its programme. This had its reaction on the stateÊs people. Because of their constant contact with neighbouring British Orissa, a hope for representative institutions arose among them. The vernacular press and propaganda by other organizations also backed them.243 In this context, it is important to map the response of the ministry to the movement, which clarifies the Congress leadershipÊs perception of the problem and its initia-tives in this regard.

The issue of the garjat movement featured prominently in the agenda of the Utkal Provincial Political Conference held in May 1938. Sarangadhar Das, a top leader of the state peopleÊs movement, placed the magnitude of the crisis in the states before the conference. The conference deplored the absolute absence of fundamental rights in the states, existence of anti-people laws and repression and reactionary measures tending to curtail the civil liberties of the people. He pointed out that fundamental rights were being denied to the people:244

242 S. Das, „Masses Seeking Contact with Leaders‰, National Front, Vol. II, No. 25, 30 July 1939.243 The Statesman, 16 August 1938.244 Indian Annual Register, Vol. I, 1938, pp. 408 10.


(a) The Ordinance of Rairakhol (Sambalpur) which prohibited the assembly of five persons or more and the soliciting and collection of any subscription for any purpose.

(b) Forcible dispersal by the Keonjhar police of a peaceful meet-ing at Sagadupatta where some 300 people had gathered to formulate their grievances for presentation to the ruler of the state. The authorities arrested and detained 10 persons for eight days in the thana (police station) and subsequently enforced Section 144 of the IPC on Dhana Naik, Dirja Dehuri and others of Billa from other villages for many days.

(c) The promulgation in Nilagiri of Regulation I and II of 1938 requiring registration of any association and making it compulsory to obtain permission one week before holding any meeting.

(d) Harassment of Bamra villagers for joining the Congress as ordinary members.

(e) Arrest and conviction of five villagers from Oragaon (Naya-garh) on criminal charges with a view to breaking the paan boycott movement which was the only weapon available to counteract the abnormal price hike of paan due to the monopoly system.

(f) Ban on the press, particularly The Samaja and Krushak news-papers in certain states.

The conference urged the people of the states to organize themselves on the established principle of truth and non-violence in order to defend their civil liberties. It extended its strong sympathy and moral support to their struggle against all kinds of repression in the states and for the winning of the responsible government. The ministry from the beginning was favourably disposed to the state peopleÊs struggles. Referring to the attitude of the ministry to the crisis in the states, the governor had written to the Viceroy:

The sympathies of most people in Orissa are with the subjects of the state and against the ruler. They allege the Government of these states as inefficient, antiquated and oppressive. This view is held by Congress Ministers, Congress party. The ministers share the sympathies to the full and blame the Government of India for im-


porting troops to bolster up an inefficient and oppressive rule. For these reasons, they are not prepared to take any action or check the agitation beyond the undertaking to use their influence to discourage actions in Orissa calculated to promote violence in the states. The Ministry holds that [the] shooting in Dhenkanal is making it more and more difficult to keep the agitation in check. They are strictly opposed to the extension of the Articles 4 to 7 of the Indian States Protection Act (1934) which curtail speeches of the leaders.

Explaining the governmentÊs helplessness, he added: „If they are forced to do it, they would resign and there is no possibility for alternative Ministry as all sections of Congress will support the Ministry on this issue.‰245

When the ministry was apprised of the various camps operat-ing in Orissa just outside the states and about the distribution of seditious literature in the states and was pressed for neces-sary action against them, the CM held that „such action would rekindle the agitation‰.246

Throughout 1938, the ministry remained opposed to the ex-tension of Articles 4 and 7 of the Indian StatesÊ Protection Act to the states where a DM would have the power to discourage certain activities on the grounds that such steps would intensify the agitation in the states. It also clearly kept its options open for resignation if there was pressure to do so. It also demanded that the situation in the states of Orissa should be isolated from that of other provinces as locally there was little interest in the latter.247 In this respect, Biswanath Das and Kanungo constantly referred to the repression in the states and the refugee problem: the difficulties in the maintenance of camps and the approach-ing cultivation season with the monsoon.248

The ministry held that the state peopleÊs issue must inevitably be the state governmentÊs concern, even though according to the existing constitutional arrangement it was not so. Explaining this, Biswanath Das argued that the refugee problem in Angul camp was a serious one for the provincial government and so „there is a justification on our part in making suggestions which might help to allay the causes which led to the exodus

245 LC, Vol. I, 19 October 1938, Hubback to Linlithgow.246 LC, „Chief Secretary to Viceroy‰, Vol. I, 15 September 1938.247 LC, „Hubback to Linlithgow‰, Vol. II, 17 January 1939, 30 January 1939.248 Ibid.


of the refugees from their homes.‰ Thus, he came to suggest the following measures:

(a) The recognition of civil liberty and rights to property, and security of such rights to be protected by a reliable court to be announced by the political department which would satisfy the public as these rights are preliminary to any system of administration which is both responsible and the representative form of government. This should be immediately introduced by the ruler of the state.

(b) For maintaining close contact with the state, the headquar-ters of the residency should be shifted from Calcutta to Orissa.249

Nityananda Kanungo, the revenue minister, also made similar suggestions:

(a) Right of free association and free expression of opinion should be guaranteed;

(b) Right of appeal in both criminal and civil cases to a tribunal under the control of political department independent of princes should be made available to the state subjects.

He warned, „Unless these elementary demands are conceded, states will remain a seething mass of discontent with its inevitable repercussion on the neighbouring districts of Orissa.‰250

The views of the ministry on securing civil liberties for princely states were characteristically summed up by Mansfield, the Chief Secretary:

The provincial Government feels that there must be some local means of ensuring that concessions, which are granted on paper, will not be whittled down in practice, and there should be some recognised means for ventilating common grievances and express-ing public opinion. In the opinion of the Ministry, this can only be secured by the formation and recognition of a body or association, which may be formed by the subjects in each state for the purpose to be followed by the inauguration by the ruler of some body with

249 LC, „Biswanath Das to Hubback‰, Vol. II, 22 February 1939.250 LC, „Kanungo to Hubback‰, Vol. I, 22 February 1939.


desired rights and responsibilities. Until such steps are taken the provincial Government urge that a responsible non-official of this province should be invited to help the raja in negotiations with their subjects.251

This clearly reveals the ministryÊs attempt to lend moral support to the movement in princely states by pressurizing the rulers to grant civil liberties. That the ministry helped to expand the space for the movement in the states was apparent when it refused to lend police aid to the states to suppress popular movements. A pro-ruler newspaper lamented the situation in the following manner:

Mr B. N. Das (P.M.) sometime ago appealed to the Rulers of Orissa states for support to the Orissa University Scheme and yet refuses to lend police aid to the states in times of great need with the result that British troops and Gurkha force have been requisitioned from the Government of India to quell disturbances. Is this a friendly act ?252

The ministry brought up the statesÊ issue during the visit of the Viceroy to Orissa in July 1939. It decided to avoid any kind of congratulatory meeting on the visit of the Viceroy on the grounds that it was not desirable to have a meeting of this nature when thousands of countrymen were rotting as refugees in Angul and elsewhere. It further pointed out that „due to the prevailing situation in the states and no prospect of settlement of the refugee problem, the public opinion is considerably agi-tated and LinlithgowÊs visit at this juncture would not appeal to public mind as it would have appealed in the case of a solution of the problem‰.253

The ministry also consistently fought against the authorities on the issue of extradition cases. The state authorities demanded that people who were arrested in connection with violent activities or for delivering inflammatory speeches (usually, false charges of theft, robbery, etc., were levelled against the activists of pra-

251 HPD, „CS to Viceroy‰, 7 December 1938, ACC-1039.252 The New Orissa, „Shortsighted Policy‰, 27 September 1938, ACC-923.253 LC, „Biswanath Das to Hubback‰, Vol. II, 5 July 1939.


jamandal) by the colonial authorities, be handed over to them.254 The ministry, however, asked the DM to refer all extradition cases to the Orissa government. It also released several such prison-ers from Dhenkanal and Talcher on the grounds that they were working with political motives. In December 1938, the ministry released eight out of 10 prisoners belonging to Dhenkanal and Talcher states.255 The tug of war over this issue embroiled the ministry throughout 1939. The ministry went on delaying the handing over of prisoners arrested under extradition warrants to the states for a pretty long time. It also pleaded that regarding powers under the extradition law, the local government should be admittedly a factor to reckon with.256

The ministry kept pressurizing the colonial authorities to concede the legitimate demands of the people by issuing neces-sary directives to the states. The ministry was opposed to certain laws, which were intended to curtail popular movements. Thus, it gave strong encouragement to such movements in the states. Moreover, it was ever ready to resign on the statesÊ issue, thereby threatening a constitutional deadlock.

254 Hubback in several letters (written in 1938) to the Viceroy made allegations against the ministry for its slow response to the extradition issue.255 LC, „Hubback to Linlithgow‰, Vol. II, 31 December 1938.256 Mahatab Papers, „Mahatab to Gandhi‰, New Delhi, 5 February 1939.

Tenancy Legislations of the Ministry

The Congress ministry came to respond to the predominant agrarian tensions of rural Orissa by initiating a distinct agrar-ian programme, quite popular in nature. This attempt by the ministry was in tune with the agrarian programme Nehru en-visaged around 1937 in his diagnosis of the agrarian problem facing the country. The kind of programme undertaken by the ministry was meant to create a new order in the country.1 This

Five

Situating the Congress Ministry, 1937–39

1 Nehru in a letter to the leaders of the Congress parties in the provincial as-semblies observed: “The questions on land and rural debt are complicated. If an attempt is made to deal with them thoroughly, some delay is inevitable. But it is necessary that some relief should be given to the peasantry almost immediately. Such efforts should be made on the lines indicated by Congress resolution, i.e., the agrarian resolution of Faizpur Congress. This will be in earnest of the bet-ter system that we aim at; and the masses will realise by this, if nothing else, a new spirit moves the new cabinet and provincial Government.” (J. Nehru, in S. Gopal, ed., Selected Works, “To Leaders of Congress Parties in Provincial Assemblies”, Vol. 8, New Delhi, 1939, p. 280) Also, in an interview to the press on 7 August 1937, he stated: “Congress policy on agrarian reform will vary slightly in certain provinces but funda-mentally it will be uniform. Different problems will be tackled keeping in view their urgency in particular provinces.” Referring to the system of abolition of zamindari system he observed: “It is always desirable to avoid major conflicts


was a perspective which encompassed both anti-colonialism and agrarian radicalism, the latter, however, to be attained through class adjustment than sheer class struggles. This understanding was reflected in various measures of tenancy legislation initiated by the Congress ministry. The objective of the ministry was to meet the challenges offered by the Act of 1935 by undertaking popular and ameliorative agrarian legislations. The strategy was to undermine the hegemony of the colonial state by redressing rural-mass level grievances. This could help the ministry acquire the status of a popular representative and also help overcome the post-Civil Disobedience Movement (post-CDM) disillusion-ment with the Congress.

The three measures of agrarian legislation that we have taken up for consideration bring out the nature of the ministry’s ap-proach to the existing agrarian problems. The bills are (i) Madras Estates Land (Orissa Amendment Act) Bill, 1937; (ii) Orissa Ten-ancy (Amendment) Bill, 1937; and (iii) Moneylenders Bill, 1938. It is noteworthy that such agrarian legislation in the sphere of tenancy laws defining the tiller–zamindar relationship and rural indebtedness facilitated popular links of the Congress.

Madras Estates Land (Orissa Amendment Act) Bill, 1937

The first tenancy legislation undertaken by the Congress min-istry was the Madras Estates Land (Amendment) Bill. This bill remained controversial until the ministry’s resignation in 1939. It was specifically meant for those areas, which had been annexed to Orissa from the Madras Province in 1936. In these areas, the zamindars charged high rents from the tenants as per the provisions of the Madras Estates Land Act, 1908. The rent was calculated on the basis of cash equivalent of half the gross produce of the land and compared to the other ryotwari areas of Orissa was quite higher. In the ryotwari areas of Orissa, the rent was half of the net produce.2 To iron out such glaring dis-advantages faced by a part of the people of the same province,

and the cost thereof by giving some compensation. The Congress cannot eas-ily deal with this problem. So, its [ministry’s] immediate task will be to lessen the burden on both tenantry and petty zamindars.” (Nehru, Selected Works, Vol. 8, p. 291).2 Indian Annual Register (IAR henceforth), Vol. I, 1938, p. 261.

Situating the Congress Ministry, 1937–39 227

the bill was introduced in the assembly on 23 September 1937.3 It proposed the lowering of the existing rent in these areas to that of the nearest ryotwari areas for similar lands with similar advantages. It also proposed a margin of only 2 annas in a rupee for zamindari rents over that of ryotwari ones.4

The legislation, according to the ministry, was “necessitated for giving relief to the ryots of private proprietary estates in the area of Ganjam that had been ceded to Orissa from Madras Province in 1936 by fixing a fair and equitable rent”.5 In fact, the Congress election manifesto had proposed the abolition of permanent settlement affecting Paralakhemundi and a number of smaller landlords in Ganjam.6 Introducing the bill, Prime Minister (PM) Biswanath Das7 highlighted the chief provision of the bill as the substitution of half the net produce in lieu of half the gross amount as rent in the newly merged zamindari areas of Ganjam and observed that the condition of peasants was particularly “helplessly miserable and much oppressed”.8 In opposition to the bill, the raja of Khallikote, who had great personal stake in it, dubbed it as “revolutionary in measure and expropriatory in character”.9 He moved a resolution that consideration of the bill should be postponed till the Madras

3 Orissa Legislative Assembly Proceedings (hereafter OLAP), Vol. I, 1937, p. 1045.4 IAR, Vol. I, 1938, p. 261.5 Ibid. Also, The Samaja (18 September 1937) observed: “In South Orissa, the raiyats pay half of the produce as rent to the Zamindars. In ryotwari/khasmahal areas, however, the raiyat pays as revenues only half of his net produce after meeting the necessary costs of cultivation. In some of the zamindari areas [like Surangi] …, this half share of the entire produce is being converted into cash by means of settlement. The rent, per acre, therefore, amounts to Rs 16 or Rs 17 in Zamindari areas, as it is mainly based on bhag. The same quality of land has to pay only Rs 6 or Rs 7 rupees [sic] as revenue in raiyatwari areas. What a serious difference!”6 P.N. Chopra, ed., Towards Freedom, Vol. I, New Delhi, 1985, pp. 113–14.7 As per the Government of India Act, the head of the ruling party in the leg-islature was called Prime Minister then.8OLAP, Vol. I, 1937, pp. 1044–46:

The average land revenue per acre for Cuttack was Rs 3-6, for Balasore Rs 2-12, for Puri, Rs 2-8, and for Sambalpur 8 annas only. In contrast, in the ex-Madras areas of South Orissa, the rate of rents varied from Rs 5 to Rs 16 in case of wetlands and in the case of rain fed lands from Rs 3 to Rs 8.

9 OLAP, Vol. II, Part II, 1938, p. 198.


government amended the Madras Estates Land Act, 1908. He further suggested:

As the ryot in private proprietary estate would not pay to his landlord more than two annas in the rupee in excess of the rates prevailing in the ryotwari lands in the neighbourhood, so the under-ryot of the tiller of the soil should not also pay to the ryot anything in excess of the margin of two annas in the rupee over the rent.10

The raja of Khallikote pointed out that the benefits contem-plated in the proposed legislation for the ryots, as against the holders of land at reduced rent, should not stick with him but should filter down to the under-ryots or the tillers of the soil. The opposition insisted that in south Orissa, the tenant in ma-jority cases was not the tiller of the soil, indicating that the PM himself owned tenancy rights on more than a hundred acres of proprietary land.11

Replying to the criticism of the opposition, Das wondered, “When did the rajas develop this sense of responsibility for the tillers of the soil and what did they do during this long period for those for whom they are anxious now?”12 The position of the opposition over the definition of ryot and under-ryot was refuted by the president of Ganjam District Congress Com-mittee (DCC), who said that peasants occupying “50 acres or more of landed property were not more than 80 only whereas ryots of 3 acres or less than that numbered 36, 563,”13 thereby constituting 70 per cent of a near total of 50,000 lease-holders.

10 Ibid.; IAR, Vol. I, 1938, p. 262.11 Desakatha, 28 September 1938. It commented: “The Hon’ble C.M. of Orissa is behaving like a child as his statements are as much inexplicable as the remarks of a child. Biswanath Babu styled himself as a Krushak (cultivator) at Gaya. When the raja of Parlakimedi became a member of the Agriculture Commission, some people said that he was a big agriculturist as he had a big farm land. Babu Biswanath Das is probably an agriculturist in that sense … he is not really an agriculturist but an inamdar or zamindar and takes a greater share of the produce from the actual tillers of the soil than the raja of Khallikote overtakes from his tenants. If a person commits any sin it is absolved in a sacred place but a sin committed in a sacred place (in the form of Das telling a lie in calling himself a Krushak in a place like Gaya) is never absolved.”12 IAR, Vol. I, 1938, p. 262.13 OLAP, Vol. II, Part II, 1938, pp. 196–98.


Referring to the various agrarian classes comprising zamindars, ryots, under-ryots and labourers, Biswanath Das observed that the Congress government epitomized their interests by “orga-nising these classes and working towards relieving them from their distress”. In his view, the legislation “was an attempt to improve the lot of these people and thereby increase rural contentment”.14

The bill was passed by the assembly on 5 February 1938 and was submitted for Governor Hubback’s assent. However, in May 1938, Hubback came out with a blunt refusal to give assent to the bill and reserved it for the “Governor General’s assent or to return it for the reconsideration of the Assem-bly”.15 This decision of the governor was strongly criticized by the Congress leadership. Gopabandhu Choudhury, President, Provincial Congress Committee (PCC), lashed out against the decision of the governor as a clear “encroachment in the field of ministerial responsibility”. Das too saw the governor’s move as “practically a refusal of his assent to such an important bill which was reasonably moderate in its scope”.16

The opposition was also keen to persuade both the Governor-General and the governor to kill the bill. In February 1938, the raja of Parikuda met the Governor-General and asked him to persuade Gandhi to handle the issue. But, Linlithgow expressed his helplessness:

Great as maybe one might feel for landlords and little as one would like to see, what has on the whole been an invaluable conservative influence disappear, I fear that the extent to which we can effec-tively intervene on their behalf, is under present circumstances, very limited and they [zamindars] clearly realise that.17

The landed elements submitted a memorandum to the gov-ernor over the bill, describing it as “confiscatory”, as it negated the guarantees offered to landholders through permanent settle-ment. They also saw the provisions of the bill as “unfair to the landholders since it proposed to reduce their income”. Besides,

14 IAR, Vol. I, 1938, p. 268.15 Linlithgow Collection (LC), “Hubback to Orissa Assembly”, Vol. I, 1938, p. 61.16 Ibid.17 LC, “Linlithgow to Hubback”, Vol. I, 9 February 1938.


it alleged that the bill was rushed through the assembly without seeking public opinion.18

The governor, in turn, suggested to the ministry to hold a round table conference, which would involve the ministry, the landlords and the governor. This was ruled out by the PM, who observed that the bill, which restricted the power of zamindars and reduced the rent, had been passed by an overwhelming majority; and that there had never been an agreed solution of problems between tenants and zamindars in the whole history of British India. Further, he insisted on not accepting a position that would “compromise with the decision of the legislature”.19

However, at this juncture, the All India Congress Committee (AICC) intervened and deputed Rajendra Prasad to participate in the proposed conference. It, however, viewed the bill as “very reasonable and necessary in the interests of both the parties”.20 Interestingly, Sardar Patel also advised Das to give a patient hearing to the people whenever there was a genuine demand from any of them, even though it would be somewhat “awk-ward for you” at this stage after the bill had already passed in the assembly. He advised Das, “You can put the Government’s point of view firmly and confront the zamindars with facts and figures; but it should not mean that you are prepared to enter into some act of settlement with zamindars.”21

Referring to the reports of the Madras Land Act Committee and the Madras Agricultural Debtors Relief Bill (passed by the Madras government) around this period, which were pro-tenant in character and offered immense relief to the peasants, Das noted that the ryots of south Orissa could have availed themselves of such benefits if south Orissa were in Madras. And he reiterated, “My bill as accepted by the Assembly gives the landholders many times more than what was reserved for them under the Permanent Settlement regulations, though it reduced the pres-ent income.”22 The governor’s conference on Madras Estates

18 Ibid.19 LC, “B. Das to Governor, Orissa”, Vol. I, 2 August 1938.20 Ibid.21 LC, “Sardar Patel to Das”, Vol. I, 2 August 1938.22 LC, “Das to Governor”, Vol. I, 20 October 1978. The Samaja (11 November 1938) also criticized the opposition’s earlier demand for dropping the bill and awaiting the decision of Madras Estates Land Act Amendment Bill sponsored by the Madras government. It said that the nature of the Madras bill as passed


Land Act commenced on 1 February 1939, where the rajas of Khallikote and Paralakhemundi and the zamindars of Surangi represented the opposition while Rajendra Prasad acted as the observer. In the conference, Das lamented the obstinacy on the part of landed elements over the bill and cited as examples the radical nature of tenancy legislations passed in Madras and Bihar. He admitted that the government had refrained from initiating such measures in Orissa but cautioned: “... people of Orissa have been watching what was happening in Madras and Bihar all of which made the position of the Ministry exceedingly difficult”.23 He, therefore, urged the landlords to cooperate by supporting the bill. At the same time, Das rejected the possibil-ity of any compromise with the landlords as their terms were unacceptable.24

In this connection, it is important to note that the “rightist” forces, led by Nilakantha Das (President, PCC, in 1939) and Chintamani Mishra (editor of the conservative and pro-zamindar newspaper Lokmata), grouped into an anti-ministry faction and levelled serious charges against the bill. They pointed out that since the bill was expropriatory, it ran the risk of the governor not giving his assent to it. Besides, they said that the bill was not for the benefit of the ryots or under-ryots but for the personal benefit of the PM. They also condemned Das’s refusal to seek a compromise with the landlords over the bill.25 Responding to the charges, Das argued that the bill was endorsed by the Congressmen at Digapahandi, where Nilakantha Das and Goda-varish Mishra were present and had welcomed the bill, adding that the question of local-level compromise had not fructified.26

was more far-reaching and drastic in its character in being pro-tenant and it would considerably reduce the income of the zamindars. The Madras committee, it pointed out, “has recommended that the rent should be brought down to the level prevailing in 1802 when the Permanent Settlement was introduced in the Madras Presidency … and rent for trees should be lowered to the level of 1802 and all other miscellaneous rents should be abolished and the management of the zamindari forest should be taken over by the Government …’ In view of this, it asked, “What grounds do the south Orissa zamindars have against the Orissa measure?” 23 LC, “Hubback to Linlithgow”, 9 February 1939.24 Reform Office, “B. Das to Hubback”, F. No. 32/4/39, 26 July 1939.25 AICC Papers, “Chintamani Mishra to Patel”, F. No. PL-7.26 AICC Papers, Report of the Enquiry Committee Made against Prime Minister Biswanath Das, F. No. PL-7.


However, on the question of the PM’s personal interest being served through the bill, the report of the enquiry made by the AICC to probe the charges against Biswanath Das made very interesting observations:

It is true that Prime Minister himself being the member of a family which holds ryots lands in zamindari of Khallikote will be benefited by the Bill but there are thousands of other tenants who will get the benefit of the bill. The Prime Minister does not gain as such by being a tenant in Khallikote zamindari as he loses by being a zamindar of some other villages and inamdar [holder of a rent-free grant] in respect of another village … The reduction in rent that his family would be entitled to claim under the bill cannot exceed Rs 3 to 4 thousand [sic] in all. His family owns four villages, three as landholder and one as inamdar. The bill would affect all the four villages. The reduction in rent that his family would have to give to their tenants would come to Rs 3,000 in case of one village and in case of another village Rs 6,000/-. A similar reduction of Rs 3,000 per annum would have to be given in the other two villages. His family thus stands to lose about Rs 6,000 annually by virtue of new legislation on account of reduction of rent in respect of villages which they held as land-holders and gain about Rs 3,000 and Rs 4,000 annually, which they would claim as reduction in their own rent in respect of lands which they held as tenants.

In September 1939, when approached over the issue of secur-ing consent to the bill, Linlithgow held that the advice of the parliamentary sub-committee meant a modification of the scheme as outlined in the Madras Estates’ Land (Orissa Amendment) Bill, which the ministry was not adhering to.27 The PCC, nev-ertheless, held on to the original position of the bill as passed by the assembly and urged immediate assent. We have seen how in Ganjam, under the leadership of Banamali Maharana, the kisan sabha had threatened to launch a satyagraha28 by 1 June 1939, in case the bill was not approved, and had asked the ministry to resign. Moreover, the AICC was apprehensive of refusal of the assent to the bill and appealed to the Congress and kisan sabha in Orissa to carry on intensive propaganda for the passing of the bill.29

27 LC, “Das to Hubback”, Vol. I, 5 September 1939.28 National Front, Vol. II, No. 23, 28 May 1939. For details, see the chapter “Peas-ant Movement in Orissa (1935–39)”.29 National Front, Vol. II, No. 15, 19 March 1939.


The ministry resigned in November 1939, but even after the resignation, the PCC campaigned for assent to the bill. It passed a resolution in February 1940 stating that “it would hereafter be difficult to exercise restraining influence on the electorate”30 in view of the delay in assent to the bill. Finally, the bill was vetoed in 1941 by the Governor-General on the grounds that the agrar-ian issue was complicated and there had been no preliminary negotiation conducted by the provincial government with the representatives of the landholders and tenants.31 Thus, the bill met with an unfortunate death after a long campaign of three years. However, it was an indicator of the fact that the Congress made a systematic effort to combine agrarian reforms with its struggle against colonialism through acceptance of office.

Orissa Tenancy (Amendment) Bill

The immediacy for bringing in tenancy legislation by the Con-gress ministry, once it accepted office, emerged from the fact that the Congress manifesto had clearly advocated the amend-ment of tenancy acts in various respects to the detriment of landlords and in defence of tenants. It had promised reduction of rents and water rates by half as well as remission of arrears of rent and revenue.32 In fact, the radical manifesto had helped the sweeping success of the Congress in the election. The bill introduced in the assembly on 25 September 1937 aimed at33 (i) abolition of mutation fee, (ii) providing tenants the right to cut trees, (iii) reducing the rate of interest on arrears of rent from 12.5 to 6 per cent and (iv) abolition of illegal levies. Besides, the bill made provisions for absolute rights of the occupancy tenants over plants, flowers and fruits; and to fell, utilize or dispose of timber of any tree on their lands. However, where the rights of landlords on these things had been established in civil courts, the tenants had to apply to the collector and pay a reasonable compensation.

The ministry rejected the demand of the opposition for the circulation of the bill to elicit public opinion and instead referred

30 Reform Office, “B. Das to Hubback”, F. No. 32/4/39, 17 February 1940.31 IAR, Vol. I, 1941, p. 37.32 Chopra, Towards Freedom, Vol. I, pp. 113–14.33 IAR, Vol. I, 1938, p. 262.


it to a select committee. In this connection, revenue minister Nityananda Kanungo observed: “The measure which was over-due should not be delayed.”34 The opposition, represented by landed elements, characterized the bill as “revolutionary and expropriatory”. Brajasundar Das asserted that the bill “smells of Leninism” and would emasculate the landlord class of its predominant rights.35 Biswanath Das, countering the opposition’s views on the legislation, observed that it was an “irony of fate” to use terms like “revolution” and “expropriation” for a bill which gave a small concession to peasants though, in fact, it would touch landholders’ income by only 5 per cent. Admitting that the Orissa ministry was more sympathetic to landlords in-sofar as it had not levied death duties nor agricultural income tax as in other provinces, he cautioned that there should be no opposition to such a moderate bill, particularly in the context of the surging nationalism, which was overthrowing autocracy in other countries.36 Kanungo was equally sharp in explaining the objective of the ministry vis-à-vis the bill. He went on to observe: “The wishes of the majority must be respected and greatest good of the greatest number must be achieved; the society must accordingly be adjusted on that basis … [there is] no purpose in extinguishing any sections but there must be readjustment of rights.”37

On the issue of mutation fee, the PM said, “… the bill gives no absolute economic relief, but takes away the rights the landlords secured at a stage when people did not have power in their hands.” Attacking the landed elements, he justified the legislation, observing that “they are able to see the vision of life—they see the danger ahead … they see unless small things are done by themselves, they as a class will be scrapped”. He wondered how long one could enjoy advantages which had “nothing to do with popular feelings and sentiments and much less with economic life and existence”.38

The opposition brought in quite a few amendments. The raja of Madhupur suggested that landlords and ryots “shall have

34 Ibid.35 OLAP, Vol. II, 1937, pp. 844 and 894.36 OLAP, Vol. II, 1937, pp. 899–901.37 Ibid.38 Ibid.


equal share in timber and flowers … whether planted before or after the commencement of the Act”. He also said that ryots “shall not be entitled to plant any tree … without the consent of the landlord”.39 Two other curious amendments proposed by the opposition were: “(a) any lawful compensation paid by a tenant to a landlord … shall not be deemed as illegal exactions; (b) mistakes in calculating and apportioning rent … be taken as illegal exactions”.40

Besides, on the issue on non-transferability, the opposition proposed an amendment advocating the following principles:41 (i) principles of non-transferability to be adopted in cases of tenants having just 3 acres of arable land; (ii) mutation fee to be abolished by degrees without upsetting the landlord’s income; (iii) principle of primogeniture to be adopted for restricting the transfer of land.

Commenting on the “evil effects of the legislation”, an oppo-sition member, Khan Bahadur Saiyyad Ahmed Baksa, observed that the bill did not merely intend to bring about betterment of tenants but “desired to kill the landlord” and the abolition of mutation fee would lead to the “extinction of middle class”. He deplored that by depriving the landlords of their rights to trees and vesting these rights in tenants arbitrarily, the legisla-tion contravened all principles of justice.42

Reacting to the opposition’s allegation that the bill was one-sided, Das asked “if any legislation affecting the interests of landlords in any province was ever hailed by zamindars as a welcome measure?” He further elaborated:

It is clear that even when the ryots had planted trees on their hold-ings, the landlords could claim a share of the produce or something like that as that was based upon custom; if burning of widows was a sacred custom, it is good for us that it has been stopped. Customs that are bad and unconscionable should be done away with.43

Similarly, Kanungo observed:

39 OLAP, Vol. II, 1937, pp. 1249–50.40 Ibid.41 OLAP, Vol. II, Part II, 1938, p. 1393.42 OLAP, Vol. II, 1937, p. 919.43 OLAP, Vol. II, 1937, pp. 1190, 1191, and 1246.


All impositions on a tenant in addition to or in excess of the rent lawfully payable shall be illegal and all stipulations and reservations for the payment thereof shall be void, the fact that an imposition is made over and above legal rent due will be prima facie proof that exaction was imposed on him.44

The opposition’s viewpoint was sharply reflected in the press through their mouthpiece, the Asha.45 It observed that the leg-islation was not likely to benefit the tillers of the soil (the real ryots); rather, it would help the middle class—the inamdars, the traders and the moneylenders—all of whom stood between the zamindars and the real ryots. It hailed the raja of Khallikote’s demand in the assembly that the rights of sub-tenants and actual tillers of soil be defined in the Tenancy Act, before any benefit accrued to the tenants at the cost of zamindari. The justification for this demand, the paper pointed out, was that the remission of rent, as enjoined in the tenancy legislation, would benefit only persons like the PM and not his sub-tenants.

Commenting on the limitations of the bill, the radical news-paper The Samaja commented that the legislation was incomplete and one-sided and was introduced to give certain satisfactions to the impatient ryots and warned the ministry that the bill “can-not satisfy all sections of people”.46 It further pointed out that the bill “represents a very small part of the relief”47 promised to

44 OLAP, Vol. II, 1937, p. 1950.45 Asha (28 September 1937), under the title “The Real Exploiters of Raiyats”, commented:“[The exploitation of the middle class such as inamdar, the traders and the moneylenders] drives out the poor raiyat from his land and he is ultimately forced to leave his country for distant places like Assam and Rangoon … This middle class never touches the plough but takes a share of the produce grown by the raiyat by the sweat of his brow … Biswanath Das was one of the big tenants [of the raja of Khallikote] and possessed hundred acres of land which he did not till himself … the real cause of regret of the raja was not so much to lose certain portions of his income as that the middle class such as that to which the CM belonged, would really benefit by the measures proposed at the cost of the zamindars and that the position of the real tillers of the soil would grow worse.”46 The Samaja (24 September 1937) severely criticized the bill on the grounds that it did not contain any provision to remove the difficulties of baheldars, bajiaptidars and intermediate tenure holders since their number was much less compared to stithiban ryots (tenants enjoying occupancy rights for more than 12 years).47 The Samaja (6 May 1938) observed that by the abolition of mutation fees and illegal exactions, the economic distress of the cultivators would not be


the poor tenants in the Congress election manifesto; and saw no reason for the delay in the consent to the bill by the governor. Kanungo defined the objective of the legislation as “greatest good of the greatest number” and “to create better relations between landlords and tenants” so that “body politic in India should grow up as one nation”.48 However, he conceded that the bill was not complete by itself as the Government of India Act did not permit radical changes in the social structure.

The bill was finally passed with the following provisions:49

(a) Reduction of the rate of interest on arrears of rents from 12.5 per cent to 6 per cent despite the opposition’s demand to lower it to only 9 per cent

(b) Provision of regular trial by the collector or deputy collector with fines as penalty (of Rs 500 or simple imprisonment of six months) in case of imposition of illegal levies or exactions from tenants

(c) A special officer to be appointed for thorough overhauling and complete unification of tenancy laws in Orissa

However, before the report could be ready, the ministry had to resign.

Moneylenders Bill

Rural indebtedness was a major feature of the nineteenth- century Orissa economy. The evil persisted till the 1930s when the nationalist leadership attempted certain measures to relieve the peasants of such a monstrous burden. The report submitted by the Bihar and Orissa Provincial Banking Enquiry Committee (1929–30) clearly brought out the existing high rates of interest on agrarian loans.50 The ministry undertook to deal with the

removed. Such provisions should be made, in its opinion, as would increase the value of the land and its income, so that people might take to agriculture as a profitable occupation.48 IAR, Vol. I, 1938, p. 268.49 Ibid.50 Report of the Bihar and Orissa Provincial Banking Enquiry Committee 1929–30, Vol. I, p. 32. The report pointed out, “In the Orissa coastal districts much of the annual borrowing for seed and maintenance is in kind. The general rate is 25 per cent


problem in right earnest from the beginning. In the light of the Banking Enquiry Committee’s report, it proposed in the Mon-eylenders Bill of 1938 to fix the rate of interest at 9 per cent on secured loans and 12 per cent on unsecured loans. The proposed legislation also advocated for the old Hindu law of damdaputa (of interest not exceeding the amount of principal) in scaling down of interest rates. Besides, registration of moneylenders and prohibition of compound interest were also mooted.51 Moving the bill, Biswanath Das outlined the context and objectives of the legislation as offering protection to the debtors, ensuring pay-ment to the creditors, and saving the debtors and particularly the agricultural debtors who were threatened by the consequences of economic depression.52 He warned that “the existing pat-tern of credit system” would lead to serious agrarian trouble. He made a serious critique of the contractual practices of the existing credit system and compound interest.

Referring to the opposition’s demand for dropping the proposal for registration of moneylenders, Das lashed out: “We are not accustomed to backdoor method; if we at all choose to attack, it will be a frontal attack; we want a straight-forward approach and try to find a remedy.”53 He justified the move for registration of moneylenders on the ground that, with moneylending becoming a registered business, the government and the law courts could intervene and control the business.54 The fall in the value of land as well as house property adversely affecting taxable and

payable soon after the harvest, the loan running for a period of four to eight months only. For seed grain, however, 50 per cent is frequently demanded. On the other hand, an occasional rate of 20 per cent is met with. For cash loans, the rate of 18 3/4

per cent for the full year is not infrequent, but the general rate is either 25 or 37 ½ per cent depending on the credit worthiness of the borrower. For loans on registered bonds without specific security rates of 15 to 25 per cent are met with, while for regular mortgages the rate sometimes falls to 12 per cent. Sudden emergencies such as the need of money for the railway fare to go to Calcutta in search of work (a common feature of rural life in these districts) may tempt a moneylender to put the rate up to 50 per cent to cover the risk of the emigrant not returning to his home. The little business that is done by other agencies than the ordinary village mahajan is done on terms which vary widely from 18 3/4

¾ to 75 per cent.”51 OLAP, Vol. II, Part I, 1938–39, pp. 151–52.52 OLAP, Vol. III, Part I, 1938–39, p. 130.53 OLAP, Vol. III, Part I, 1938–39, p. 162.54 OLAP, Vol. III, Part I, 1938–39, pp. 128–30.


borrowing capacity was the rationale behind the legislation, the PM emphasized. However, he added that the legislation “in the present form was still not totally perfect compared to the vast-ness of the problems” and sought to provide a certain amount of protection to the classes of people who needed “protection more at this hour or the day”.55

He hit out at the opposition’s allegations that mahajans (the rich moneylenders) like Das, having money, had secured lands by depriving the cultivators and benefited at the expense of zamindars. In defence, Das argued:

We are out to protect the people both from moneylenders and zamindars … and if we have fallen short of our ideals which the country expects of us then we will be nowhere and the country will be [the] best judge of your action and ours.56

However, he once again focused on the intimate enemy, the clutches of colonialism, as the major irritant against any attempt at a radical measure, when he observed, “If India were free today it would have taken a far more stringent measure than this bill that was being piloted.... Has not England in the course of three days revolutionised its monetary system?”57

It is interesting to note that E.M. Evans, a nominated member, hailed the legislation saying that people borrowing money at 30 per cent, 40 per cent or 50 per cent would now borrow at 9 per cent for secured debts and 12 per cent on unsecured debts under the principle of damdaputa which would be definitely beneficial. He commented that debtors like the “dumb crowd” look to the members of the house for relief in the face of moneylenders’ organized opposition to kill the bill.58

55 OLAP, Vol. III, Part II, 1938–39, p. 782.56 OLAP, Vol. III, Part I, 1938–39, p. 162. The Asha (11 July 1939) commented, “Of the three ministers of Orissa, two are well-known moneylenders and it is said that Hon’ble Mr Nityanada Kanungo, before he became minister, used to lend money at an interest of 25 per cent and the Hon’ble Mr Biswanath Das belongs to a family whose prosperity is due to money lending.” It further pointed out the limitations of the legislation, stating that it was meant to benefit a few as it did not make allowances for the debtors who had borrowed money from the government, banks, cooperative societies to improve agriculture or increase the fertility of the land, nor did it incorporate provisions to protect the tenants whose land was sold for paying off the zamindar’s rent, etc.57 OLAP, Vol. III, Part II, 1938–39, p. 778.58 OLAP, Vol. III, Part I, 1938–39, pp. 148–50.


Looking at the stand taken up by the ruling Congress in advocating tenancy legislation, it becomes evident that the ministry put in a systematic effort to integrate the need for agrarian reform with its struggle against colonialism. As has been pointed out at different stages, the ministry came to represent popular hopes by initiating such legislations openly, admitting its inadequacies in undertaking full-fledged reforms due to the stranglehold of colonialism. Yet, within its limited scope, the ministry revealed a certain capacity to undermine the semi-hegemonic rule of the Raj by providing the ministry a popular and representative character. Kanungo, reflecting on the inadequacies of the agrarian legislation, deplored the dif-ficulties in the way of bringing “radical change in the existing social structure” under the existing Act of 1935. He equally ac-cepted the fact that such measures of legislation could not be “complete in themselves”.59

The ministry, to a certain extent, reflected the ideals of the Left and distanced itself from the pressure of the right-wing forces as far as tenancy legislation was concerned. For instance, the right-wing Asha observed that the ministers were influenced by socialist ideas, because, it argued, the confiscatory provisions of the Madras Estates Land Bill certainly smacked of such an idea, even though the bill might or might not have been actuated by a desire to distribute the zamindari of the zamindars among the tenants.60 The analysis of the nature and role of mobilization of the peasantry by the Congress leadership and its efforts at translating the election promises and popular expectations into concrete tenancy legislation at least point to a subtle strategy. The strategy which the ministry followed was one of expos-ing the inadequacies of the Act of 1935 not only by constantly fomenting popular demands but also by trying to satisfy them to a limited extent. The limitations were meant to convince the people of the illegitimacy of foreign rule. Consequently, the leadership, far from being co-opted by the reformed legislature,

59 OLAP, Vol. III, Part II, 1938–39, p. 2091.60 The Asha (20 November 1939) ascribed the reason for the passing of Madras Estates Land Bill to the inspiration exerted by the socialist ideas though it might not have been taken up due to the pressure of socialism [socialists inside the Congress]. It also added, “It is on account of this Bill, that the administration is being accused of expropriation.”


used office acceptance to fight the official policy of co-option underlying the Act of 1935.

The failure to take more radical steps for transformation was crucially due to the stranglehold of colonialism and the very limited scope of reform available under the Act of 1935, as re-peatedly emphasized by the Ministers. Besides, an all-out war against the landed elements could not have been possible so long as the ministry was conscious of the fact that its greatest enemy was colonialism and not the internal vested interests like landlords and moneylenders. The Congress, being a multi-class movement, under any circumstances (more so in the context of acceptance of office) had to follow a strategy of adjusting “mutually clashing class interests” to sharpen the fight against imperialism. In other words, the only viable option before the ministry was to “neutralize” the landed elements as far as pos-sible. It is important to note that official acceptance was just a part of the struggle against colonialism and not a fight to finish a class which either could be neutralized in the fight against colonialism or at best not found to ally fully with the colonial rulers. To put it briefly, it was the very centrality of “class adjustment” that lay behind the ministry’s approach towards tenancy legislation. Finally, it was not all that easy to find instant or quick solutions to the agrarian problems due to the complex and complicated nature of the agrarian structure and the issue of moneylending within a short period of 28 months in which the Congress exercised its so-called power.

Other Measures by the Ministry

The other significant socio-economic measures undertaken by the ministry are briefly discussed in this section.

Orissa Co-operative Land Mortgage Bank Bill

The Congress ministry took interest in restructuring the co-operative movement in Orissa.61 A report suggesting several measures for the reorganization of the cooperative movement

61 The Samaja, 16 April 1938.


was submitted to the government by Devasikhamani Mudaliar (retired from the position of Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Madras), who was commissioned to conduct the enquiry.62 The Orissa Co-operative Land Mortgage Bank Bill, as introduced in the assembly, sought to extend loan facilities to the ryots at a low rate of interest from the mortgage bank for development of land and other agricultural purposes.63 A sub-committee was appointed to examine the bill and spell out amendments. On the basis of Mudaliar’s report, it was agreed upon to form a provincial cooperative bank to act as the nodal agency for all the cooperative banks of the province.64

Orissa Small Holders Relief Act

The ministry enacted a measure to safeguard the economic interest of small peasant proprietors holding not more than 6 acres of irrigated land or 12 acres of other land and who were cultivating the land themselves or through farmhands. The Orissa Small Holders Relief Act also sought to prevent the eviction of small holders and the attachment and sale of their movable property. The act extended protection to the small landholders too by making provisions under which the land belonging to them could not be sold to recover the debt pending against them by the decree holders of the civil courts.65

Measures Concerning Industries

The Congress government paid due attention to the promotion of industries, though its capacity to do so was limited. Respond-ing to popular demand66 for the revival of the salt industry in Orissa, it deputed Jagannath Mishra, Parliamentary Secretary, to study the salt industry in Bengal and Madras. On his recom-mendation, the ministry decided to launch a demonstration farm

62 Ibid.63 OLAP, Vol. II, Part I, 1917, pp. 55–66.64 Ibid.65 Jadu Nath Mahapatra, Orissa in 1936–37 to 1938–39, Cuttack, 1941, p. 37.66 IAR, 1939, Vol. I, p. 409. In fact, the PCC had passed a resolution to the effect that people should be allowed to manufacture and sell salt, free of duty, as salt was the only subsidiary industry for the people of Orissa.


in Astaranga, Puri, for salt manufacturing.67 But the ministry had to face constitutional impediment in its efforts at large-scale promotion of salt industry, as salt was not covered under the provincial items under the Act of 1935.

The khadi industry was accorded special attention. Promotion of the use of khaddar was sought to be done by asking officials to take to wearing khadi and also to purchase swadeshi goods.68 The assembly passed a resolution endorsing the use of khadi as official uniform.69

The ministry also undertook efforts to recognize small-scale industries such as manufacture of various articles from animal horn, tanning and filigree making. Government grants were sanctioned for Madhusudan Village Industries, which imparted training in weaving, hand-spinning and other village-based industries to 50 selected probationers who also received government stipend. The idea was that the probationers, after completion of this training, would impart training to the people in village industries. An experiment to produce gur (molasses) from palmyra and date palm juice was also taken up. In fact, 75 workers were trained to popularize the expertise for this at village levels. All these efforts by the ministry were in keeping with the Gandhian village reconstruction drive. In fact, during this period, Gopabandhu Choudhury’s Bari Gandhian ashram became an active centre for experimenting in and promotion of honey, date palm sugar, paper, pottery and kathau (wooden footwear).70

Welfare of the Backward Classes

Biswanath Das reiterated the ministry’s commitment to the welfare of Harijans and backward classes in his maiden budget speech. He observed, “It is our earnest desire that these classes, kept backward and depressed, should have their due place in society and make their best contribution to the highest well-being of the country.”71 In accordance with this commitment,

67 OLAP, Vol. I, Part I, 1937, pp. 55–56.68 OLAP, Vol. I, 1937, p. 149.69 Ibid., p. 157.70 Niankhunta, 16 June 1938.71 OLAP, Vol. I, 1937, p. 55.


subsidies were granted to the Spinners’ Association to encourage spinning and weaving among the people of the pana (Harijan) caste of Angul. Harijans of Sambalpur and Angul were given permission to freely use forests for rearing cocoons. A build-ing named Kaibalya Kutira was run on government grants as a hostel for Harijans. Government departments were asked to accord preference to Harijans in the matter of appointments.72 The government also made provisions for stipends, scholarships, remission of fees, free supply of books and slates as well as ensuring hostel facilities to Harijan students.73

Measures Concerning Prohibition

Even though revenue to the tune of Rs 34 lakh was raised from the sale of excise articles like opium, ganja and alcoholic drinks, the Congress ministry, true to its Gandhian commitment, resolved to take up measures on prohibition. The district of Balasore had gained notoriety for having the maximum number of opium addicts in the whole of India. The ministry dealt with this menace by closing down all opium shops (except 14 shops on the borders of the district) from 15 October 1938. Provisions were, however, made to supply opium to addicts (after due medical examination to ascertain whether they were regular opium-eaters) at fixed rates. They were required to register themselves in the specified centres. Besides, carrying of opium to the district of Balasore from other parts of the province was banned. A “prohibition officer” was appointed to monitor the implementation of the scheme.74 Thus, the ministry tried to address the problem of opium addiction through a policy of restricted and regulated sale of opium backed by a campaign against opium addiction.75

The ministry also initiated measures like banning of the sale of intoxicants after sunset, prohibiting the carrying of alcoholic drinks back home from a shop after purchase, discouraging the

72 IAR, Vol. II, 1938, p. 245.73 Government of Orissa at Work: Work of Congress Ministry (1937–38), Cuttack, 1939, p. 19.74 The Samaja, 10 October 1938.75 Home Political Department (HPD), Fortnightly Report (FNR), 17 October 1938.


sale of toddy, restricting issue of licences to excise shops (for instance, all shops that opened in 1937–38 were closed down) and shifting the excise shops from sensitive localities.76 The Opium (Orissa Amendment) Bill and the Orissa Prohibition Bill were passed in the assembly with the central objective of ensuring total prohibition in the province by appointing excise officers to deal with offences covered under the Opium Act.

Jail Reforms

The ministry also proceeded to give the prison environment a humane look by abolishing the gradation of political prisoners into A, B and C categories. All political prisoners were hence-forth treated as A-class prisoners, with all privileges except certain items of food.77 Spinning and activities related to cot-tage industry were launched as a part of vocational occupation for the prisoners to enhance their economic productivity. The “inhuman” elements of the Criminal Tribes Act were sought to be removed by allowing more freedom to those under its purview, particularly the Dandasi tribe of Ganjam, to ensure a full-fledged growth of their personalities.78 Interestingly, the practice of bowing down to any of the colonial officials by the prisoners and wishing Sarkar Salam—a ridiculous colonial prac-tice—was also discontinued.

Civil Liberties

The maiden performance of the ministry when it took office was to declare the release of all political prisoners.79 Political prosecu-tions were also withdrawn. Restrictions on the organization of public meetings and taking out demonstrations without licence were revoked. The ministry also repealed the emergency pow-ers vested in the executive: a provision contained in the Bihar and the Orissa Public Safety Act.80 The proscription of books

76 OLAP, Vol. IV, 1939, p. 10.77 OLAP, Vol. IV, 1939, p. 23.78 Government of Orissa at Work (1938–39), p. 11.79 Harekrushna Mahatab, ed., History of Freedom Movement in Orissa, Vol. IV, Cuttack, 1969, pp. 5–7.80 HPD, FNR, 14 December 1937.


and leaflets imposed since 1930 was removed too. The press was to be rescued from the clutches of colonial restrictions by refunding the deposits of newspapers and printing presses.81 The police manual was given a new look by revising the old rules and instilling in the police a sense of duty towards the people.82 A branch of the Indian Civil Liberties Union also started functioning after the formation of the Congress ministry, with Bichitrananda Das as president and Lingaraj Mishra (both Das and Mishra were MLAs) and Laxmi Narayan Sahu (Servants of India Society) as vice-presidents to focus on the infringement of civil liberties in the Orissa states.83

The Ministry’s Position over the Governor’s Leave

One of the constitutional issues over which the ministry got involved deserves mention here. Hubback, Governor of Orissa, was granted leave from 5 May 1938, and J.R. Dain, Revenue Com-missioner, was officially appointed to function as the governor during his absence. This decision was, in fact, effected without consulting the ministry. This decision led to vehement opposition from the ministry, which objected on the grounds that a person subordinate to the provincial government could not act as the governor of the province, nor could any decision for such an appointment be taken without consulting the ministry.84

The issue was widely debated not only in the province but also in the whole of India. The AICC, under Subhash Chandra Bose, condemned the decision and urged the Governor-General to appoint the Chief Justice as the acting governor.85 Gandhi and Patel also put their weight behind the campaign of the Orissa ministry. Finally, the ministry decided that in case the order was not revised, they would resign on 5 May 1938—the date of the new governor’s assumption of office.

The campaign against the decision was intensely highlighted during the National Week Celebration in Orissa (6–13 April

81 Mahapatra, Orissa in 1936–37 to 1938–39, p. 20.82 Lal Mohan Patnaik, Resurrected Orissa, Cuttack, 1941, p. 92; HPD, FNR, 28 April 1938.83 HPD, FNR, 14 September 1938.84 Nanda Kishore Das, Mo Jiban Janjala Kahani (Oriya), Cuttack, 1981, p. 114.85 IAR, Vol. I, 1938, p. 306.


1938).86 The PCC fully backed the decision of the ministry to resign on the issue. A resolution passed by the PCC called upon the people of the province to be in readiness for any emergency.87 But when Das was about to tender his resignation, Hubback averted the crisis by cancelling his leave “in the interest of the province”. This was regarded as a victory in the Congress circles, as also in popular perception.88 This incident also reflects the ministry’s ever-preparedness to face a constitutional deadlock while working out the 1935 Act.

On an overall estimate, during its brief spell of 24 months, the Congress ministry sought to enhance the nationalist hegemony by projecting the Congress as the representative of popular opinion, despite immense constitutional constraints enjoined under the Act of 1935. The ministry’s track record, in terms of redressing rural-level grievances through tenancy legislations and initiating socio-economic developments in a limited manner, and (more importantly) securing civil liberties for the people in general and the states’ people in particular, was quite impres-sive. Moreover, the ministry sought to function assertively by threatening to resign when it felt that a significant issue was involved. This in fact sent the right signal to the people: that the ministry was very much a part of the Congress struggle against colonialism. Besides, the ministry’s functioning was meant to show the people that Indians had the ability to rule themselves. The following excerpt from the article written by Mohan Das (Secretary, Socialist Provincial Youth League), published in Krushak, sums up the popular opinion on the ministry:

After the resignation of the Congress Ministry, I got the occasion to tour in most parts of the Puri Sadar sub-division and explain the present situation to the people in public meetings … They feel pride and joy that their ministers have come away tendering resignation. Anxiety for achieving Swaraj has been expressed in all quarters and the eagerness of the people to stand by their ministers would be evident if the Government were to dissolve the legislature and order re-election.89

86 Mahatab, History of Freedom Movement, Supplement, p. 9.87 HPD, FNR, 28 April 1938.88 N.K. Das, Mo Jiban Janjala Kahani, p. 114; HPD, FNR, 14 May 1938.89 Krushak, 9 December 1939.

This chapter serves broadly as a background to the Quit India Movement and attempts to examine the nature of mobilization of peasants, tribals and workers, and the attendant popular percep-tion during 1940–41. Besides, it maps “individual satyagraha” in a separate section. These developments are also read along with peculiar developments in Orissa in the shape of factions within the Provincial Congress Committee (PCC), leading to the installation of a “coalition ministry” and the rejection of assent to the Madras Estates Land Bill by the Viceroy. The overall scenario of war serves as a continuing theme of all the sub-sec-tions contained in the chapter. While dealing with individual satyagraha, an attempt has been made to locate the form and extent of popular mobilization under its strategy, thus assessing its strength and viability as a method of struggle. This satyagraha should be seen as a strategy linked to the broad mass move-ment which emerged in 1942, insofar as it mobilized people and kept them ready for the subsequent onslaught on imperialism. In other words, the strategy of the individual satyagraha went into the making of the forceful anti-imperialist and anti-feudal sweep characterizing the 1942 struggle.

Six

Return to Agitation: Signalling Quit India, 1940–41

Return to Agitation 249

Pattern of Peasant and Worker Mobilization, 1940

The resignation of the Congress ministry in November 1939 was accompanied by the simultaneous process of elevating the peasants’ movement to a new high and placing peasant consciousness on the path of progressive transformation. Thus, despite the outbreak of World War II (September 1939) and the consequent imperialist repression against the anti-war stance of the leadership, the peasant movement continued to maintain a fair degree of momentum. Let us analyze this trend briefly to locate the immediate context of the Quit India Movement.

One of the dominant issues around which peasant mobiliza-tion occurred during this period was the Madras Estates Land (Orissa Amendment) Bill, which was finally refused consent by the Viceroy in February 1941. We have observed earlier how massive peasant mobilization in Ganjam was organized over this bill till the end of 1939. Coinciding with the resignation of the Congress ministry, several meetings as well as the Kisan Rally Week were organized in Aska, Kudala, Patrapur, Kalyanpur, Samantrapalli and Gurandi, demanding early consent to the bill by the Viceroy. Biswanath Das, who addressed these meetings, indicated the lines of the satyagraha to be organized after the approval and support of the All India Congress Committee (AICC) and the PCC, in case consent to the bill was withheld. The people of Phasi village (Athagada estate) marched in a demonstration to the district magistrate (DM) and submitted an unsigned resolution to him (addressed to the Viceroy), say-ing that it had been passed by all the ryots in the village. The resolution demanded immediate consent to the bill and rejected any plea for compromise over the issue. It characterized the bill as not very satisfactory insofar as the protection of the interests of the zamindari tenants was concerned, and yet called it a measure intended to save the ryots from the “present misery and exploitation” of the tenants.1

In March, a delegation comprising Dibakar Patnaik (MLA, Ganjam), Shyam Sundar Mishra, Laxmi Narayan Sahu (Servants of India Society) and Sachi Routrai (left-wing student activist,

1 Home Political Department (HPD), Fortnightly Report (FNR henceforth), Ganjam, 30 January 1940, Accession no. 1308 (ACC-1308).


and a peasant leader by this time) attended the fifth session of the All India Kisan Conference.2 A delegation of 20 peasants from Paralakhemundi also attended the conference. The meet-ing with Swami Sahajananda and other peasant leaders in the conference gave these delegates the idea of launching a no-rent campaign back in Orissa, particularly in the Ganjam district and in Khurda.3 Around March, Dibakar Patnaik, Balaram Panda and Ramaballava Panda, in a meeting at Luhagudi (Ganjam), advised the tenants not to offer bethi (forced labour) to the government and to demand full payment for such work and to “resist by force” any attempt by the government to realise bethi through coercion. The villagers were also told not to give their dues to the Patros (village heads).4 Banamali Maharana kept circulating leaflets and making speeches in the usual militant tone,5 focusing on the grievances of the peasants. In Baliguda Agency, under the advice of the dismissed Samastanam Paik Hanu Majhi, tribals refused to work on government roads and buildings and refused payments to the Patros.6

The possibility of a no-rent campaign7 gathered strength around April in Ganjam after the Palasa Peasants’ Conference in the specific context of the long-pending Madras Estates Land Bill and an overall “hesitation in paying-up rents” in the za-mindari areas was experienced. This process was further helped by PCC’s weak control over Congress activists of Ganjam and involvement of communists in championing the cause. We come across evidence of tenants assaulting the police force by September in Kakharajolo village (Hinjli, Ganjam). The police had gone there to arrest a “suspected person”. The sub-inspec-tor (SI) who had led the force (10 in number) to the village was aware of the tension prevailing earlier in the village. Still, he went ahead with a small force and without any firearms. This resulted in a serious assault on the police by the people and a constable was killed.8

2 HPD, Inspector General (IG’s) Report, 5 April 1940, ACC-1371.3 Ibid.; HPD, Special Branch Report, 1 April 1940, ACC-1449.4 HPD, “Kisan Sabha and Agrarian Situation”, 22 March 1940, ACC-1371.5 Board of Revenue Records, “Chief Secretary (CS) to DM”, 15 April 1940, Sl No. 422.6 HPD, FNR, Ganjam, 27 April 1940, ACC-1308.7 HPD, “No rent campaign in Ganjam”, 19 May 1940, ACC-1441.8 HPD, FNR, Ganjam, 12 September 1940, ACC-1308. Also see: HPD, IG’s Report, 30 August 1941, ACC-2041.


The Congress organization in Ganjam reflected the sharp di-vision in the PCC in terms of two factions under the leadership of Dibakar Patnaik and Biswanath Das. The former advocated a more militant line in terms of a no-rent campaign, whereas Biswanath Das as usual pressed for the organization of a sa-tyagraha in case of refusal of assent to the Madras bill. Dibakar Patnaik represented the Nilakantha Das group (Forward Bloc adherents) in the PCC whereas Biswanath Das and Mahatab constituted the dominant leadership. It would not be out of place to suggest here that the advocacy of a more militant line of peasant mobilization by the faction of Nilakantha and Dibakar was more to oppose the ex-ministry faction than to genuinely take up the peasants’ cause.

Besides, certain associations of rich peasants of Khallikote and Athagada estates (like the one at Kudala Taluk) preferred and pressed for a compromise between the raja and the ten-ants over the Madras bill and sought immediate reduction of rents. That apart, the large-scale arrest of kisan activists and leaders in Ganjam (e.g., conviction of Maharana in September 1940) definitely dampened the militancy of the Ganjam peas-ants’ movement. Along with these trends, the campaign against contributions towards the war fund also existed in the district. The initiative for this drive had come from Maharana.9

The All India Kisan Day was observed in Puri district, particularly in Begunia and Astarang areas, on 1 September. Imperialist war policies were discussed and the need to devise means to prevent the British from “taking away men and money by force for the war” was stressed upon. Peasants were advised to initiate a “whisper campaign” in the villages against the war efforts and fund collection drive.10 Communist leaders like Fakir Chandra Mohanty (Bolgarh) advocated resistance to the drive for war fund collection as well as breaking of forest laws and withholding of rent payment.11

Unfortunately, we do not get enough details of the incident. The peasants involved in the incident were Ghana Sahu, Sudarshan Sahu, Dillip Sahu, Dina Sahu, Madhab Patra, Agadhu Sahu, Ganga Badita and others. The official enquiry held to probe the incident viewed the SI’s conduct as “irresponsible” and “irresolute”.9 HPD, FNR, Ganjam, 13 July 1940, ACC-1308.10 HPD, FNR, Puri, 14 August 1940, ACC-1285.11 HPD, “DM to CS”, Puri, 14 September 1940, ACC-1590.


Around September, the Poona AICC resolutions and its direc-tive on refusal of payment of compulsory subscriptions were published in Oriya booklets. Meetings were also organized to explain this to the people.12 Socialists like Kshetrabasi Mahanty and Lakhmidhar Mahapatra brought out anti-war posters un-der the titles of “Sahajyabad Dhwansa Heu” (“Down with the doctrine of help and cooperation”) and “Bhaira buku re chhura dei juddha chanda deuchha ki?” (“Are you stabbing the chests of your brothers by subscribing to the war fund?”).13 However, as elsewhere, large-scale arrests of left-wing leaders (who were most active in peasant mobilization in the district) such as Gokul Mohan Rai Churamani, Sadhu Charan Mahanty, Prananath Pat-naik and Purna Chandra Mahanty under the Defence of India Rules (DIR)14 dealt a major blow to the peasants’ movement of this district.

We also come across a pamphlet entitled “Ranabheri” (“War Trumpet”), which was circulated in Jaleswar haat in Balasore district. The pamphlet discussed the overall scenario of war and asked the kisans to refuse “war tax to hypocrite Britishers”. While advising peasants to form a “Young Volunteer Peace Corps” (“Yuvak Shanti Sena Dal”), it asked them to devise means to drive away the British and not to be “afraid of red pugrees” (meaning the police). One Natu Satpathy, who pasted the pamphlet on a tree in the haat, was arrested by the police but he refused to divulge his address, saying that his residence was in India.15

Banamali Das of Nilagiri Prajamandal fame stepped up the communist propaganda by circulating the communist leaflet “Agge Chala” (“Forward March”) in the villages.16 A book titled Chasabhai Gita17 (“Songs of the Peasants”), written around July 1939 by Jatindra Mohan Mohapatra, a student of Agarpara High School (Bhadrak), and published by the Students’ Federation of Agarapada, was considered for proscription in the year 1940. It reflected the concern of the youth as well as the intelligentsia for

12 HPD, FNR, Puri, 30 September 1940, ACC-1285.13 HPD, FNR, Puri, 29 November 1940, ACC-1285.14 HPD, FNR, Puri, 14 March 1940, ACC-1285.15 HPD, SP Report on Oriya Pamphlet “Ranabheri”, 4 June 1940, ACC-1495.16 HPD, FNR, Balasore, May 1940, ACC-1307.17 HPD, SP Report on the Book “Chasabhai Gita”, 12 April 1940, ACC-1450.


the peasantry. Basically a text with intense nationalist content, it appealed to the peasants to be fearless and join the non- violent struggle. It stressed upon all the Gandhian principles like swadeshi, boycott of foreign goods and Gandhian constructive activities like Harijan upliftment, anti-untouchability, anti-dowry, literacy and anti-alcoholic drinks campaigns. Besides, it advised the peasants to represent to the Congress all their grievances without leaving the organization “even if it is converted into 100 factions” (This was somewhat a reflection on the state of the PCC!). The poem also pointed to the stranglehold of imperialism when it warned the peasants that “just because the ministers of the province are Congressmen, don’t think you are saved; over them there are Governors, Viceroys …” The poem exhorted the zamindars and the vested interests to realize the fact that by oppressing tenants they were only serving colonial interests.

In Koraput, one again finds peasants’ meetings being used by the leadership to campaign against “forced” contributions to the war fund. Cyclostyled notices against such forced contribu-tions were issued in Nawarangpur under the initiative of Radha Mohan Sahu (MLA).18 In a meeting, addressed by Prof. Ranga in Gunupur, the peasants were promised a peasants’ government entirely manned by them on Russian ideals.19 Ranga attacked both imperialism and the internal exploiters like zamindars for their extravagant living and the oppression of the peasantry. However, the anti-feudal edge of the peasant movement in this district (as seen in the 1937–39 phase earlier) was blunter and the focus of attack shifted to imperialism through campaigns against war measures—a feature increasingly visible since May 1940, when the number of Congress meetings opposing war measures was stepped up.20

At this stage, we must turn our attention to Lakshman Naiko, a trainee of Nuaput camp in Koraput, to examine his style of leadership as well as his mobilization of peasantry in the pre-individual satyagraha phase. This is to be examined as a crucial aspect along with the overall peasant mobilization in Koraput during the 1937–39 phase. Understanding Lakshman Naiko in

18 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 27 September 1940, ACC-1306.19 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 13 February 1940, ACC-1306.20 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 12 May 1940, ACC-1306.


this phase21 assumes importance precisely because he was to later become a substantial force in the Quit India Movement.

On return to his village at Tentuligumma from the Nuaput camp in March 1938, Lakshman was a transformed political personality. The ideological weight of the camp had generated in him a much stronger commitment towards Gandhian ideals. In spite of belonging to an ethnic tribe, he not only gave up hunting and non-vegetarian food, but also tried to dissuade his fellow villagers from sacrificing animals before goddesses. That apart, he preached Gandhian constructive programmes such as use of khadi, spinning, cotton cultivation, non-violence and character-building for moral and economic regeneration of rural life. Lakshman’s father was the mustajar (headman) of Tentuligumma, Bejuniguda, Anlaguda and Lekiguda villages under the Jeypore zamindari. Lakshman succeeded his father to this position in 1930. He also owned nearly 80 acres of land. He utilized his position as a mustajar to further the campaign of Gandhian programmes by undertaking village reconstruc-tion activities like road-building, making provisions for irriga-tion facilities and introducing new techniques for cultivation. He moved from village to village, covering 30–40 miles a day, preaching the Congress and Gandhian policies and ideology and collecting subscriptions for the Congress fund. As a mustajar, he listened to the complaints of people regarding oppression by the zamindars, and the state and forest officials. Besides, he gave discourses on religion, Gandhi, use of khadi and the national movement to the people. He would exhort them:

Don’t fear; tell loudly whatever you have in your mind, otherwise you and your future generations would suffer…We must think a way out … Don’t fear the revenue inspector or the raja … the raja is

21 This reflection on Lakshman Naiko is mostly constructed on the basis of the views presented in Dasarathi Nanda’s book Sahid Laxman Naik (Berhampur, 1977), pp. 30–90. It is also interesting to note that Lakshman had come under the influence of Rampa rebellion led by Alluri Sitaram Raju (1922–24). Raju, it is reported, had been to Malkangiri, in the course of his wanderings. Besides, Lakshman had befriended one Chandra Kutia (a Koya youth who had joined the Rampa fituri [insurrection]) and learnt from him about the Rampa rebellion and the nature of rebels’ warfare. Under Chandra’s guidance, Lakshman mas-tered the use of gun. These factors must have shaped the youthful exuberance of Lakshman and helped in the tribal organization in his own area.


placed under British Government … they have arms and ammuni-tions … If we reject both the raja and the British Government nobody can terrorise us … This is what Gandhi, a great man of this country says … Gandhi has said that people should disobey the Government; [and] not to perform bethi and gudem [a form of feudal levy]. If a single man does it, the police will beat him, but if everybody does it, the Sahibs [the British] will quit this country.

In the process, Lakshman (himself being a mustajar) came to inaugurate a virtual no-rent campaign by advising fellow trib-als to hold back the payment of cesses to the ruler. Lakshman’s activities resulted in his losing his official position and being declared a rebel. The entire process of mobilization undertaken by Lakshman led to the people treating him as the Gandhi of the tribals of that tract.

The kisan sabha activities in Khariar (Sambalpur) were geared towards refusal of chari and ranawa (forms of feudal levies) to the zamindar, which continued alongwith attempts at negotia-tions with them.22

Similarly, in the Kanika, Aul and Dampara estates of Cuttack district, peasant movement as well as conflicts between petty landlords (like Samadhi Mutt, Sankarananda Mutt, Mahiprakash Mutt and Neuldas Mutt) and their respective peasants in Puri district continued, though in a muted form, as elsewhere.23 The floods in Cuttack and Balasore during July–August 1940, and the arrest of left-wing leaders (as seen in the context of Puri district), also considerably affected the pace of peasant move-ments in these districts.24

Another activity of this period was the opening of the kisan school at Jankia (Khurda), under the guidance of socialist lead-ers, to educate peasants on the war situation and other wartime developments.25 Here mention may also be made of the Gramya Mangal Samiti (which basically functioned for rural upliftment) at Lachinda village (Bargarh sub-division, Sambalpur), which had been instituted during the period of the Congress ministry to protect tenants’ interest against the oppression of gountias

22 HPD, FNR, Sambalpur (SBP), 2 June 1940, ACC-1305.23 Report on the Land Revenue Administration, “Districts of North Orissa for the Year 1938–39”, Cuttack, 1941, pp. 3–10.24 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, Balasore, July and August.25 HPD, FNR, Puri, 14 May 1940, 14 June 1940, ACC-1285.


(village headmen). It was revamped in 1940.26 A Congress volun-teer training camp, including the plan for a women volunteers’ section, was opened in Tunglibandhbi (Sohela, Sambalpur) to impart necessary training to village-level volunteers.27

The overall pace of the peasants’ movement during 1940 was of low key in the face of massive repression launched by im-perialist forces. This helped the autocracies represented by the zamindars and the rajas to re-assert their position, which had been damaged during the period of the Congress ministry.

At this point, we may also trace certain developments re-garding workers’ mobilization,28 a feature emerging very late in Orissa and possibly due to the impact of massive mobilization of peasants during 1936–39.

As early as January 1940, one notices the labourers at the goods shed demanding a hike in wages due to a rise in prices of foodstuff and proposing to go on a strike from 15 January.29 In May, 250 workers of Himgir–Rampur colliery (Sambalpur) went on a strike, demanding increase in wages from 2.5 to 3 annas per day due to wartime inflation. The strike continued till the first week of June, but as nothing materialized the workers resumed their duties.30 In August, around 300 labourers from the Orient Paper Mill at Ib (Sambalpur) held a meeting at Telenpali under the leadership of Durga Prasad Guru, the president of the labour union, and demanded a hike in wages. They resorted to a full-fledged strike on 13 August. They took out processions with red flags and distributed leaflets. This ultimately forced the mill owners to concede a wage hike. This, in fact, turned Guru into a hero among the labourers.31 This success of the labourers of Orient Paper Mill spurred the labourers of the Himgir–Rampur colliery once again, as they came from the same villages. They again went on a strike, only to be persuaded into going back to work through a promise of negotiations regarding pay increment

26 HPD, FNR, SBP, 12 April 1940, ACC-1305.27 HPD, FNR, SBP, 12 February 1940–12 April 1940, ACC-1305.28 The efforts at mobilizing the workers in the 1936–39 phase were really mild and meagre.29 HPD, Special Branch Report, 15 January 1940, ACC-1449.30 HPD, SP’s Report, 10 June 1940, ACC-1490.31 Board of Revenue Records, Deputy Commissioner’s (Sambalpur) Report, 17 August 1940, Sl No. 401.


by the authorities. Here, Guru and Piary Shankar Ray took the initiative to mobilize the workers.32

Guru often mobilized the workers and kept up the strikers’ morale by composing many poems.33 These were written es-sentially to enthuse the labourers to get into a struggle against the capitalist system by highlighting their grievances. They were sung by the workers during processions. For instance, one of them said:

Blow the conch of strike and mobilise the workers in the Paper Mill. Rend the heart of the proud [owners] by hoisting up the bloody flag … Destroy the acute pride of capitalists through strike … Respond to the exploitation of the capitalists through this strike … The sky will rend with cheers of the Labour Union. (Poem 1, 13 August 1940)

Referring to the failure of the authorities to initiate negotia-tions with the labourers, another poem read: “The name of Birla who is known in the country as charitable and respectable, has become so for our misfortune … It is useless to wait any longer … Display, the proletariat! being united, the destruction of the haughty and the proud!”

It further went on to chart the method of struggle for the workers: “You have made your righteous war by holding up the banner of truth and chanting the slogans of peace; proceed on your work fearlessly and with an undiluted mind … Apply your mind to righteous warfare by taking up the arms of action” (Poem 2, 23 October 1940).

Another poem reminded the labourers that they were the miserable victims of the capitalist system:

The earth could no longer bear the pains; the seat of the Almighty shook. The reliever of the distressed played revolution in the pro-cess of relieving them. The whole world is shaken with the cries: “Catch! Strike a blow!” The war goddess Durga is bathed in blood and dancing merrily. The oppressive kings and haughty capitalists will also perish. We, the cultivators and labourers who are losing all, will surely attain victory. The destroyer of pride and the killer

32 Board of Revenue Records, Deputy Commissioner’s (Sambalpur) Report, 21 August 1940, Sl No. 413.33 HPD, “Report by Deputy Commissioner on a Booklet Biplaba Jhankar”, 16 Feb-ruary 1942; Durga Prasad Guru, Biplaba Jhankar (Oriya), SBP, 1942, pp. 1–5.


of demon has become merciful to us. We are masters of this country. We are not afraid of any body. (Poem 3, 10 September 1941)

The poems clearly reveal a distinct inspiration of the communist perspective of struggle against capitalism.

We also come across evidence of the sweepers’ strike in Puri.34 Narasingha Tripathy (Chairman, Puri District Youth Conference), along with other communist leaders like Gokul Mohan Ray Churamani and Guru Charan Patnaik, organized the sweepers of Puri municipality over the issues of pay hike and basic facilities like drinking water, street lights, provident fund, provision for holidays, casual leave as well as maternity leave for women sweepers. The sweepers also demanded the recognition of the Harijan Labour Union. They called for a general strike during the Car Festival in July. Behind such mobilization, prominent communists such as Sharat Patnaik, Ananta Patnaik and Bhagabati Panigrahi were also active. These leaders launched an association called Harijan Shramika Sangha and under this banner made efforts towards organizing them. They also carried out a literacy campaign among them. This development had its effect in Paralakhemundi (Ganjam) where sweepers threatened the municipality with a strike in August.35 It may be noted that the organization of Harijan workers and the assertion of their rights were primarily inspired by the Harijan welfare campaign taken up by the Congress leadership—mostly the committed Gandhians—over a long period and markedly since the 1930s.

Princely States

The Talcher Prajamandal intensified its campaign against the ruler for the violation of the declaration made by him and the atrocities of the forest department officials. It condemned the ruler for not implementing the concessions already announced by the administration, such as stopping of realization of pro-fessional taxes from artisans and the return of Khasdakhal and sarbarakari Bhogra lands. However, the Prajamandal shifted

34 HPD, “Chairman, Puri Municipality to DM”, Puri, 4 July 1940, ACC-1523; HPD, SP’s Report, 5 June 1940, ACC-1460; Interview with Guru Charan Patnaik, Cuttack, November 1988.35 HPD, FNR, Ganjam, 13 August 1940, ACC-1308.


its focus to imperialism, locating in it the major cause for the exploitation of the state subjects. For example, in a meeting at the Kosala refugee camp on 11 March 1940, Pabitra Mohan Pradhan declared that the British government is made up of “thieves, liars and cheats”, as no action was taken by the po-litical department to remedy the real difficulties of the people. He advised the peasants to join the coming Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM).36 The Talcher Prajamandal leadership also stepped up the campaign against war-loan collection and kept asking the people to withdraw their savings from post offices.37 In yet another meeting at Paniola on 24 June, Pradhan spoke of conducting the prajamandal campaign both violently and non-violently due to the changing political context and the war.38

The anti-imperialist focus of the leadership was exception-ally sharp. For instance, Madan Mohan Pradhan explained to the people of Paniola that the British Empire would certainly crumble in the war and therefore the people in the states should organize and launch a satyagraha movement.39 In this context, it will be instructive to have a look into the detailed instructions given by Pabitra Mohan Pradhan to the subjects of Talcher with reference to the war and the future course of action:40

(a) To establish youth leagues in villages to recruit one person from each family to the league

(b) To arm every family with a lathi of 3 cubits and a rope of 10 cubits in length

(c) To keep a detachable ladder secretly in the bedding which can be taken everywhere for disconnecting the telegraphic lines so as to disrupt the state administration’s move to bring in armed forces to the state by wiring message in the context of war

(d) People in the villages to appear in batches of 500 to counter the contingent of 100 armed policemen. People to assemble when a call or signal of the Congress is given in the vil-lage

36 HPD, DM’s Report, Cuttack, 31 March 1940.37 HPD, 10 July 1940, ACC-1353.38 HPD, DM’s Report on Paniola Meeting, 24 June 1940, ACC-1351.39 HPD, “Speech of Madan Mohan Pradhan”, 26 June 1940, ACC-1351.40 HPD, Report of DM, Cuttack, on Talcher State, 28 June 1940, 7 July 1940, 2 July 1940, 3 July 1940, 21 September 1940, ACC-1351.


(e) People to defend themselves by the use of lathis and weap-ons (sickle, axe) and resist the collection of war loans as well as recruitment of men to the war. People to also go to the rescue of villagers where such attempts were un-dertaken

(f) Through youth leagues, sufficient number of volunteers to remain ready in every village

(g) In view of the war, the rich in the villages to distribute their properties, mainly paddy stocks, among the fellow villagers by way of loans, to be realized back in future

(h) Volunteers to launch satyagraha against the durbar, taking advantage of the war conditions, to get back the sarbarakars’ (headmen’s) land

(i) Subscriptions to be collected from people to strengthen the prajamandal

(j) Not to fear the “red turbans” (the policemen in red headgear), forest and other officials of the state administration

(k) Maintenance of people’s unity in the context of the war (l) Constructive programmes like cultivation of cotton, sugarcane

and groundnut and soap manufacturing to be undertaken by the people for their economic upliftment

(m) A bell to be kept in every village; and when it is rung, people to assemble for secret meetings, preferably in the night.

Resolutions were passed in the meetings condemning forcible war fund collection by the state dewan or the police and asking the people to “launch satyagraha” and “snatch away power from the ruler”. As late as 30 October, the Talcher Prajamandal passed a resolution, under the leadership of Pradhan, seeking the intervention of the political department to withdraw the executive and judicial powers exercised by the ruler and vest them either with the ministers elected by the people or a dewan appointed by the political department. It also appealed to the political department to grant remission of rent and provide relief work in areas where crops had failed, and sharply criticized the misrule of the state by noting that “the subjects cannot live safely and peacefully under the ruler’s regime”.41

41 HPD, Report on Talcher, 1 December 1940, ACC-1351.


In Nilagiri, the communist leadership represented by Banamali Das stepped up its activities, providing a new direction to the overall prajamandal movement. He advised the Nilagiri state subjects, dominated by tribals, to raid police stations, to refuse to pay arrears of rent payable to the state (instead to pay them to the Congress office), and under instructions by the leadership, loot the granaries of the rich as per their necessity.42 He also made a suggestion to take possession of the jail.43 Besides, in the context of the war, the leadership coined and aired slogans like “Na ek bhai, na ek pai, samrajyabad ladhai” (“Not a brother, not a paisa to the imperialist war”) and “Lalaji ka badla lena” (“Avenge the murder of Lala Lajpat Rai”).

Das was also in regular touch with the communist leadership outside the state. For ensuring massive propaganda, he had kept a good amount of Left literature procured from Moscow and the Great Britain as well as the pamphlets issued by the Orissa communists like “Agge Chala” (“March Forward”).44 However, this led to his arrest and subsequent expulsion from the praja-mandal. The president of the prajamandal took this decision as he was afraid that such activities would offer a chance to the ruler to derecognize and ban the prajamandal.45

We must note here that the Prajamandal’s struggle against the state had been long drawn out, mediated by the twin processes of struggle and negotiations in the 1937–39 phase. Thus, any at-tempt to pitch the struggle to such a militant and even violent height in the war context on the lines of communist policy was sure to invite the imperialist’s as well as the ruler’s suppression, thereby causing serious damage to the people’s movement. The Nilagiri Prajamandal, however, carried on its activities by form-ing a defence committee to render financial help to the victims of the state administration and denounced the oppression and victimization of Lakhrajdars by the ruler.46

42 All India State People’s Conference (AISPC) Papers, F. No. 124, 15 June 1940.43 Ibid.44 Ibid.45 Ibid.46 HPD, 18 March 1940, cited in Biswamoy Pati, Resisting Domination: Peasants, Tribals and the National Movement in India, 1920–50, New Delhi, 1993, p. 193; HPD, “Orissa Police Abstract Intelligence” (“OPAI” hereafter), Vol. V, 8 January 1940, Who’s Who Compilation Committee no. 30 (WWCC-30).


In contrast to Talcher and Nilagiri, Dhenkanal presented a rather mild version of popular protest. This was due to the high pitch of terror resorted to by the ruler in terms of the arrest of prajamandal leaders and the disruption of the prajamandal and Congress activities in the state. Besides, the refugees had gone back to the state by early 1940. We also come across evidence of bulletins like Juddha Nian47 (“War Fire”), issued by the Khandapara Prajamandal (which denounced both the state ruler and imperialism as sources of sustenance of repression of the subjects).

Politics of the Youth

We can take a pause here to take a brief look into the nature of youth and students’ politics of the pre-Quit India Move-ment phase. As early as 1938, the students of Cuttack Medical School sought permission of the superintendent for hoisting the national flag on 26 January, but the British superintendent refused the permission to do so on a “government building”. Disregarding the directive, the students hoisted the flag on that day. By the time the authorities intervened, it was evening and the students had already removed the flag.48 On 15 August of the same year, the students of this school submitted a charter of their grievances to the authorities and went on a strike from 16 August. However, the strike was called off on 20 August on the assurance of the authorities that a committee would be formed to examine their grievances.49

In September 1938, law students of Ravenshaw College re-sorted to a strike, protesting over an issue that involved the resignation of Prof. Banerjee, a faculty member, on grounds of opposition to service conditions. A number of students were struck off the rolls and they were readmitted upon offering an apology to the principal.50

Again, in March 1939, the medical students of Cuttack went on a strike. They resented the remark in a government report on the lack of discipline among the students in connection

47 HPD, “OPAI”, Vol. V, 20 March 1940, WWCC-30.48 Linlithgow Collection (LC), “Hubback to Linlithgow”, Vol. I, 26 January 1938.49 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 31 August 1938, ACC-1059.50 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 17 September 1938, ACC-1059.


with the previous year’s medical school strike. They formed a council of action and resolved to go on a strike if the govern-ment did not withdraw the remarks within a week. In response, the authorities rusticated four student leaders. This brought in intense mobilization of the students in protest against the deci-sion of the authorities. They held a demonstration in Cuttack town shouting anti-establishment slogans and organized public meetings over the issue and condemned the Congress ministry for such moves against the students. They boycotted the board examination and refused to vacate hostels. Finally, to intensify the movement, they picketed and offered satyagraha at the Secretariat building for nearly a week from 20 April. However, on 27 April, they called off the satyagraha when the Congress Government agreed to reinstate the rusticated students, not to victimize any student and to release the satyagrahis.51

The students’ strike evoked widespread sympathy in the province.52 Students of other institutions like the Ravenshaw Girls’ School, Ravenshaw Collegiate School, Mission School, Victoria School and P.M. Academy also joined in the satyagraha and picketed before their schools. When a batch of satyagrahis was arrested, fresh batches of satyagrahis joined instantly. A large number of students offered themselves to be recruited as volunteers. The student satyagrahis organized huge demonstra-tions and raised slogans against imperialism and the injustice meted out to them, and in favour of the students’ unity. Citizens’ meetings were organized in Cuttack Town Hall to discuss the issue. The town also witnessed a successful bandh as a mark of support to the striking students on 21 April. The students led a huge demonstration to the Secretariat building and offered satyagraha there, delivering speeches against the ministry.

Financial contribution and sympathy from other parts of the province also flowed in, demonstrating a high fraternity for the movement. The students braved victimization and harassment by the authorities, and objections from their guardians and rela-tives to join the satyagraha. The anti-Congress ministry faction

51 HPD, FNR, Cuttack, 3 April 1939, 17 April 1939, 3 May 1939, ACC-1088.52 Chhatra, 15, 21, 22, 24, and 25 April 1939, ACC-1229: Oriya pamphlets on the medical school strike; The Observer, 15 April 1939, ACC-1229: on the Orissa medical school strike and its ideal and etiology; HPD, SP’s Report, 21 April 1939, ACC-1124.


extended support to the movement to put the ministry in an embarrassing position. However, the students’ organization tried to project a neutral image. Thus, anybody wishing to be recruited as a volunteer for satyagraha signed a form that he would strictly follow the policy of truth and non-violence, that the struggle was not intended against the Congress but against imperialism and its reactionary allies, and that the fight would enhance the image and prestige of the Congress. The youngsters who participated and provided the radical thrust to this move-ment included Sachi Routrai, Biswanath Pasayat, Baidyanath Rath, Bibhudendu Mishra, Ashok Das, Bijoy Chandra Das, Manmohan Mishra, Nilamani Routrai and Gangadhar Mohapatra.

Sachi Routrai brought out a daily bulletin called Chhatra (“Students”) in the context of the students’ satyagraha detailing the developments and projecting a students’ perspective of the movement vis-à-vis imperialism, the Congress movement and the ministry.53 The Chhatra repeatedly clarified the objective of the movement as not being opposed to the Congress. However, the anti-ministry position as well as its communist predilection are best evident from its editorial dated 21 April 1939:

Those who attempt to fly the flag of freedom, they in fact, get im-prisoned first. Likewise, the November revolution was born, but it demolished the nexus of imperialism and capitalism in Russia and made way for the establishment of classless society of the Proletariat … [Today] the student society is distressed over the doings of some of the opportunist Congress leaders, who are the agents of imperial-ism. They have, in fact, started fostering an attitude of compromise with imperialism instead of unleashing a mass movement without any compromise with imperialism. This Congress Ministry has become an indispensable constituent of imperialistic bureaucracy. They are acting against the interests of the peasants’ and the state people’s movement … [Thus] the students being united, demand a clarification from these careerist elements.

Again in its editorial dated 22 April, it commented:

Today the youth sings the rhyme of Diwali by braving and ignor-ing the lathis of the police, the rule of the guardians, the inhuman

53 Chhatra, 15, 21, 22, 24, and 25 April 1939, ACC-1229: Oriya pamphlets on the medical school strike; Bijay Chandra Das and Sadananda Mohanty, Chhatra Andolanara Itihasa (Oriya), Cuttack, 1986, pp. 22–30.


policies of the Congress Ministry—committed to political prostitu-tion—and the agents and the servants of imperialism.

A column in the said bulletin titled “Satakatha” (“The Truth”), issued during the struggle, was sharply critical of the contem-porary Congress “rightist” leadership. It went on to characterize Mahatab as the “approved compromising leader” of the gov-ernment who had volunteered compromise in all the political battles including the state people’s struggle, but without any success. It also criticized the socialist leadership represented by Nabakrushna Choudhury and Surendra Dwivedi as no better than the Congress leadership, always insisting on “compromise” in “any political battle”.

The success of the strike emboldened the students consider-ably. Thus, again in 1940, a massive strike rocked Ravenshaw College,54 when on 26 January the students insisted on hoisting the national flag in the tennis field of the college compound to observe independence day, disregarding an order by the authori-ties to the contrary. The defiant action provoked the authorities and the university syndicate inflicted fines on two of the organiz-ers of the meeting, Nilamani Routrai and Bibhudendu Mishra. The students, in turn, decided to protest by going on a strike in February and planned to boycott the university examination. In retaliation, the authorities closed down the college, ordered the non-examinees to vacate the hostels and made heavy police deployment for the conduct of the examination. On 26 February, the day of the examination, the students picketed and obstructed the conduct of the examination in the face of a severe lathi charge. The issue of the Ravenshaw College strike was discussed in the All India Students Federation’s (AISF) executive meeting in the Ramgarh session in March 1940, which was attended by such young communists as Baidyanath Rath, Biren Mitra, Durga Charan Mohanty and Nurusingha Chandra Tripathy. On the basis of a decision in the meeting, Mohan Mangalam, the for-mer secretary of AISF, was deputed to meet the vice-chancellor to persuade him to revise his orders and readmit the students whose names had been struck off the rolls during the strike. He

54 HPD, SP’s Report, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, and 26 February 1940 and 8, 14, and 29 March 1940. Also, the report of the enquiry committee headed by Laxmi Narayan Sahu, 1940, ACC-1395.


effected a compromise between the authorities and the students, following which the students were asked to tender an apology to the principal and secure readmission. He also condemned the action of the boys in resorting to a strike without enlisting the support of the public or the student community. The leadership of this strike was again mostly dominated by communists like Sachi Routrai, Ashok Das, Baidyanath Rath, Rabi Ghose, Durga Charan Mohanty, Manmohan Mishra, Jaykrishna Mohapatra (Secretary, Utkal Students’ Federation), Ram Krushna Pati and Gangadhar Mohapatra. The basic feature of this strike was a strong anti-imperialist thrust. Sachi Routrai developed the idea of a “Summer School of Politics” and opened such a school at Cuttack in May 1940 on the lines of the communist ideology.55 However, large-scale arrests of the communist leaders along with proscription of communist literature by July 1940 in Cut-tack and Puri districts restrained the pace of youth politics in this period.

Functioning of the PCC

The feature which characterized the PCC right since the installa-tion of the Congress ministry in the shape of a factional divide between Nilakantha and Godavarish on one hand and Mahatab and Biswanath on the other, further deepened. This ultimately resulted in the formation of a coalition ministry in November 1941 by the former with the support of the raja of Parlakhe-mundi, indicating a veiled victory for the “rightist” elements in the PCC. Curiously enough, in its bid to gain political mileage and a popular image, this leadership had been associated with the Forward Bloc movement and often maintained a position sharply critical of Gandhi and the policy of non-violence.56

55 HPD, “OPAI”, Vol. I, 28 May 1940. During his visit to Madras, Sachi Routrai caught on the idea of running a summer school in politics.56 WWCC, 14 August 1941, ACC-30; HPD, FNR, Puri, 15 April 1940, ACC-1285. While around April, Dibakar Patnaik, a member of the Nilakantha group, criticized Gandhi along with the war aims of imperialism, and talking of sa-tyagraha, reflecting the “waiting policy” of the Congress, by August 1941, he would advise people in Koraput to desist from satyagraha and to help in war efforts. These shifts reflected more their anti-PCC stand than an anti-Gandhi position.


However, their shifting political stance was more indicative of an anti-PCC attitude than an anti-Gandhian policy.

In contemporary politics, this divide in the PCC was also seen in terms of a caste clash, that is, Brahmin vs Karan (writer) and Khandayat (warrior)—Nilakantha representing the former and Mahatab the latter.57 The bitterness between the two camps was so acute that a periodical called Dagara observed: “We only wish that the people of Orissa having been saved from the clutches of a tiger (read Nilakantha’s presidentship of PCC in 1939) might not fall into the clutches of the snake.”58 However, this divide ultimately resulted in the formation of the Orissa Congress Swarajist Party by the Nilakantha faction in October 1940.59

The revamping of PCC had begun since February with Na-bakrushna Choudhury and Radhakrishna Biswasray being ap-pointed as president and secretary, respectively.60 By April, the PCC took up the initiative for the preparation of satyagraha by taking a census of active and passive volunteers.61 The district Congress committees (DCCs) were instructed to send volunteers to undergo an orientation and refresher course at Bari Gandhian Camp in Cuttack. As mentioned earlier, this was a prominent Gandhi ashram managed by Gopabandhu Choudhury. Besides, all the DCCs and primary Congress committees were transformed into satyagraha committees, with the standing instruction that those who did not meet the requirements of an active satyagrahi should resign to create space for others.62

The Gandhian orientation of the PCC’s exercise was sought to be demonstrated by arranging a march of Congress activists under the leadership of noted Gandhian Gopabandhu Choud-hury in April. He walked from Bari to Ganeswarpur, organizing meetings en route, and explaining Gandhian principles as well

57 The Dagara (1 January 1940) commented, referring to an Oriya proverb: “Brahmins do not know how to sit and Karans do not know how to eat.” It goes on to add, “The community led by Kshatriya Mahatab alleges that Brahmin Nilakantha has misappropriated the money of the Congress Committee. The community of Brahmins alleges that Kshatriya Mahatab has wrongly usurped the throne in the Congress Committee.”58 Dagara, 1 January 1940.59 WWCC, “OPAI”, No. 39, 26 October 1940, ACC-60.60 WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. V, 20 February 1940, ACC-60.61 WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. V, 6 April 1940, ACC-60.62 WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. V, 22 April 1940, ACC-60.


as the war situation to the people.63 This march was organized on the occasion of the annual session of Gandhi Seva Sangha. The other aspect of the PCC’s reorganization exercise was to float four departments to monitor activities on Harijan uplift-ment, minority issue, khadi and spinning, and overall Congress propaganda efforts. Mahatab headed the propaganda affairs, Biswasray handled Harijan upliftment, and Muhammad Akthar was kept in charge of the minority issue.64 Khadi and spin-ning were placed under the supervision of a sub-committee. Mahatab, on his return from an AICC session, was emphatic about stepping up the constructive programme of the Congress to enhance its influence.65

There was also a march to popularize khadi and instill Gandhi-an values, conducted from Soro (Balasore) to Jajpur (Cuttack). The march, led by Nilambar Das and five others, demonstrated khadi spinning to the villagers.66 The march, spanning over a period of 20 days, was conducted by six Congress activists. There were efforts by Laxmi Narayan Sahu to convert an alcoholic drinks shop into a Sanskrit tol (school) in Balasore.67 Mahatab, being the president of the DCC, undertook regular tours of the Balasore district to strengthen the constructive programme of the DCC right since May 1940.68 These tours were also undertaken to gauge the popular pulse for the coming satyagraha.69 The DCC too promoted the campaign of constructive programmes by distributing AICC and PCC circulars as well as articles writ-ten by Mahatab, and explaining the satyagraha programme in mass meetings.70

By June, nearly five short-term satyagrahi training centres had come up in the province.71 The Cuttack district satyagrahi

63 Ibid.64 WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. V, No. 18, 6 May 1940, ACC-60.65 Ibid.66 WWCC, 28 November 1940, ACC-60.67 WWCC, 13 April 1940, ACC-60.68 WWCC, 25 May 1940–13 August 1940, ACC-60.69 WWCC, 29 September 1940, ACC-60.70 Ibid.71 WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. V, No. 23, 15 June 1940, ACC-30.

A volunteer training camp was founded in Butosorosingi in the Ganjam district, but we do not have many details about it (HPD, FNR, Ganjam, 13 July 1940, ACC-1308). The training camp at Tunglibandhi (Sohella, Sambalpur) was opened in February and 17 Congress volunteers were trained in it. A plan was


training centre operated for a fortnight from 9 May.72 At this centre, Nabakrushna Choudhury was assigned the task of taking political classes for the trainees; Pranakrushna Padhiary (CSP) gave instructions on khadi and spinning whereas Rajkrushna Bose acted as the camp manager. Interestingly, no physical training (such as lathi exercises) was imparted, as in the Con-gress-sponsored training camps during the 1937–39 phase. There was a camp at Jankia (Puri) and another under Sachi Routrai’s initiative under the aegis of the All Utkal Students’ Federation at Cuttack in May–June. According to the PCC’s estimation, by the end of May it had trained 416 active satyagrahis and 121 passive satyagrahis.73

The Utkal Provincial Congress Committee (UPCC) and the DCCs circulated leaflets to popularize their viewpoints. For example, around September, UPCC released three leaflets:74 “Congress Nirdesha” (“Congress Instructions”), “Congress Karyakari Samiti Prastab” (“Congress Working Committee Resolutions”) and “Congress Committee Istahar” (“Congress Committee Communiqué”). These leaflets essentially focused on non-cooperation with the pro-war efforts. The communiqué released by Mahatab on behalf of the Balasore DCC advised people not to tolerate any compulsion regarding the war fund collection and to immediately inform the Congress office of such efforts.

As early as January 1940, we also come across a pamphlet issued by the Balasore DCC called “The Oriya Way” to serve as a guide to the Congress activists engaged in popularizing the message of the Congress and Gandhi.75 Mahatab was ap-pointed as the General Dictator for Orissa to monitor the PCC’s preparation for the satyagraha.76 Dictators were appointed for other districts also. These developments suggest that despite a disturbing divide in the PCC, right since the beginning of 1940

afoot here to organize a women volunteers’ training camp (HPD, FNR, SBP, 12 April 1940, ACC-1305). Another volunteer training camp in Sambalpur was at Kuchipali; it opened in May (HPD, FNR, SBP, 12 May 1940, ACC-1305).72 WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. V, No. 19, 13 May 1940, ACC-30.73 WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. V, No. 21, 21 May 1940, ACC-30.74 Board of Revenue Records, DM’s Report, 15 September 1940, Sl No. 241.75 WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. V, No. 2, 8 January 1940, ACC-30.76 WWCC, OPAI, Vol. V, No. 37, 3 October 1940, ACC-30.


a consistent effort was on to put the PCC in all readiness for the coming satyagraha.

The process naturally hastened in April with the re-organiza-tion of the PCC and the institution of satyagraha cells as well as satyagraha training camps both at village and district levels. It was in this context that the UPCC sent circulars to the DCCs regarding the new type of Gandhian satyagraha (i.e., individual satyagraha) by October. The circulars, while highlighting con-structive work to be taken up by the Congress activists, asked only the “selected ones” to offer satyagraha, and instructed the DCCs to nominate Dictators in advance to conduct satyagraha in view of the arrest of the leaders or the banning of the Con-gress.77 In this connection, we come across some evidence that Mahatab instructed the DCCs that in case the Congress was banned, Congress activists would be released from the pledges of non-violence (which they had taken) and were at liberty to decide their individual and collective policy.78

Before looking into the nature and pattern of individual satyagraha in Orissa, we must note here that Congress leader-ship undertook a consistent campaign against war measures and war fund collection. Thus, a strong anti-imperialist current had already formed in the province. As early as November 1939, Birakishore Das, a nationalist poet, wrote a poem titled “Dhapadhapi Aau Chaliba Nahin” (“Deception will No Longer Pay”) in the Krushak, criticizing the imperialist war. The poem would translate as follows:79

We speak frankly; it will no longer do to deceive us,We have remained vigilant and [have been] watching all your moves (chorus).Things could be managed so long by suppression.They can no longer be managed even for an hour.Have you got the power to check the currentthat is flowing throughout India?Our eyes have been opened through the mercy of the Congress: there is nothing more to know.You are responsible for all the unrest and wars in the world,

77 WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. V, No. 39, 26 October 1940, ACC-30.78 WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. V, No. 43, 17 November 1940, ACC-30.79 Krushak, 18 November 1939.


You have a widespread Empire throughout the world, that is why you are seeking help.Unless you give up your attachment to imperialism, You would not be given any corner in human society.You are shedding tears for the protection of democracy,but you have kept us like a flock of sheep. Your works and deeds are incompatible.That is why people are jeering at you.You carried away maunds of gold and gave us nickel and paper instead.If you hope to be honoured in the world, give up craftiness and arrogance,Remove the machinery of exploitation from this land,Be simple and keep good relationship.

Depicting the context and objective of the ministry’s resigna-tion, he wrote in the poem “Yudha Kahali Uthila Baji” (“The Bugle of War Has Been Blown”):80

The whole country is obeying the order of the Congress; The fort of Council is dismantled, The minister friends threw off their resignations And removed the obstacles on the way to freedom. Not even a single Deshi [indigenous man] agreed to work up the machine under the mantra of the foreigner!The British who took pride in offering constitutional reformsgot the rebuff when ministers resigned.The British have really behaved like the Nazis!Swaraj is our birthright; we want the key of India. We don’t have aeroplanes or submarines, The beggar of the street is our general. Let the world see our war strategy, We have sacrificed everything for the world.

Laxmi Narayan Mishra, on the occasion of the Martyrs’ Day (1 March), in Jharsuguda, described the imperialist government as a “jallhad sarkar” (“the slaughterer government”).81 In yet another public meeting at Lachide (Bargarh), he asked the peasants to “pray for the annihilation of British Government”. Dubbing the British government as “the devil of devils”, he wished for the

80 Ibid.81 HPD, Report of Deputy Commissioner, 12 April 1940, ACC-1398.


establishment of Bolshevism. He went on to explain the villag-ers, “If the British want to live in India, then we will keep Lord Wellingdon and Lord Linlithgow as our sweepers in the same way as they have kept us as their servants and in bondage of slavery for so long.”82

Nabakrushna Choudhury held the capitalists and imperial-ists responsible for the war in a meeting at Tukuda83 (Balasore) on 3 July. He was equally critical of the Gandhian policy of non-violence. He observed that it would be wrong to say that Indians could not overpower their enemy, if they resorted to violence, as the government’s armed forces were insignificant compared to the overwhelming Indian population. He exhorted the people to join the Congress and carry out its programme and not to help war efforts.84

In a public meeting at Sambalpur town (October 13), Nabak-rushna Chaudhury, referring to the war, observed: “This war is against the doctrines of Kshatriyas.”85

The press also organized a vigorous campaign against war measures and the war fund.86 For instance, Pallibasi, a weekly newspaper published from Belaguntha (Ganjam), printed a news item on the defeat of the British army. This led the chief secre-tary to remark that the “Congress leaders and newspapers have frequently asserted that compulsion is being used by officials to secure help for War funds.” This paper was widely circulated in the Khond tribal agency tract of G. Udayagiri. Quite naturally, such rumours spread fast among the tribals in the agency and copies were secretly distributed in the marketplaces. This ru-mour was equally strong in the Kodala Taluk, and in the whole of Ganjam district.87

The Dagara was critical of the police, who arrested the sa-tyagrahis and took them to the court and inflicted violence on others. A sarcastic poem, titled “Police Prema” (“In Love with

82 HPD, Report of Deputy Commissioner, 7 April 1940, ACC-1398.83 HPD, Special Branch Report, 2 February 1940, ACC-1404.84 Board of Revenue Records, Report of Revenue Commissioner to CS, 18 July 1940, Sl No. 403.85 HPD, FNR, SBP, 28 October 1940, ACC-1305.86 Board of Revenue Records, Reports of DM and CS, 21 June 1940, 30 July 1940, Sl No. 259.87 Asha, 6 June 1940, Sl No. 259; Board of Revenue Records, Report of CS, 25 July 1940, Sl No. 259.


the Police”), described the police as “a class of compromising persons of ill repute”, who could create thunder without rain. The sarcasm is visibly sharp when it says: “Oh, Policemen! You are so audacious that you made me give up fear of jail”, and “If I were given the authority to lord over you [the police], I would smash you then and there.”88

It should be noted here that Dagara, edited by Nityananda Mohapatra, was an ardent supporter of the Gandhian leadership in its articles way back in 1936–37. Mohapatra’s poem titled “Gandhi Budha” (“Gandhi, the Old Man”) was basically illus-trative of this orientation. But by 1941 he was veering towards an ambivalent position which synthesized both Gandhian and non-Gandhian forms. Thus, in October 1941, in his speech dur-ing the Gandhi Jayanti celebrations, one finds him advocating for both force and non-violence to drive away the British from India.89

Mohapatra’s overall position in terms of his writings and speeches illustrates a typical case where, even without offer-ing the prescribed pattern of satyagraha, he almost dared the authorities to arrest him. And, probably this was his modified version—more or less an innovation—of the individual satya-graha.

Moreover, communist literature and pamphlets were smuggled into Cuttack from Calcutta for circulation among students. One such pamphlet called “Our Duty on the Independence Day” was circulated in February.90 The Congress socialists also re-solved to take up a leaflet campaign on the issues of war and national struggle among the masses, and organization of strikes and marches to the districts or sub-divisions by the peasants, workers and students.91

On an overall assessment, it seems that except Ganjam (where the PCC’s dominant leadership lacked relative control over the DCC as the issue of Madras Estates Land Bill remained unre-solved and to a certain extent the latter remained inextricably entangled with the former), Cuttack, Puri, Balasore, Koraput, Sambalpur as well as the princely states were characterized by

88 Dagara, 1 September 1941.89 HPD, SP’s Report, 4 October 1941, ACC-2033.90 Board of Revenue Records, 18 February 1940, Sl No. 388.91 HPD, SP’s Report, 12 January 1940, ACC-1292.


an intense sweep of anti-imperialism as also by a dominant strain of Gandhian constructive activities. With this backdrop, we need to examine the phases of both individual satyagraha and the Quit India Movement.

The Pattern of Individual Satyagraha, 1941

Here, we will examine the nature, extent and pattern of the indi-vidual civil disobedience which was organized from 1 December 1940. Earlier, we saw how in the pre-December 1940 phase, politicization occurred in the whole of Orissa province around anti-war issues. Dominant PCC leaders like Mahatab, Biswas-ray, Biswanath Das, Nabakrushna Choudhury and Kanungo undertook the offering of satyagraha on an individual basis and courted arrest. The DCCs were, in fact, marked by hectic activities through the conduct of individual satyagraha.

Individual satyagraha was sought to be imparted as mass anti-war orientation by selected satyagrahis. The satyagrahis would read out from the prepared text, which highlighted non-violent resistance to the imperialist war efforts by withholding support in terms of men and money.92 But this was usually preceded and followed by detailed speeches by the satyagrahis. It was impressed upon the audience that any help to the war efforts was a “sin”; and that it was the “order” of Gandhi not to help it.93 In some cases, there were fascinating references to Gandhi,

92 Anti-war speeches by the satyagrahis were mostly made in selected places to attract large crowds. For instance, in Balasore district we see anti-war speeches mostly delivered in places like the Ambodia haat, Deula haat; in Bhadrak at Budhabar (Wednesday) haat; in Puri at Lions’ Gate, near Jagannath Temple; in Cuttack at the Secretariat building, to attract large crowds.

Board of Revenue Records, DM’s Report, 5 December 1940, 6 December 1940, 16 December 1940, Sl No. 412.

Besides, we have references to the incident in Puri of one activist Sadhu Charan Das shouting slogans against imperialism and war fund in the courtroom of the sub-divisional magistrate (SDM) on 20 December 1940.

HPD, FNR, Puri, December 1940, ACC-1285.93 HPD, DM’s Report Ganjam, SBP, Puri, 2 December 1940–4 December 1940, ACC-1543. The report contains speeches delivered by Laxmi Rai (Berhampur), Jagannath Das (Bhadrak) and Mohan Das (Nimapara) on 4 December 1940; and Bodharm Dube (Sambalpur) on 2 December 1940.


such as “Have a Gandhi in every house” or “If the government throws bomb, Gandhi will upset the government”.94 People were asked to be fearless. For instance, on one occasion, Biswasray told the audience, “We were goats previously, but now we are men and why should anybody take us to the War forcibly?”95 The speeches by the dominant leadership point to a serious exercise on its part to keep the satyagraha strictly within the dictated course.96

To show the texture of Congress propaganda at the popular plane, we may refer to a leaflet asking people to desist from any effort at helping the war. It was released and distributed under the signature of Mangalu Pradhan, a local-level Congress activist of Sambalpur. The content of the pamphlet was as follows:97

Beware, my brothers and sisters; beware of being cheated. Many innocent persons are being killed in the violent war that is now go-ing on between England and Germany. They cannot eat a morsel of food or wear a piece of cloth. Knowing this misery, we can give no help to the Government unless it is to our own benefit. We should not also do any harm to the Government. We must free ourselves from the supremacy of the English. In 1914, in the German War, we helped the British Government against our conscience in a violent way and saved their Kingdom. We shall not give any such help [now], because India does not get any benefit. Be it known that the Congress is declaring that we should not render any help to any Government for any war in Europe. We shall spin [khaddar] and remain prepared in a non-violent way. Brothers, beware! Accord-ing to the present condition of the country, one who is not able to defend oneself how can he defend others?

Pradhan pasted copies of the leaflet on the walls of houses in Bheden village and made arrangements for its circulation in the other villages of the district through secret messengers. Interest-ingly, he would paste the pamphlets just below the posters and advertisements calling upon people to purchase the government defence bonds. Sometimes he would make a speech to gather-

94 HPD, SI’s Report on Biswas Ray’s Speech at Berhampur, Koraput, 1 December 1940, ACC-1543.95 Ibid.96 Board of Revenue Records, “DM to CS”, 20 December 1940, Sl No. 412.97 HPD, Reports of the SDO Bargarh and Divisional Magistrate, SBP, 2 December 1940, ACC-1305, ACC-1543.


ings on the spot. This had a great impact in the villages under Bheden thana (police station). In fact, people refused to make any contribution when the moharir visited the villages to collect donations for the war fund.98

There are also references to the national flag being hoisted on a khadi store as a symbol of satyagraha in Jeypore (Kora-put). When the police intervened and asked the shopkeeper to remove the flag, he refused. He told the police that the flag had been planted to advertise his intention to offer satyagraha. By refusing to obey the police, he had really offered satyagraha!99

Sarangadhar Das, Secretary, Orissa Prajamandal Association, who was not selected as a satyagrahi to conduct individual satyagraha and was instead assigned the job of popularizing the constructive programme of the Congress, addressed several public meetings in Sambalpur district in January 1941 and advised people not to contribute to the war fund and to be prepared for “mass satyagraha” within a year or so.100 The impact of his activities and anti-war sentiments on villagers was consider-able. This shows that constructive activities were also utilized to further anti-war sentiments.101

To celebrate independence day on 26 January 1941, meetings were organized in various places and the satyagraha pledge was read out to the congregation followed by a spinning competition.102 By February, the PCC had appointed “Dictators” for different districts to monitor the satyagraha and had also suspended the DCCs and all primary-level Congress cells.103 Efforts were made to compile a list for the subsequent batches of satyagrahis.104 In fact, Sachi Routrai, a student activist of the kisan sabha, and by 98 Ibid.99 HPD, DM’s Report, Koraput, 23 January 1941; Press Advisor’s reports on great stir in Jeypore, 8 January 1941, and Jeypore national flag controversy, 31 January 1941, ACC-1835.100 HPD, Report of the DM, SBP, January 1941, ACC-1874.101 HPD, SP’s Report, 4 October 1941, ACC-2035. Here, mention may be made of Nityananda Mohapatra’s (Dagara editor) speech.102 WWCC, SP’s Report, 2 February 1941, ACC-60.103 WWCC, 19 February 1941, ACC-60. Thus, Gouranga Charan Das, Nilamber Das, Satyabadi Nanda, Damodar Samantrai, Ram Murthy and Dayananda Satpathy were kept in charge of Cuttack, Balasore, Puri, Koraput, Ganjam and Sambalpur, respectively.104 WWCC, 8 January 1941, ACC-60. Sachi Routrai (communist) and Rabinda Mohan Das toured Balasore district to compile a list for the third batch of satyagrahis.


then a full-fledged communist, was involved in the preparation of such a census.

The response of the colonial authorities, however, was to ar-rest prominent leaders who offered individual satyagraha and to ignore less prominent Congress activists by not arresting them (or, even if they were arrested, to give them milder punish-ment).105 In an interesting incident in G. Udayagiri (in Ganjam Agency), dominated by Khond tribals, the colonial authorities started recruiting tribals for the 40th Labour Company. In this context, two of the local Congress activists announced in Febru-ary that they would be conducting satyagraha in local markets and bazaars. When they offered satyagraha on 21 February 1941 by making anti-war speeches, the DM ordered the police SI and assistant sub-inspector (ASI) to arrest the satyagrahis on the grounds that activities of satyagrahis would “excite the hillmen”. The officers refused to carry out the order, saying that the instructions of the SP were on the contrary. Whatever the explanation, this indicates the moral support of the police to the satyagrahis in some instances.106

The entire Ghumsur Udayagiri region came to be affected by the anti-war propaganda, and resistance to recruitment of tribals for the war continued, thus delaying the process of completion of the labour company. Moreover, the colonial authorities were concerned about a possible rise in jail population of Savara tribals in the Paralakhemundi Agency (Ganjam); consequently, they made preparations for the arrested by arranging extra tents in

105 WWCC, ACC-30, 15 March 1940; HPD, FNR, Puri, December 1940, ACC-1285.

For example, only a fine of Rs 50 or, in default, one month’s simple im-prisonment was imposed on Sadhu Charan Das, who stormed the court of the ADM, Puri, and shouted anti-war slogans. This was done to avoid him getting “cheap publicity”.106 HPD, IG’s Report, 4 March 1941, ACC-1912; HPD, Recruiting Officer’s Report, 3 February 1941, ACC-1851. This incident highlights two points. One is the organization of individual satyagraha in the pockets of tribal areas around February 1941, where war recruitment continued. And second is the erosion of loyalty on the part of the police to imperialist bureaucracy and support to the national movement. The names of the two Congress activists were Narayana Patro and Madhava Routho. The police also arrested a tribal along with these two satyagrahis, which points at the participation of tribals in satyagraha activities.


Berhampur and Koraput jails. This strongly points to the mo-bilization of tribals in the Khond belt of Ganjam.107

There is evidence of a general feeling of resentment against the official war fund drive. Despite war-time press control, The Samaja condemned the attempt by the authorities to collect war subscription along with the chowkidari tax. We come across a reference around June 1941 of a demand for the refund of war subscription. A person named Ramachandra Dora of Chhatrapur (Ganjam) resented the large sum of Rs 400 demanded from him as war subscription. Instead of agreeing to pay another Rs 200, he wrote to the authorities to give back the already deposited amount of Rs 200.108

Similarly, popular resentment existed against the collection of rent along with war subscription in the Jeypore zamindari.109 Such incidents were given wide publicity by leaders through the press, alleging the use of coercion in the collection of war subscriptions. The weight of the campaign was such that the chief secretary warned all the district authorities to ensure that only voluntary contributions for the war were made.110

The individual civil disobedience, however, seemed to stagnate due to the government policy of ignoring local-level satyagrahis by not arresting them but arresting only the prominent leaders, even if they did not themselves offer satyagraha (for example, Sarangadhar Das). This created a good deal of frustration among the unarrested satyagrahis and apprehensions among the arrested leaders. This trend was evident by March 1941.111 But the PCC came up with a surprising degree of innovation as per the direc-tive of the AICC and Gandhi’s scheme of Delhi march.112 The

107 HPD, “Accommodation for Satyagrahi Prisoners”, 22 January 1941, ACC-1840.108 HPD, “Complaint of R.C. Dora against War Collection”, 2 June 1941, ACC-1975.109 HPD, DM’s Report, 29 March 1941, ACC-1883.110 Ibid.; HPD, Report of SP, 8 November 1940, ACC-1449.111 HPD, “OPAI”, 15 March 1940, WWCC-30.112 “Delhi march” meant that disappointed satyagrahis should converge on India’s capital. But before marching on to Delhi, the satyagrahi would serve notice on the DM, revealing his intention to offer satyagraha and shout anti-war slogans. He would repeat the same method if he were not arrested. But on the second notice, he would add that he had not been arrested on the previous occasion as the government had realised its folly and it no more considered anti-war slogans as an offence. The logic was to dare the authorities to effect


PCC, in fact, drafted an innovative scheme which asked every unarrested satyagrahi to serve fresh notices on the authorities about his/her plan to undertake a tour, from his/her village, culminating in the capital of the province (Cuttack, in Orissan context), touching police stations and sub-divisions on the way. The satyagrahi was thus expected to cover many villages en route, where he could popularize anti-war slogans and convince people that the government had realized its mistake.

The police had stopped treating anti-war slogans as an offence and had consequently refrained from arresting the satyagrahis. Besides, the satyagrahis were instructed to make the most of their long tour from their villages to the provincial capital by making anti-war speeches at selected sites like haats, railway stations, court premises, townships and temple compounds to attract large crowds. The arrest of satyagrahis at such sites was meant to gain publicity.

Further, the activists were asked to carry out a door-to-door campaign propagating anti-war slogans and airing anti-war fund views.113 The PCC directed that two or three satyagrahis who had influence over people should move together and finally reach Cuttack, from where they could get certificates for their march to Delhi.114 In fact, this was a clarification sought by the Balasore DCC, and indicates the expectation existing at a mass level to carry forward the struggle based on individual satyagraha. As an alternative, in the month of May, the PCC further instructed the rural activists to concentrate on constructive work, besides taking up mass contact programme as well as Hindu–Muslim unity activities. The members of local bodies were directed to monitor such activities in their respective constituencies. How-ever, this emphasis on constructive programme was to be carried on along with stress on building popular opinion against war and other political developments.115

By August, the Balasore DCC had decided to divide the dis-trict into several units, each under the charge of a satyagrahi,

arrest. In this second attempt (if unarrested), the satyagrahi should be prepared to march to Delhi by going round places and shouting anti-war slogans. And his Delhi march was not to be intimated to the DM. Refer: WWCC, 8 March 1941, 19 March 1941, ACC-30.113 WWCC, “OPAI”, 15 March 1941, Vol. VI, ACC-30.114 WWCC, 22 May 1941, ACC-30.115 WWCC, “OPAI”, 13 May 1941, Vol. VI, ACC-30.


to supervise activities of constructive work, enrolment of Con-gress members, Hindu–Muslim unity, and providing broad political orientation to public opinion in villages on issues like contemporary political developments and the question of war through door-to-door campaigning.116 Besides, a weekly called the Satyagrahi was published by and large on the lines of Hari-jan to popularize the philosophy of khaddar, non-violence and Gandhian ideology. It was edited by Gopabandhu Choudhury.117 In May, the chairman of the Balasore District Local Board ordered the sub-inspectors of schools to ask teachers to fly the national flag in schools, students to sing “Bande Mataram”, and that Hindi be taught in schools.118 By April, satyagraha consultation camps had sprung up to offer a new direction to the movement, which had started showing signs of fizzling out.119

Around May, the PCC launched a scheme for the recruitment of Shanti Sena (“Peace Army”) to enroll volunteers as well as to train the intending satyagrahis. The sena would primarily supervise the maintenance of peace along with allied Congress activities.120 Thus, we come across the establishment of Congress volunteer training camps at Gadadharpur (Bhadrak) and Aska (Ganjam) by June. The centres focused on spinning, use of khad-dar, the real meaning of the satyagraha pledge, and aims and duties revolving around individual satyagraha.121

All these innovations by the PCC can be seen as a system-atic exercise to re-energize the waning spirit of the unarrested and disappointed satyagrahis as well as to push the struggle forward in a new direction. The very strategy to re-inspire the satyagraha spirit by undertaking constructive programmes and anti-imperialist political training at rural levels though the organization of training camps as well as building up a vast contingent of Shanti Sena volunteers later demonstrated its potential viability. However, there is no doubt that the pace

116 WWCC, 8 August 1941, ACC-30.117 Satyagrahi, No. 14, 23 April 1940, ACC-1429. This weekly was launched in January 1940.118 HPD, FNR, Balasore (BLS), 13 May 1941, ACC-1986.119 WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. VI, 6 May 1941, ACC-30.120 WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. VI, 4 June 1941, ACC-30. The qualification to be eligible for being recruited to the Shanti Sena was that a person should be above 18 years of age, having faith in Hindu–Muslim unity.121 WWCC, 22 June 1941, ACC-30.


of individual satyagraha slowed down by April before it was formally suspended in December 1941. This slowing down was probably compensated by shifting the focus of the satyagraha in the direction of villages, giving it a broad Gandhian construc-tive orientation.

Despite the slowdown, individual satyagraha continued to be organized in almost all the districts, with some released sa-tyagrahis repeating the performance. It is apparent that there was ire and enthusiasm for the performance of individual satyagraha again around September, with more arrests being made at sub-divisional levels like Angul, Jajpur, Kendrapara (Cuttack), Bargarh (Sambalpur) and Chhatrapur (Ganjam).122 This can probably be traced to the inspiration gathered for the satyagrahis through rural camps and training centres.

Another noticeable feature in the conduct of satyagraha in this phase was that the satyagrahis, while making speeches, often went beyond the usual forms as spelt out in the satya-graha pledge.123 The meetings organized to welcome back and garland the released satyagrahis were largely attended. The released satyagrahis often expressed their desire to repeat their performance after a few days’ break. Writers and journalists wrote inflammatory articles, regarding this as one more form of satyagraha.

We should also take into account the fact that the PCC’s efforts at conducting individual satyagraha were marked by a parallel exercise in terms of the formation of a coalition ministry represented by the faction of Nilakantha Das and Godavarish Mishra along with the landlord elements in Orissa. As noted earlier, they floated a party called Orissa Congress Swarajya Party, which stood opposed to the PCC, and installed a coali-tion ministry in November 1941. This factor also partly explains the slowing down of the individual satyagraha movement. For example, the Puri DCC could not take any disciplinary action against the two Congress MLAs who were not willing to join

122 Board of Revenue Records, Report of Cuttack DM, 8 December 1941, Sl No. 344; Board of Revenue Records, Report of Superintendent of Cuttack Jail, 5 De-cember 1941, Sl No. 154.123 WWCC, 10 January 1942, ACC-57. Pranakrushna Padihary, in a meeting of labourers in Cuttack (on 7 December 1941), talked of British rule as a hundred times more condemnable than German rule.


the satyagraha lest they should go over to the faction of Das and Mishra.124 The DCCs in other parts were also ridden with infighting between these two factions. This was aptly summed up by the DM of Balasore as early as January 1940, in his correspondence with the chief secretary, characterizing it as “unseemly squabbles for power among the different Congress groups”. He further observed:

Congress Ministers are now making extensive tours, telling people what to do since the leaders do not themselves know what to do and partly with the object of gaining support for their group against Nilakantha Das. In this district the Congress opponents of the Min-istry though few are not down-hearted.125

Besides, there was a relative fall in the number of Congress memberships by 1940 compared to the 1937–39 phase, partly due to the stringent qualifications enjoined for enrolment as a Congress satyagrahi. Membership stood at 46,000, less than half of the 1939 figure and one-third of that of 1938. The number of satyagrahis in 1941 (on the basis of an official report) who offered satyagraha and got arrested, was 377, with 68 repeating the “offence”.126

At this stage, we need to locate the pattern emerging in the tribal belt of Koraput district. We have noted earlier how Lakshman Naiko mobilized tribals against the illegalities of the Jeypore zamindari in Mathili area. In fact, a no-rent campaign by Naik had led to his arrest in 1939. His activities intensified in the context of individual satyagraha. He offered satyagraha twice, once in Ramgiri, bordering Jeypore sub-division and the other time in Mathili. As a result, he was arrested twice, sentenced to imprisonment for nine months, and had to pay a fine of Rs 300.127

In fact, in Jeypore zamindari, war subscription was included as an item in rent collection, creating grounds for strong popular

124 HPD, FNR, Puri, December 1949, ACC-1285.125 WWCC, FNR, BLS, 12 January 1940, ACC-56.126 WWCC, “Summary of Political Activities during the Year 1940 and 1941”, 12 January 1942, ACC-30.127 S. Sanganna, “Revolts in Orissa—Martyr Laxman Naik: A Hero of the Freedom Movement”, in V. Rangavaih, ed., Tribal Revolts, Nellore, 1971; Harekrushna Mahatab, ed., History of the Freedom Movement in Orissa, Vol. IV, Cuttack, 1969,


resentment. By February 1941, 22 people (including tribals and non-tribals) were arrested128 for shouting slogans against war funds. It was natural that individual satyagraha should hasten the campaign against bethi, goti (bonded labour), gudem, panu (taxes), “shandy” excise dues, plough tax and haat tax. These issues were taken up by Lakshman since 1939. We have also references to the killing of an amin (petty revenue official) in Kasipur and another in Nandapur by the people during this period. In contrast, Mathili was marked by the absence of any violence perpetrated against estate officials.129

Besides, Naik’s initiatives in organizing tribal villages through constructive activities as well as political education (a trend, as noted earlier and evident since 1939) had made the tribals con-fident and assertive. Dasarathi Nanda made an interesting rep-resentation of this transformation in popular consciousness:

The tribal who used to say to the revenue inspector, police and forest guard, “Oh! You, my Lord, whatever you wish I will carry out,” started speaking “I say no to you, I am not willing, we will not give, and we will not do [what you demand or say]”.130

One must note here that Naik’s faith in non-violence and Gan-dhi was total and he mobilized the tribals strictly within these creeds, which at least explains why we do not come across any violent activities in this period in Mathili zone. The considerable number of satyagrahis arrested in Koraput district also points to the degree and pace of tribal mobilization, in the context of the individual satyagraha.131 Naik was heading the Congress primary committee at Mathili during this period and Congress membership in Lakshman’s village at Tentuligumma stood at 200. The very popularization of Gandhian constructive activities, like spinning khaddar along with the establishment of ashram schools in areas like Udayagiri, Pandraguda and Tentuligumma

pp. 90–91; Budhram Samrath, Swadhinata Samgramara Yodha (Oriya), Jeypore, 1963, p. 1.128 HPD, FNR, Koraput, 18 February 1941.129 Dasarathi Nanda, Sahid Laxman Naik (Oriya), Berhampur, 1977, pp. 75–77.130 Ibid., pp. 9–10.131 Gopinath Mohanty, Dhulimatira Santha (Oriya), Cuttack, 1985. He says that the number of arrested satyagrahis in Koraput was the highest. He puts the figure at 500 (p. 243).


in Malkangiri132 (where Naik operated), equally suggests the success of the movement in certain tribal areas.

Princely States

At this point, we must take a look at the developments in the princely states. The prajamandal leaders of Nilagiri and Talcher offered individual satyagraha. Kailash Chandra Mohanty, Presi-dent, Nilagiri Prajamandal, was arrested in Ambodia haat in December 1940.133 When he was released in August, a reception was organized for him where the Nilagiri Prajamandal issued a booklet detailing the state of affairs in Nilagiri.134 Pabitra Pradhan of Talcher was also arrested in December 1940 and Kalindi Charan Pradhan became the president of the Talcher Prajamandal. What is noticeable is that most of the prajamandal leaders continued to emphasize on constructive activities, a trend clearly emerging in 1940, but protests against misrule of the states by organizing meetings or by circulating cyclostyled leaflets also existed.135

Peasant Mobilization, 1941

With regard to peasant mobilization, in the beginning of 1941 we see massive protest against the rejection of the Madras Estates Land Bill by the Viceroy. The Ganjam DCC, while resenting the decision, appealed to the government to appoint an official enquiry committee to examine the suggestions made in this connection by the Viceroy.136 The peasant agitation over the rejection of the Madras bill gathered momentum in February 1941. The peasantry resented the decision as arbitrary, as it was

132 S. Sanganna, “Revolts in Orissa”, p. 249; Mahatab, History of the Freedom Move-ment in Orissa, Vol. IV, pp. 91–92; Interview with Malati Choudhury (Angul, 14 May 1990) and Man Mohan Choudhry (Cuttack, 13 July 1989).133 WWCC, 16 December 1940, ACC-60.134 HPD, “Prosecution of Proprietor of Gopinath Press”, 4 August 1941. The book was published in Gopinath Press of Bhadrak, from where the Dagara of Nityananda Mohapatra was being published.135 AISPC Papers, “Sudhakar Rath’s Letter to AISPC”, F. No. 164, 5 March 1941; WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. VI, 21 January 1941, ACC-30; WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. VI, 4 June 1941.136 WWCC, Ganjam SP’s Report, Vol. VI, No. 434, 22 February 1941, ACC-30.


taken without the consent of peasants’ associations. They held out a warning that the government would face a terrible situa-tion in case their grievances were not redressed.137

The peasant conference held at Lingapur (Paralakhemundi, Ganjam) under the presidentship of Malati Choudhury in June resolved to fight imperialism, fascism and nazism and to es-tablish a socialist state. Among the other usual anti-zamindar resolutions, a resolution demanded the establishment of village panchayats for settlement of rural disputes. The conference also defended the civil liberty of the people, condemned the rejection of the Madras bill and asked people to continue the agitation against the rent hike.138 The peasant conference held at Polasara (Ganjam) on 7 June elected a delegation to meet the governor in connection with the harassment of peasants by local landlords after the rejection of the Madras bill. The conference clarified that the rejection of the bill had placed the ryots at the mercy of zamindars, who would hardly offer any voluntary reduction of rent.139

At the same time, we find efforts on the part of local leaders to enter into a compromise with the zamindars.140 Dibakar Patnaik, president of the district board, favoured such a compromise. As against this, Bipra Charan Das, Biswanath Das’s brother, and Narayan Panda opposed any idea of a compromise. The latter advised peasants to refuse payment of rent. Their uncom-promising position encouraged the peasants so much that the raja of Khallikote, sensing the popular mood, had the idea of carrying out distraints under police protection. A large number of letters, containing written resolutions of protest against the decision over the bill, were sent by the peasants to the Viceroy.141 The All Orissa Kisan Conference held at Khurda on 8 June at-tacked imperialism and capitalism as sources of exploitation of peasants and also responsible for dragging them into the war. It also sought to defend the peasants’ fundamental rights and civil liberties and asked the peasants to join the anti-imperialist

137 WWCC, Ganjam SP’s Report, 1 March 1941, ACC-30.138 WWCC, Report of Special Branch, 9 June 1941, ACC-30.139 WWCC, “OPAI”, 11 June 1941, ACC-30.140 WWCC, “OPAI”, 19 February 1941, Vol. VI, ACC-30.141 Board of Revenue Records, “DM to Revenue Commissioner”, 26 March 1941, 31 March 1941, Sl No. 268.


forces in securing freedom and resolved to initiate a statewide agitation over the Viceroy’s rejection of the Madras bill. Domi-nated by communist leadership, the conference made no secret of the fact that it wanted to use the kisan sabha to further its pro-communist campaign.142

The chasm between the kisan sabha activists and the other Congress sections widened during the year. Nabakrushna Chou-dhury, in a meeting at Puri in September, sought to reconcile the differing perceptions of the two sections. It was decided that all ideological shades in the Congress would back the satyagraha effort. Besides, no disciplinary action would be initiated against any kisan sabha member provided he/she acted as per the gen-eral creed of the Congress.143 The kisan sabha’s open profession of Russian ideals had become near total by November 1941.144 The sabha was mostly active in Puri; its efforts at expansion in other districts were not very successful. The communist attempt to launch a parallel kisan sabha through the help of Congress left-wingers145 was also not successful. The conflict between the two forces was evident when the Balasore DCC, in a meeting, resolved not to dilute the anti-imperialist thrust of the move-ment by joining the kisan sabha.146

A fillip to the organization of the youth and the peasantry was given within the course of the individual satyagraha when most of the unarrested and intending satyagrahis were directed to concentrate on village welfare, apart from offering individual satyagraha. This probably explains why during 1941 we come across several instances of various forms of popular mobiliza-tion and peasant resistance in many parts, which marked a clear-cut departure from the usual and prescribed conduct of individual satyagraha.

In this context, we may also mention cases of Salt Law viola-tions. There was a perceptible increase in such cases by the end of 1940. Puri registered 1,654 such cases, with 114 in Balasore alone.147 The reasons for these may be sought in the influence

142 WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. VI, 11 June 1941, ACC-30.143 WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. VI, 19 June 1941, ACC-30.144 HPD, “OPAI”, Vol. VI, 20 November 1941.145 WWCC, “Review of the Year 1941”, ACC-30.146 WWCC, Report of SP, Balasore, 15 August 1941, ACC-59.147 Report on the Land Revenue Administration of the District of North Orissa for the Year 1938–39 and 1939–40, Cuttack, 1941, pp. 2–4.


of the communists in the Puri kisan sabha and much talk of satyagraha (which was round the corner). Preparation for the satyagraha around December 1940 and popular memory of the Salt Satyagraha probably spurred such violations. We come across a report in March 1941 by the colonial authorities under-taking full-fledged efforts to prepare a scheme for protecting the salt factories of Ganjam district. The scheme insisted on the extra recruitment of at least 18 havaldars and 84 constables for Humma and Sumandi as it anticipated “raids” on the factories in view of the satyagraha.148

One more aspect that merits attention is the open participa-tion of states’ subjects in kisan sabha activities. For instance, the Kisan Day celebration at Remuna was marked by the participa-tion of Nilagiri peasants.149

As noted earlier, Sachi Routrai along with Rabindra Mohan Das (another left-winger) toured Balasore district extensively in the beginning of 1941 to compile a list of satyagrahis for the third batch.150 Rabindra Das was selected to impart training to satyagrahis at Soro centre in April.151 The involvement of youth with a communist outlook in the overall conduct of satyagraha must have lent a different impulse, as far as training of young-sters or organization of peasantry was concerned. For example, while addressing the Andrei Youth League session in Balasore, Routrai urged the audience to fight capitalism.152

We also come across interesting instances of the formation of kisan sabhas. In Dhamnagar, people resented the government policy of levying water tax, and thus was born a water tax as-sociation. This association gradually transformed itself into a kisan sabha around July.153 In Eram, Basudebpur and Bhadrak, individual satyagraha in a Congress-dictated form came to be opposed.154 Around October, one finds satyagraha conducted before the houses of paddy hoarders in the overall atmosphere of

148 HPD, IG’s Report on Protection of Salt Factories, 8 March 1941, ACC-1835.149 WWCC, 15 September 1941, ACC-59.150 WWCC, SP’s Report, 8 January 1941, ACC-60.151 WWCC, 27 April 1941, ACC-30.152 WWCC, SP’s Report, 8 January 1941, ACC-60.153 WWCC, 10 March 1941, 31 July 1941, ACC-59.154 WWCC, 15 July 1941, ACC-59.


food scarcity in Balasore.155 These trends within the broad pattern of individual satyagraha were a result of the re-organization of the rural areas through constructive activities, satyagrahi train-ing centres, the creation of Shanti Sena and the PCC’s persistent call for “march to villages”. The objective was to re-inspire the large number of unarrested and intending satyagrahis at mass levels, which probably created space for different forms within the broad structure of satyagraha.

Mobilization of the Youth

The youths, basically socialists and communists, also commit-ted themselves to such activities at the village level. This may explain the reasons for peasant mobilization picking up in many of the estates like Madhupur. We come across several instances of the organization and activities of the youth league during 1940–41. The emergence of this trend, in fact, picked up within the course of individual satyagraha, and in the context of con-sistent efforts by the PCC to emphasize constructive activities at the rural levels. This trend was evident since January 1941, when many youth leagues sprang up at village levels handling village welfare work, like settling petty disputes. Mostly initi-ated by the local-level Congress activists, such leagues were often used as platforms to cover up socialist and communist ideological campaigns.156

We have seen earlier, how, as early as September 1940, the youth league at Jeypore estate (Koraput) resisted violently the efforts at war fund collection by the authorities, leading to the arrest of its president Lambodar Singh Lal. On 16 June, Lalmohan Satapathy (Balasore) distributed leaflets at the Jaleswar haat and encouraged the audience there to form a youth organization to drive away the British government. His speech spelt character-istic departure from the “symbolic satyagraha”.157 In September, the Puri District Youth Conference was organized under the

155 “All India Kisan Supplement”, 18 October 1941–19 October 1941, Indulal Yajnik Private Papers (NMML), Subject File No. 20.156 WWCC, SP’s Report, 8 January 1941, ACC-30; HPD, “OPAI”, No. 5, 27 Janu-ary 1941, ACC-60.157 Board of Revenue Records, Report of DM, 21 January 1942, Sl No. 118.


presidentship of Nabakrushna Choudhury, who emphasized on the need to strengthen the anti-imperialist struggle.158

We have pointed out earlier the activities of Sachi Routrai and Rabindra Nath Das in Balasore. They were involved in the working of the kisan sabha through overt activities around satyagraha and the organization of youth league. Along with this, most of the rural pockets of Balasore, particularly Bhadrak, Basudebpur, Chandbali and Andrei, were conspicuous by the presence of several youth leagues. These leagues, formed under the initiative of local Congress leadership, attracted many student activists. Most of them adopted anti-capitalist and anti-feudal positions to bring about the welfare of peasants.159

As for student politics during the year, both the National Front and the Forward Bloc kept functioning within the Orissa Students’ Federation.160 M.N. Roy’s visit to Orissa in January had a mixed response. The National Front condemned him as an “agent of imperialism” and a “traitor”.161 The Nilakantha Das group, opposed to the ex-ministry party, was a supporter of both Forward Bloc and M.N. Roy. The 17th session of the All Orissa Students’ Federation organized by the National Front-wingers resolved to unite and fight any sort of discrimination, and to take their due share in the national struggle without being an appendage to any political party in the context of the war and to bring about social change. Besides, it reiterated its anti-im-perialist stance very clearly and condemned the Congress for its “shameful efforts for a compromise” with imperialism. The Balasore students’ conference, organized in April 1941, was pre-sided over by Harihar Mohapatra, who advised the students to concentrate on socio-cultural as well as constructive activities. The conference was conspicuous by the presence of communists like Sachi Routrai and Ram Chandra Mishra. Nityananda Mohapatra, editor of Dagara, also attended the conference. The conference condemned the oppression of medical school students.162

The National Front wing dominated by budding communists now stepped up its activities. Bibhudendu Mishra, a prominent

158 WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. VI, No. 37, 6 October 1941, ACC-30.159 WWCC, SP’s Report, BLS, 1 January 1941–7 January 1941, ACC-30.160 WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. VI, No. 3, 13 April 1941, ACC-30.161 WWCC, “OPAI”, Vol. V, 7 February 1941, ACC-30.162 Chhatra, 1 April 1941.


student communist, released a pamphlet for distribution among Ravenshaw College students in January. It reminded the stu-dents of the preceding year’s strike during the celebration of independence day, and exhorted the student comrades to as-sert their rights as students and nationalists.163 In February, Ramakrushna Pati, another young communist, translated the book Whither Congress into Oriya under the title Congress Ra Gati Keun Ade.164 While explaining the need for such a translation, he observed in its preface:

After coming into contact with various youth leagues [implying communist associations with youth leagues in Orissa], I have been convinced of the fact that most of the Congress and Kisan activ-ists have no idea about things except what they come to see in newspapers … These workers have heard of only spinning and weaving. They have also heard that in the present situation of the country, we shall have to be organised and [we have] to engage ourselves in constructive work [spinning, Harijan upliftment, etc.] as per the dictate of Gandhi. This is the political education of the workers and this is the method to bring about political awakening among the people.

Dubbing the policy enunciated by the Congress leadership as wrong, and basically capitalist in character, the book defined socialist principles. While the book was critical of the “philoso-phy of swaraj based on khaddar and spinning”, it blamed the Congress leadership for not politically educating the masses properly for fear of destruction of the capitalist system, which such education might generate.

This, in fact, typically reflects the growing disillusionment of the communists with the dominant Congress leadership and their negative attitude towards Gandhi. In March, Durga Charan Mohanty, a student communist, addressing the youth gathering at Cuttack on the occasion of Sahid Day (Martyrs’ Day), described the imperialist rule as an organized hooliganism, causing mass murders through firing, bombs and starvation, and exhorted the audience to fight for the independence of the country and to fight

163 Bibhudendu Mishra, “An Appeal” (Pamphlet), 23 January 1941, ACC-1838.164 Ramkrushna Pati, Congress Ra Gati Keun Ade (Oriya), Cuttack, 1941.


the obstacles on the way to independence.165 This points to the open advocacy by the communists of the alternative methods of struggle to the basic Gandhian forms. In another meeting, on 9 March, he attacked the method of individual satyagraha as organized by Gandhi, describing it as a “stupid” method. But he concluded by observing:

It is necessary for the youth and old men and women to take part in the agitation [individual satyagraha] to break the backbone of the British Government, who are now embarrassed due to this War and whose backbone is about to break.166

He also projected the communist thinking—of the necessity for organizing immediately a mass movement to fight British imperialism. Mohanty also circulated many communist leaflets. The communist bulletin Chhatra (mouthpiece of Orissa Students’ Federation, 1940) continued its publication in 1941 under an editorial board comprising such prominent left-wing activists as Banamali Patnaik, Durga Charan Mohanty, Biren Mitra and Ram Chandra Ram and continued to reflect communist ideas in its writings.167

165 HPD, SP’s Report on D.C. Mohanty’s Speech at Cuttack, 31 March 1941, ACC-1929.166 Ibid.167 See, for example, Chhatra, 1 April 1941.

The Preparatory Phase, January July 1942

The dominant political discourse, which had characterized the Provincial Congress CommitteeÊs (PCC) exercise in 1941, was individual satyagraha coupled with the stress on Gandhian constructive activities. Besides, we have also focused on the organization of youth leagues and the strengthening of kisan sabha activities by the left-wingers, basically the communists. However, with the suspension of the limited satyagraha in De-cember 1941, the broad anti-war campaign of the PCC shifted to a specific drive for evolving mass preparedness for the war situation.

The Congress meetings organized to welcome the released satyagrahis around early 1942 mostly discussed the war situation and advised people about their course of action. A large num-ber of people attended the meetings. A notable feature of these meetings was the sharp critique of colonial rule. For instance, Pranakrushna Padihary, while welcoming the satyagrahis in a meeting at Cuttack on 7 December 1941, asked them to repeat satyagraha once again, pointing out that „British rule was rather

Seven

Making of Swaraj: The 1942 Movement

Making of Swaraj 293

hundred times condemnable than German rule.‰1 In another meeting2 organized by the socialists at Salipur on 6 January, Malati Choudhury spoke to an audience of nearly 4,000 people about the urgency of holding meetings in area under every thana (police station) to educate popular opinion about the ap-proach to the „present international situation arising out of the War‰. She stated that the war was the creation of the capitalists for profiteering and exploitation and not to the advantage of peasants and workers. Her advice to the people was to store foodstuff for „at least a year‰ and „to organise [themselves] to save the country from anarchy and goondaism [hooliganism]‰ in the context of a chaotic situation which might be brought about by the war. She further stressed the formation of volun-teer corps at village level to undertake Gandhian constructive activities besides monitoring the security of the villages. While talking of the „new society‰ prevailing in Russia, she asked the zamindars and moneylenders to give up their old policy and live harmoniously in their villages. While deploring the fact that British imperialism had prevented the Indians from get-ting militarized for so long, she pointed out that it was due to the Congress that people had become fearless and developed a „non-violent and combatant spirit‰ towards the government, police and moneylenders.

Nabakrushna Chaudhury, who also addressed the meeting, wondered how the British government, which had demilitarized the Indians for so long, could now ask the same Indians to fight, reminding the people that the British sought the help of Indians when they were being beaten by Germany. He further pointed out that British soldiers were „now famous for their historic retreats‰ and „the present English statesmanship‰ was known for their „bankruptcy‰. He went on to describe Hitler as an offspring of British imperialism as England initiated the policy of colonization that ultimately resulted in the Treaty of Versailles giving birth to Hitler. He said that unless India became independent, neither Gandhi nor Nehru would be able

1 WhoÊs Who Compilation Committee (WWCC), Report on Congress-cum-Labour Meeting (7 December 1941) by the District Magistrate (DM), 10 January 1942, Ac-cession no. 52 (ACC-52).2 Ibid.


to induce the masses to help the war effort. Stressing on the need to stand by the dictates of the Congress and Gandhian 13-point constructive programme, he appealed to the people to store foodstuff, grow cotton, spin, weave and thereby trans-form „each village into an invincible fort‰. This, he suggested, would also be the means to maintain peace in the village in case of the emergence of chaos associated with war. In keeping with Gandhian instructions, he warned the zamindars and the capitalists to mend their ways and realize that „greater disaster awaited them at the hands of people when there would be no police or government to protect them‰. Gouranga Charan Das, another Congress Socialist Party (CSP) functionary, warned the audience of a political upheaval where leaders might not meet the people nor would the police be able to exercise con-trol. Thus, he justified the raising of a volunteer corps by the Congress as a means of forging a link with the people during a period of crisis. All the speakers punctuated their speeches with forthright attacks on the existing coalition ministry, which in their perception served the interests of imperialism.

It is noteworthy that such meetings were organized in the rural areas at a time when they had become hotbeds of „wild alarming rumours‰.3 Moreover, the overall texture of the speeches sought to project the impression of the near-total collapse of the British authority and the death of imperialism, a trend that the officials believed was gaining momentum „since the release of the satyagrahis‰.4 This trend of mobilization and orientation of popular perception, that imperialism, which was at the root of all evils including the war, was nearing its death and almost „gone‰, remained vigorous as late as July 1942. Such views of the speakers were often associated with emphasis on organization of people on a non-violent basis, taking up Gandhian constructive programmes to face the war crisis.5

During the independence day celebrations at Balasore, Karuna-kar Panigrahi spoke of the possible defeat of Britain. However, he pointed out that even though Japan, or Germany or Britain

3 Ibid.4 Ibid.5 See, for example, Home Political Department (HPD), Report of SP to DM, Puri, 12 January 1942, ACC-2094.


might win the war, it was essential to remain away from them, as each of them was the enemy of Indians.6

By the end of February, the Congress leadership started or-ganizing a volunteer corps in Balasore. Harekrushna Mahatab took the lead. Volunteers from every village were raised, and upon their sending written applications to the Balasore District Congress Committee (DCC), their names were registered. The volunteers were divided into various sections. One section of volunteers was asked to guard their respective villages and another section was kept ready to move into the village on the indication of a „symbolical sound‰, in case of any trouble created by the anti-social elements taking advantage of the civil disorder due to the war. It was also decided to open a full-fledged office at Balasore to monitor such activities. Subscriptions were raised from businessmen and willing citizens to finance the scheme.7

This trend of raising volunteer groups became much easier, given the fact that a substantive part of the PCCÊs exercise in the year 1941 had been devoted to constructive activities in villages, raising of Shanti Sena and also organization of youth leagues. The drive for raising volunteer squads became a marked affair by February. The Cuttack DCC decided to divide the entire district into various sections, placing experienced „officers‰ as heads of sections. The objective was to forge a link with the masses and to raise a volunteer corps to maintain order and allay panic caused by the war. Volunteers were also instructed to prevent the export of rice, paddy and other necessities. It was also decided to establish price control committees in the rural areas.8 Such schemes, often seen as „parallel organizations‰, created considerable apprehension to the colonial authorities. The chief secretary (CS) asked the district magistrates (DMs) to prevent such organizations and „not to allow them to grow into big organizations‰.9

6 HPD, Report of DM, Balasore to Chief Secretary (CS) and „Prosecution of Asok Das‰, 9 February 1942, ACC-2098.7 HPD, Report of Special Branch, February 1942; HPD, „CS to Revenue Commis-sioner‰, 28 February 1942; HPD, Fortnightly Report (FNR), Balasore, 17 March 1942, ACC-2112.8 HPD, „CS to Revenue Commissioner‰, 28 February 1942.9 HPD, FNR, Balasore, 17 March 1942, ACC-2112.


An important development in May was the visit of Mira Ben (a British lady who had settled down in India and devoted her life to the cause of advancement of Gandhian principles and the national movement) to Orissa as GandhiÊs emissary on the request of Mahatab.10 She addressed many public meetings during her long tour of Cuttack, Puri, Berhampur, Bhadrak, etc., and explained GandhiÊs position regarding the war to the Congress activists, merchants and the people in general. In Choudwar, she advised the villagers to evacuate the aerodrome area while explaining GandhiÊs instructions on self-protection and self-sufficiency. She suggested that the evacuees need to be compensated. She appealed to the doctors to take charge of Congress-sponsored medical units. In all her speeches, she projected the impression that Orissa would very probably be invaded by the Japanese and would not be defended by the military. She appealed to all, especially the government servants, to dispel the thoughts of surrendering before the enemy and to concentrate on the constructive programme of Gandhi and the practice of self-sufficiency. Moreover, she advised the setting up of local defence organizations in defiance of government orders, and protesting against any move to remove country boats from the danger zone and the draining of canals as part of war measures. She also pointed out that restriction over the manufacture of salt should be removed in view of its scarcity. The overall impression she sought to create among the people was that the Congress would build a system of administration in the eventuality of occupation of the country by the invaders.

In a public meeting at Cuttack on 26 May, she sought to explain the Gandhian position.11 In answering Ramakrishna PatiÊs (a young communist) query as to which was the greater enemy, Britain or Japan, and how to fight both of them, she put forward GandhiÊs idea:

The wretchedness of poor in the present Raj is so terrible and increasing that scorched earth policy is not applicable to this country. Gandhi says that it is his religion to resist that route even at the expense of assisting the Japanese. Fight against Japanese is not in GandhiÊs

10 HPD, Report on Mira BenÊs Activities, June 1942, ACC-2323.11 Ibid.


agenda, at least fight in the sense of violence. GandhiÊs programme works up in non-violence and non-cooperation. If we begin to fight violently, Gandhi says we will bring chaos and confusion. But, if we non-cooperate and non-violently fight with Japanese, we will serve our purpose. Gandhi has absolute faith on that.

Answering another question regarding the validity of non-cooperation as a movement in such a violent political situation as the war and in view of the fact that Lord Wellingdon was able to crush the movements of 1930 32 so easily, she observed that Gandhi was sure of dealing with the thrust of the Japanese, adding that the struggle to remove British domination would have a great psycho-moral effect on non-cooperation with the Japanese. She repeatedly asserted that by resisting one imperi-alism, that is, the British, Gandhi was also resisting all sorts of other imperialist forces like Japan.

During her campaign, Mira Ben was invariably accompanied by the top leaders of the PCC and DCCs such as Mahatab, Biswanath Das and Laxmi Narayan Mishra, who expended equal effort in explaining to the people the war and the PCCÊs efforts to meet the situation. Her meetings attracted large crowds and her visit touching different parts of Orissa became a serious exercise on the part of the PCC to build up mass preparedness for the war while infusing an anti-imperialist spirit among the people.

The dominant form of the PCC to evolve mass preparedness in the context of the war crisis was to concentrate on constructive activities and propagate Gandhian values. Mira BenÊs visit was part of that exercise. Mahatab had started editing a newspaper called Rachana since February 1942 with the avowed objective of popularizing Gandhian views on khadi, spinning, Harijan upliftment, cultivation of grain, raising of a volunteer corps, etc. Besides the fact that MahatabÊs articles on the war were filled with an intense anti-British spirit, he advised people to grow more crops and not to store food crops at one place but to distribute them equally in different parts through either lending or selling. He also advised people to resist any attempt at exporting food crops outside the province. He asserted that an acute economic crisis was emerging due to the war as Oriya labourers working in Burma and Calcutta were returning to Orissa, adding to the problem of unemployment. He equally resented the move by


the zamindar of Jaleswar of forcing the peasants to sell their paddy because of the declaration by the Nilagiri State prohibit-ing the possession of paddy beyond 20 maunds per family. He warned both the zamindars and the government that selling of paddy was a sin when Orissa did not have enough stocks. The Rachana also regularly protested against other war measures like boat and light restrictions.12

Between May and July, constructive activities came to be organized at the initiative of the Congress. Congress activists toured rural areas, organizing meetings, emphasizing construc-tive activities and preaching Congress doctrines. In Bhadrak, 22 centres13 were opened under the initiative of Rabindra Mohan Das to popularize constructive activities. Village reconstruction remained a major part of the activities of such centres alongwith the preaching of the Congress doctrine. Campaigns against war restrictions, such as removal of boats, were also undertaken. Centres were opened for civil defence purposes in Bhadrak.14 These activities assumed greater momentum in the wake of Mira BenÊs visit. In Sambalpur, L.N. Mishra, who had associated himself with the tour of Mira Ben, propagated Gandhian views, including raising of Congress volunteers for night patrolling as well as campaigning against war restrictions.15

What emerges from the above developments is the fact that the leadership undertook consistent efforts to mobilize popular opinion and generate mass preparedness for the war while pro-jecting the vision of an imminent collapse of British imperialism. This collapse was sought to be compensated by the vision of a self-reliant India. We must note here that as early as January 1942, the Utkal Provincial Congress Committee (UPCC) had resolved to initiate mass contact programmes through the orga-nization of volunteer corps to work in rural areas. They would work as National Defence Brigade in order to protect people from war-related dangers, which involved activities like night patrol, to prevent cases of hooliganism and crime.16 By the end

12 Rachana, 4 May 1942.13 WWCC, FNR, BLS, 28 June 1942, 27 July 1942, ACC-76.14 WWCC, FNR, BLS, 28 May 1942, ACC-76.15 HPD, „Public Meeting at Jharsuguda‰, 24 July 1942, ACC-2282.16 HPD, „Orissa Police Abstract Intelligence‰ („OPAI‰ henceforth), Vol. VII, 23 January 1942, WWCC, ACC-30.


of April, when troop movement and naval action took place in Orissa, the nature of mass contact campaign by the leadership became one of improving the morale of the people in the face of enemy attacks, by organizing resistance to external aggres-sion, however small, and hampering the invader by a policy of denial.17 As against this, the policy of the coalition ministry remained one of help to the government in the war, with men and materials.

Evidence suggests that by March 1942, several volunteer organizations had sprung up, mostly in the rural areas. For example, youth leagues, peace brigades („shanti senas‰), and „helping committees‰ having four to five villages under their supervision had already become operational. Village defence committees were also organized to monitor defence activities in the respective areas and to supervise law and order dur-ing external invasion. Besides, „watch-and-ward‰ committees were organized in villages for night patrolling and help in the evacuation of people from coastal tracts during enemy raids.18 There is evidence of the formation of seven camps in Cuttack to train volunteers.19

In this regard, Bari Congress Gandhi Ashram under Gopa-bandhu Chaudhury had done a tremendous job. Many of the volunteers underwent training at the Bari centre and later su-pervised the activities of „swabalambi khadi centres‰ as well as volunteer centres in their respective villages. Several khadi centres, each with at least four villages under its supervision, started functioning. These centres, along with helping com-mittees, acted as nodal agencies to preach the Congress and Gandhian ideology during the war crisis. It is interesting to note that a zonal committee called Eastern Zone Central Committee was formed with its headquarters at Bhadrak to popularize the Congress doctrine with emphasis on Grama Sangathan (village reconstruction) and other constructive activities.20 This indi-cates how a full-fledged structure had evolved to reconstruct

17 HPD, „OPAI‰, Vol. VII, 15 April 1942, WWCC, ACC-30.18 All India Congress Committee (AICC) Papers, „PCC to AICC Regarding Volunteer Organizations‰, F. No. 22, Part 1, 15 March 1942.19 Ibid.20 WWCC, 22 June 1942, ACC-30.


villages via the Congress campaign. There is reference to the functioning of 42 constructive centres in Balasore by June.21 A swayamsevak sangha came up in Bargarh around March 1942 to organize night patrolling to check crime and enrol volunteers for such activities.22 L.N. Mishra was active in setting up vol-unteer organizations in Sambalpur district.23 The organization of Shanti Sena, under the initiative of Mahatab in 1942, was done to discharge effectively the functions of watching the law and order situation while popularizing the Congress ideology. At least 24 sub-committees functioned in Balasore to assist the Shanti Sena volunteers in their activities.24

The nationalist press had its share in arousing strong popular feelings against war measures. For instance, The Samaja, Nababharat and Rachana continued pleading for full exemption of boats from removal in the coastal tracts during the rainy months of July and August.25 Resenting troop movement in Orissa, the Rachana continued to advise people not to be scared by such moves.26 The Samaja was also equally harsh over the naval action undertaken in the coastal tracts of Orissa (especially in Jagatsinghpur area) in April, holding the British government responsible for the failure to inculcate moral courage among the people. Commenting upon air raids on Rangoon,27 The Samaja deplored the fact that people were blamed for not behaving properly in such a crisis, which resulted in the death of so many persons. It went on to suggest that the Rangoon experience might be repeated in Orissa, and warned that the „foreign government‰ should not come up with the explanation that people did not behave properly and thus they were being taught a lesson. Finally, it advocated a strong plea for sponsoring adequate government measures in advance for the protection of the people to withstand such an eventual-ity. It also continued to focus on the problem of unemployment

21 Ibid.22 WWCC, 21 March 1942, ACC-30.23 WWCC, 7 April 1942, ACC-30.24 WWCC, 1 March 1942, ACC-30.25 HPD, „A Brief Appreciation by the Provincial Press Advisor‰, 31 July 1942, ACC-2089.26 HPD, „A Brief Appreciation by the Provincial Press Advisor‰, 31 March 1942, ACC-2089.27 HPD, „A Brief Appreciation by the Provincial Press Advisor‰, 15 April 1942, ACC-2089.


in the event of Oriya labourers returning from Rangoon and Calcutta due to air raids.28 The Samaja also condemned the co-alition ministry and accused Godabarish Mishra of displaying the imperialist mentality of Churchill and Amery.29

The by-election in Baliguda constituency, in which the Con-gress candidate defeated a member of the coalition ministry, was projected in the press as a victory for the Congress not only in Orissa but also in India.30 The Samaja continued to voice its opposition to the arrest of Congress leaders by the coalition ministry.31

Nature of Communist Leadership

Here, we could take a brief look at the politics of the commu-nists in Orissa. A weekly newspaper titled the Shramika („The Labourer‰) was launched on 6 March with Ram Krishna Pati as its editor. Its first editorial observed, „If today the people and the labourers destroy the fascist Germany, Italy and Japan, then imperialism will crumble along with it before the mighty force of the masses.‰32 It emphasized the need to fight the fas-cist forces first and declared the war to be a peopleÊs war. The Orissa Trade Union Conference was organized around March. Ram Krishna Pati, joint secretary of the Provincial Kisan Sabha, with Durga Charan Mohanty (All India Students Federation, hereafter AISF) were active in the organization of kisan sabhas. Durga Prasad Guru, who used to mobilize the workers of the Orient Paper Mill in Sambalpur in 1940, again became active during this period. He collected all his revolutionary composi-tions (which were sung by the workers during strikes) in the shape of a booklet titled Biplaba Jhankar.33

28 The Samaja, 14 January 1942 17 January 1942.29 HPD, „A Brief Appreciation by the Provincial Press Advisor‰, 15 February 1942, ACC-2089.30 HPD, „A Brief Appreciation by the Provincial Press Advisor‰, 31 April 1942, ACC-2089.31 The Samaja, 20 January 1942 3 February 1942.32 Shramika, 6 March 1942.33 Biplaba Jhankar, 20 January 1942.


Addressing a kisan sabha meeting34 at Sarpada (Bhandari-pokhari, Cuttack), Rama Krishna Pati explained the difference between the Congress and the kisan sabha to the gathering. He said that real swaraj, aimed at by the kisan sabha, was that of the Russian type, to be achieved through a revolution by the peasants and labourers. He further explained that there would be no gain if British imperialism was replaced by the likes of Birla, because the rich people and the zamindars were the greatest thieves, sucking the blood of the poor, for which they must be totally destroyed as there could not be any relation between the eater and the eaten. With reference to the war, he described the Japanese as tigers and the English as wolves. To quote him, „As the power of the British has gradually gone down; so we will first join the wolf and kill the tiger. Then it will not be difficult to finish the wolf after the war by giving necessary blows.‰

He criticized the Congress for insisting on driving out British imperialism at a juncture when a bigger fascist enemy was threatening the country. His overall appeal to the audience was to first get rid of the more powerful enemy and to kill the small one afterwards. Other speakers also made forceful pleas for the release of leaders of anti-Japanese convictions to step up the campaign against the Japanese.

At a studentsÊ meeting35 organized by the communists in Cuttack on 11 July, Manmohan Mishra spelt out the necessity of joining the war efforts·particularly air raid precautions·so as to forge links with the Indian soldiers by inspiring them with the idea of independence. This would ultimately make the Indian soldiers help the masses as the Russian soldiers did during the time of revolution. The two prominent members of the All Utkal StudentsÊ Federation (the Communist faction), viz., Baidyanath Rath and Durga Charan Mohanty, were in touch with the Bengal Communist civilian volunteers who were trying to promote better understanding between the civil population

34 HPD, Report on Speeches by R.K. Pati and Giridhari Panda, 19 July 1942, ACC-2301.35 HPD, Report on the Meeting at Town Hall, 12 July 1942, ACC-2327.


and the troops in areas where necessary military undertakings caused some inconvenience to the life of the people.36

Mohanty, along with Ram Krishna Pati, sought financial assistance from the government to attend the guerilla training camp organized in Punjab by the Punjab Provincial StudentsÊ Federation.37 Moreover, these youngsters, under the banner of the studentsÊ federation, stepped up their anti-Japanese and anti-fascist campaign following the visit of Mira Ben with a view to countering the effects of her propaganda.38

It is interesting to note that a section of the communists who were released from jail after promising support to the war effort, started denouncing the war efforts of the coalition ministry and, in fact, secretly tried to strengthen the anti-British campaign.39 As late as July, certain sections of the communists were convinced of the fact that in case the Congress started an anti-imperialist movement under Gandhi, they could hardly oppose it. This was precisely because they knew that such a position would send wrong signals to the people: they would be accused of indirectly opposing a peopleÊs movement.40

With regard to the CSP, the visit of Ram Nandan Mishra (Secretary, All India Congress Socialist Party, hereafter AICSP) on 22 July was of real importance.41 During his visit, he appealed for support to GandhiÊs new move. This activated the socialist groups in Orissa to locate their position along with the Gandhi-ans as against the communists. As far as the Forward BlocÊs activities were concerned, its chief organizer Ashok Das, son of Nilakantha Das and a student activist (though opposed to the Congress and supportive of the coalition ministry), tried hard to consolidate the Forward BlocÊs position in the province. He campaigned by circulating pamphlets such as „Biplabi Subash‰ and „Bidrohi‰, the latter advocating an armed revolution for

36 HPD, „Secret Letter No. 2018C‰, 27 June 1942, ACC-2158.37 HPD, Report of PM, 28 May 1942, ACC-2158.38 HPD, „Secret Letter (No. 3303/42, 23 June 1942) of CS to Govt. of India‰, ACC-2158.39 HPD, Report of Deputy Inspector-General (DIG), 22 April 1942; HPD, „A Brief Appreciation by the Provincial Press Advisor‰, 15 July 1942.40 HPD, „OPAI‰, Vol. VIII, 20 July 1942, WWCC, ACC-30.41 WWCC, Report of SP, Cuttack, 23 July 1942, ACC-30.


overthrowing of the British government under Subhash Bose and finally to enthrone him as the dictator of free India.42

Locating Popular Perceptions

It is equally important to examine the understanding of the war at popular levels. We have attempted to delineate the notion of the collapse of British rule, often hinted at by the leadership in their efforts at popular mobilization. Moreover, stringent war measures in terms of restrictions on lighting and boat movements, drying of canals, army/naval deployment and exercises, and the return of evacuees·mostly Oriya laboureres·from Burma and Calcutta to the province, with attendant civilian problems of law and order and unemployment created an intense climate for war discussions and rumours.

As early as March 1942, we have references to sweepers (under the leadership of Gourahari Naik) lighting fires in many streets of Puri town.43 The objective was to discredit the local administration and police supervision, while highlighting the grievances of the sweepers. In other words, the intention was to make people lose faith in the police and the administration. Besides, a section of the Congress leadership, which was op-posed to the coalition ministry and Godabarish Mishra (finance minister and a person from Puri district), was active in backing such activities. The sweepers had been actively demanding in-crease in wages to meet the war-time inflation along with other facilities like provident fund, sick leave, maternity leave and provision for holidays since 1940. Faced as they were with the prospect of air raids and naval exercise along with attendant calamities due to the war (most seriously apprehended in Puri, as it was on the sea coast), by 1942 they seem to have resorted to this type of protest to focus their grievances. However, a sec-tion of other leaders, mostly communists, also lent support to such activities. It is in this background that one has to see why Mahatab kept emphasizing on Harijan reform in his writings

42 Board of Revenue Records, „ADM, Cuttack to Revenue Commissioner‰, 28 June 1942, Sl No. 486.43 HPD, Report of SP, Puri, 26 March 1942, ACC-2153.


in Rachana. His articles often projected the prospect of a social revolution arising out of the Harijan problems, unless reforms in the social structure were undertaken.44

A war situation often creates a climate for wild rumours. As places like Rangoon and Calcutta had sizeable Oriya labour settlements, popular reaction to the air bombings in those areas led to the rise of a variety of rumours. These rumours, born out of popular discontent over war, sought to strengthen the notion of British collapse and the inevitable overthrow of British imperialism. In the atmosphere of wartime depres-sion, the rumours often helped considerably to reinforce the impression of Indian victory, thereby offering potential thrust to the anti-imperialist struggle. Besides, popular discontent, often enhanced through rumours, surfaced in response to the deployment of war measures like the movement and camping of army contingents, naval exercises, restrictions over lighting and boat movement, building of „war zones‰, surveillance done through low-flying airplanes and the like. Popular perception of such developments displayed a deep-seated anger against the colonial army and navy and by extension, an outright rejection of colonial hegemony.

First, let us try to map the response of the Oriya labourers mostly settled in Calcutta and Rangoon to the signs and realities of the war. In fact, these were the people who left Calcutta and Rangoon in the face of air bombings on the Assam Burma border as well as Calcutta and rushed back to Orissa by overcrowded trains.45 Along with them, they brought back their perceptions of war happenings. As per official estimates, as many as 70,810 Oriyas46 had left for home from Calcutta, Rangoon and Assam (via Calcutta) by the first week of June. The bombings not only resulted in the death of many Oriyas but also unleashed a spree of looting. For instance, with repeated Japanese bombings on the Assam Burma border and in Manipur, the Oriya fugitives

44 See for reference Rachana, 26 January 1942 4 May 1942.45 HPD, „An Appeal by Godabarish Mishra‰ (Pamphlet entitled „Oriyas in Calcutta‰), 1941 (date not mentioned), ACC-2012.46 HPD, „Extracts from Lala N.K. Roy, Liaison Officer to Govt. of Orissa and Calcutta‰, 7 June 1942, ACC-2326.


were looted by the tribals of the areas.47 Along with this distress, problems regarding transportation and food were acute.

Some of the evacuees from Burma carried back with them Burmese currency notes as they had neither the patience nor the time to encash them.48 Moreover, as exchange facilities were not easily available during wartime, it added to the financial problems back home. Many of them suffered from cholera, dys-entery and other ailments during their homebound journey.49 They often left for Orissa without caring for their wages. No amount of persuasion in terms of wage hike or supply of cheap food provisions through grain shops by the authorities could make them stay and work there.50 The panic in the industrial belt of Calcutta was further heightened by pamphlets and cartoons dropped by Japanese planes during air raids. One such pamphlet, titled Hartal,51 written both in Hindi and Bengali, dropped near labour settlements of Calcutta, read roughly as follows:

From Thursday (24 December) the tortured, insulted and starving employees and labourers have struck work with their wives and children as a protest against cruel treatment of the moneyed and heartless landlords. The corporation has left the employees and labourers in the midst of bombs, but they have not done anything for the hungry souls. Moreover, they would quieten us by shoe-ing [sic]. They would not listen to government direction regarding dearness allowance.

A cartoon in the pamphlet had a message: „All associations are marching on the path of victory; come on: letÊs break the chains of slavery and carry on the fight for independence.‰

Ironically, the ongoing state of distress and panic only con-tributed to strengthen the popular disillusionment with British

47 HPD, „Extracts of Lala N.K. Roy, Liaison Officer to Govt. of Orissa and Cal-cutta‰, 21 May 1942, ACC-2326.48 HPD, „Extracts of Lala N.K. Roy, Liaison Officer to Govt. of Orissa and Calcutta‰, 15 June 1942.49 HPD, „Extracts of Lala N.K. Roy, Liaison Officer to Govt. of Orissa and Calcutta‰, 28 July 1942.50 HPD, „Extracts of Lala N.K. Roy, Liaison Officer to Govt. of Orissa and Cal-cutta‰, 21, 24, and 25 December 1942.51 HPD, „Extracts from the diary of Lala N.K. Roy, Liaison Officer, Orissa‰, 19 December 1942, 30 December 1942, ACC-2326.


rule. Rumours of various sorts, which often circulated among the labourers, reinforced the notion of doom for the British Raj. The overtones of collapse of British imperialism were rich. A rumour which spread in Calcutta around May was that due to heavy fighting in Balasore, the DM and the SP (who were apparently defeated) had taken refuge in Mayurbhanj state.52 According to another rumour, nearly 300 had died in a fight between Indian and European soldiers.53 Yet another rumour in August said that Japanese planes, which came over to Cuttack, succeeded in killing the raja of Mayurbhanj.54

In one incident,55 an Oriya cook named Chintamani, who had „undergone remarkable spiritual transformation‰ and claimed sainthood, got several copies of Malika (Oriya scripture written in a cryptic language, which in popular belief foretells events of the distant future) printed and circulated. The text of the booklet suggested that there would be nothing left (in the universe) except Biraja Mandal (referring to the region around the holy seat of Goddess Biraja in Jajpur), and King Padmanava would reign. This was also read as an indication of the end of British imperialism and the dawn of a new era in terms of PadmanavaÊs swaraj.

Interestingly, Padmanava (identified as Pada Jena) was a member of the Jajpur Local Board and had been evading arrest. However, he had kept himself active among the Oriya labourers in Calcutta since May. He would secretly shuttle between Calcutta and the coastal tracts of Orissa, covering Cuttack and Balasore districts. Thus, he became a link for the Oriya labourers in Cal-cutta, and kept them abreast of the political developments.

The Oriya labourers in Calcutta, mostly hailing from the inte-rior pockets of coastal Orissa, Dhenkanal and Mayurbhanj States,

52 HPD, „Extracts of Lala N.K. Roy, Liaison Officer to Govt. of Orissa and Calcutta‰, 21 May 1942.53 HPD, „Extracts of Lala N.K. Roy, Liaison Officer to Govt. of Orissa and Calcutta‰, 17 May 1942.54 HPD, „Extracts of Lala N.K. Roy, Liaison Officer to Govt. of Orissa and Calcutta‰, 10 August 1942. Interestingly, the rumours pointed to incidents in the coastal tracts of Gopalpur, Balasore and Cuttack·the targets of possible Japanese invasion.55 HPD, „Extracts of Lala N.K. Roy, Liaison Officer to Govt. of Orissa and Cal-cutta‰, 22 May 1942, 30 September 1942, 29 December 1942.


had their distinct political identity. For example, a section of Oriya labourers belonging to Bhadrak region claimed themselves as the followers of Mahatab (who also belonged to Bhadrak). They had organized a „marana samiti‰ („death squad‰) under the leadership of Ram Beuria and Akuli (both from Balasore). This squad remained an ardent supporter of Pada Jena, in the latterÊs bid for the realization of Biraja Mandal.

Another section of Oriya labourers in Calcutta and Kharag-pur, who hailed from different state pockets like Dhenkanal and Mayurbhanj and were often frequented by Prajamandal leaders like Baishnaba Patnaik (Dhenkanal), met in a secret rendezvous to discuss political developments, and chalk out their course of action.56 Besides, we have references to Dibakar Patnaik and Sriharsha Mishra (both from Ganjam), who visited and kept in touch with the „Ganjam evacuees‰.57 In fact, we come across evidence where a „crowd‰, mostly comprising labourers, rescued a young man who was arrested on charge of dacoity from police custody. Two policemen were severely assaulted.58 The connection of the so-called death squad in this incident appears almost certain.

It is noteworthy that letters which the Oriya labourers and employees in Calcutta received were filled with details about the daring activities of Jagannath Das, Pada Jena, Goura Das, and Keshab Jena·Congress activists in the coastal districts of Orissa·during the peak of anti-British struggle in 1942. The letters highlighted facts regarding the destruction of colonial symbols like post offices and courts of law, attack on landlords and collective acts of arson and violence. The letters contained information that calls like „One man from each house‰ were given to get more people to join the struggle at the threat of burning the house in case of non-compliance, or about how the „members of the Bimla Club [a youth league in Sunderpada, Bhubaneswar] were bent on cutting [telegraph/telephone]

56 HPD, „Extracts of Lala N.K. Roy, Liaison Officer to Govt. of Orissa and Calcutta‰, 18 September 1942.57 HPD, „Extracts of Lala N.K. Roy, Liaison Officer to Govt. of Orissa and Calcutta‰, 5 September 1942.58 HPD, „Extracts of Lala N.K. Roy, Liaison Officer to Govt. of Orissa and Calcutta‰, 16 October 1942.


wires‰.59 These letters encouraged the labourers to adopt different forms of struggle current in 1942. For example, handbills asking people to cut down wires were given to petty shopkeepers, who in turn would use them for packing goods. This was probably done with a view to circulating the idea back in Orissa.60

The objective of focusing these developments among Oriya labourers and the activities going beyond the prescribed time limit (of the January July phase) is to broadly point out the pat-terns of response to the war emerging at popular levels. Thus, the large-scale return of evacuees to Orissa had its repercussions in terms of exerting additional pressure on the not so stable agrarian economy. Besides that, the remittance of money by these workers, a major source of financial sustenance for many rural families, had now stopped and it created acute financial stress.61 The overall consequences were economic instability and massive unemployment.

At this stage, we may examine the emerging popular perception of defence measures deployed by the imperialist government, with the apprehension of Japanese invasion appearing imminent around early 1942. By March 1942, the Bay of Bengal coastline, including the unprotected coast of Orissa, became quite vulnerable to enemy attack. As early as February, the colonial authorities lamented the fact that Orissa lacked any army command at the disposal of the provincial administration and hastened to add that the provincial government might surrender without much resistance in the eventuality of an enemy attack.62

This state of affairs naturally sent panic signals to the people of coastal Orissa. Besides, on return of the evacuees to Orissa, with their tales of agony, the details of the fall of Singapore and the success of the Japanese army only helped to strengthen the notion of the defeat of the British and the inevitable occupation of Orissa by the Japanese. Besides, restrictions over lighting, the seizing of boats, bicycles and buses within 20 miles of the coast

59 HPD, „Extracts of Lala N.K. Roy, Liaison Officer to Govt. of Orissa and Cal-cutta‰, 28 August 1942, 18 September 1942.60 HPD, „Extracts of Lala N.K. Roy, Liaison Officer to Govt. of Orissa and Calcutta‰, 19 December 1942.61 AICC Papers, „PCC to AICC‰, 15 March 1942, F. No. p. 22, Part 1.62 Linlithgow Collection (LC), „Governor to the Viceroy‰, No. 84, 26 February 1942.


to delay the possible enemy movement, the drying of canals, the sight of low-flying aeroplanes (for surveillance), the orders by the authorities to shift the paddy stocks of the coastal tract off the „war zones‰, the construction of the war zone itself and finally the movement and stationing of the military contingent substantially added to the general anxiety and discontent.63

These measures, which were meant to instil confidence among the people and build up war preparedness, were marked by widespread resentment at popular levels. We have noted earlier how the leadership as well as the nationalist press unleashed a relentless campaign against such measures.

In this context, when panic was soaring high, as many as six British naval ships were sunk by the Japanese near the Kujanga coast on 6 April.64 The demoralizing incident sent shock waves everywhere. As some of the survivors were mistaken as Japanese, a rumour gained ground that the Japanese had already landed.65 The weight of the rumour was such that one-third of the popu-lation of Cuttack district evacuated and left for secure places in the adjoining rural pockets. Subordinate government officials as well as local traders and businessmen joined the exodus with their families to safer places in the interiors.66 People saw the crisis as an ominous signal and symbolic of GodÊs wrath.67

The colonial administration geared itself to meet the situation arising out of the Kujanga incident through rigorous enforcement of wartime restrictions on the use of lights, boats and buses. Besides, it sought to strengthen the war zones as well as the air defence system by shifting foodstuff, conveyances and even people at certain places in the coastal belt to inland areas.68 Such orders were almost forced upon the people under the threat of dire consequences in case of non-compliance.69

63 HPD, FNR, 18 January 1942, 18 February 1942, 18 March 1942; LC, „Governor to the Viceroy‰, No. 84, 14 March 1942.64 LC, „Governor to the Viceroy‰, No. 84, 8 April 1942.65 Ibid.66 HPD, FNR, 18 April 1942; Amrit Bazaar Patrika, 13 April 1942; LC, „Lewis to Linlithgow‰, 28 April 1942.67 S.N. Dwivedi, Quest for Socialism: Fifty Years of Struggle in India, New Delhi, 1984, p. 21.68 HPD, FNR, 18 April 1942.69 LC, „Governor to the Viceroy‰, No. 84, 26 February 1942.


The colonial administrationÊs move in shifting the secretariat from Cuttack to Sambalpur strengthened the popular impression that the government was poorly equipped to resist the Japanese onslaught as it could hardly save its own offices.70 This not only bred a sense of helplessness among the people but also loss of faith in the British rule, which was seen as nearing its end. Popular discontentment also surfaced with the policy of commandeering of boats and drying of canals, which caused great hardship to poor cultivators and rural folk. As has been brought out earlier, these policies were bitterly criticized by the press as well as by Mira Ben, Mahatab and other leaders in meetings.

Popular faith in the viability of British rule was fast waning, reaching demoralizingly low limits. As a result, by April, one notices heavy withdrawals from the savings in banks and post offices and encashment of government securities. For instance, immediately after the Kujanga incident, the daily withdrawal from post offices in Balasore touched Rs 8,000.71

The presence of military contingent in war zones adjoining civilian areas often created conflicts, resulting in violent clashes. On one occasion, the people of Jobra locality in Cuttack town seriously assaulted military sepoys.72 The sepoys, who came to Mahanadi to take their bath, bathed in the naked, and often made passes at women, who also had their bath in the nearby ghats. The locals had been resenting such activities by the sepoys for a long time and demanding that no military personnel should be allowed to bathe in the Mahanadi ghats. In fact, a rumour had spread that posting of the army contingent meant molestation of women and harassment of the civilian population.73

Similarly, during September, there was resistance by the people to the construction of a wireless system at Jagatsinghpur under the belief that a military station was being planned.74 Consider-able popular resentment also found expression when labourers belonging to Hyderabad, Travancore, Cochin and Gorakhpur,

70 HPD, FNR, 18 March 1942; H.K. Mahatab, Sadhanara Pathe, Cuttack, 1987, 3rd edn, pp. 223 225; Dwivedi, Quest for Socialism, pp. 22 23.71 HPD, Report of DM to CS, 11 April 1942, ACC-2171.72 HPD, Report of SP, 1 June 1942.73 HPD, FNR, 18 January 1942.74 WWCC, September 1942, ACC-53.


brought in for the construction of a war zone at Choudwar, were quartered in the nearby villages, almost 3 miles from the work site. Shops were opened in the civilian localities to supply alcoholic drinks to these labourers. The labourers, especially the habitual offenders amidst them, often indulged in fights among themselves. On one occasion, they indulged in arson, looting and large-scale violence, followed by a fight among themselves.75 The extent of property and assets lost due to the looting and violence was valued at Rs 25,000. This caused con-siderable panic among the local people. Congress leaders such as Mahatab and Mira Ben visited the site and arranged relief work for the affected villagers. They also demanded recruitment of local labourers at the site along with wages at par with the coolies brought from outside. Nationalist newspapers like The Samaja gave wide coverage to the issue.

Thus, the ever-mounting popular antipathy as well as the ever-increasing notion of the collapse of British imperialism drew added momentum from circulation of large-scale rumours.

In an attempt to meet the emergency of air raids, people tended to rely more and more on the Congress. For example, an evacuee from Burma hoisted a Congress flag in his house with the conviction that it could save his house from air attacks by the Japanese.76 Interestingly, such a notion was widespread. Flying of Congress flags was generally considered efficacious in keeping homesteads secure from air raids (given the fact that aeroplanes kept hovering around the low-flying zone) by the people in Jeypore estate.77 At a popular level, the perceived threats of bombardment and the resultant destruction were sought to be overcome through a deeper identification with the Congress. This also implied the undermining of imperialist hegemony as well as coming to terms with the Congress idea of swaraj.

We also need to stress the fact that during the crisis created by the war, British bureaucracy suffered from an erosion of loyalty. Many officials and members of the subordinate staff started supporting Congress activities and became indiffer-

75 The Samaja, 17 June 1942, 18 June 1942.76 HPD, FNR, 18 March 1942.77 WWCC, „Narrative Account of Disturbances in the Different Districts of the Province of Orissa from August to December, 1942‰, p. 2, ACC-98.


ent·at times even hostile·to the British government. For in-stance, a subdivisional officer in Bhadrak supported the cause of the Congress by passing a lenient sentence on the Congress satyagrahis in 1941 and secretly associated himself with the Congress leadership around early 1942.78 With the shifting of the secretariat from Cuttack to Sambalpur, many subordinate officials with pro-Congress leanings openly joined the struggle against the British. One such person was Bhairab Chandra Mo-hanty, who went underground in August and later on organized anti-British activities.

Developments after 9 August

Orissa reacted as strongly to the arrest of Congress leaders on 9 August as other parts of the country. To bring out the narrative of the Quit India Movement, a brief district-wise summation follows:

First, in the district of Cuttack, popular reaction to the arrest of the top leadership of the Congress including Gandhi and the ban on the Congress on 9 August 1942 instantly rebounded through protests by students. With a tradition of fairly intense nationalist and communist politics ever since 1938, the students of Ravenshaw College sought to transform the initial shock of British repression into a broad-based popular protest. On 9 August itself, they demanded the principalÊs permission to hold a meeting in the college campus to condemn the arrest of Congress leaders. They were refused permission.79 The next day, a meeting was organized where a resolution was passed protesting the „mean, repressive policy of the British Govern-ment‰ and an appeal was made to the students to „further the national fight‰ against it. Bhagirathi Mishra, a student union leader of the college, explained the urgency to protest against the suppression by the British government, as „each starving man and woman‰ was looking upon them (the students) with

78 HPD, Report of CS to DM, Balasore, 24 February 1942, ACC-2135.79 Regional Committee for Compilation of the History of Freedom Movement in Orissa, History of Freedom Movement (hereafter HFM), H.K. Mahatab, ed., „Unit Papers Region I‰, F. No. 46/3, 13 August 1942.


the hope that they would offer the people correct leadership. Upendra Mohanty, who had in the past issued statements call-ing „for boycott of schools and colleges by students and teach-ers‰, now declared, „We shall all go back to our villages and make Congress propaganda‰ and „[we will] violate all rules and regulations and that it will be possible to frame a national Government having units of four or five villages‰. He also suggested that students should campaign for inducing govern-ment servants to resign and join the people in their „fight for the Congress‰. The organizers exhorted the students to boycott classes and join the hartal. They said that in case students were rusticated or expelled, they should go back to their villages and start educating the masses on „the lines indicated by the recent speeches and statements of Gandhi‰.

The hartal on 11 August was followed by a studentsÊ meeting on 12 August. Communist activists like Biren Mitra, Narasingha Tripathy, Durga Mohanty and Man Mohan Mishra took the lead in organizing the movement.80 This assumed a militant form on 15 August. After asking the principal and faculty members to resign in protest against government repression, the students rushed into the college office and the principalÊs chamber.81 They destroyed official records, damaged furniture, took away cash from the cashier and set fire to some official papers. This phase of studentsÊ activities continued until 18 August. By then the students of Victoria School, Mission School and P.M. Academy had also started boycotting classes.82 The mounting tension in Cuttack town and the mobilization of public opinion by the students were further hastened with the resignation of two subordinate government officials. Bhairab Charan Mohanty (an assistant in the Orissa Secretariat) and Lokanath Mohapatra (a clerk of Ravenshaw GirlsÊ School) submitted their resignations in protest against the arrest of Congress leaders.83

The focus of the movement shifted to the rural pockets of Jajpur, Jagatsinghpur and Kendrapara by the third week of

80 Ibid.81 HPD, „Copy of FIR by Ravenshaw College Head Clerk‰, 15 August 1942, ACC-2360.82 HPD, „Communiqué Regarding CDM in Orissa‰, F. No. 521/1942, ACC-2399.83 WWCC, 17 August 1942, ACC-30.


August. On 16 August, the Congress ashram at Bari, already seized by colonial administration, was „invaded‰ by a „mob‰. The mob set fire to Congress property removed from the ashram and kept in the nearby Public Works Department (PWD) build-ing for safe custody. Ofiicial records of the Kaipara post office were set on fire.84 On 17 August, the local Congress activists persuaded people gathered in the Hariharpur haat to observe a hartal. The police tried to resist but were rebuked. Paramananda Mohanty exhorted the gathering to „rise‰ against the police as they were „hired‰ and assured the public: „If we pull them out and bring [them] to our fold, we will achieve Swaraj.‰ This provocation was enough, and led people to mercilessly stone the police. The uniforms, red pugris (turbans), haversacks and parwanas (warrants) of the police were snatched away. The crowd also made a straw effigy, attached a placard saying „British Sarkar Dhwansa Heu‰ („Down with the British Government‰) and then set fire to it.85

The teachers and students of the Basic Training School and M.E. School at Bari, joined by the local Congress activists, at-tacked the Rampa Inspection Bungalow (Binjharpur PS) and set fire to the articles therein.86 They renamed the bungalow Swaraj Ashram and wrote anti-British slogans on the bungalow wall. This was followed by the burning of the post office at Baliapal, 2 miles from Rampa village. On 18 August, nearly 150 students of Jajpur High School, led by two local Congress activists, entered the school and destroyed the furniture.87

School students at Jagatsinghpur, Salipur and Ahiyas also re-sorted to mass strikes, boycotted classes and organized meetings. In Jajpur, students led by Yusuf Ali Khan and Golak Chandra Mohanty entered the court compound and gave a written ap-peal to the sub-divisional officer (SDO) to resign. In Ravenshaw College, students set fire to the hostel room of a boy who did not support the struggle. P.M. Academy, Victoria School and Mission School continued to remain restive. Processions were

84 WWCC, 24 August 1942, ACC-30.85 HPD, Special Report 42/42, 17 August 1942, ACC-2272.86 HPD, Special Report 43/42, 22 August 1942, ACC-2375; HPD, „Petition by Vil-lagers regarding Collective Fine‰, ACC-2202.87 WWCC, 20 August 1942, ACC-55.


organized regularly. The trend continued with large-scale ab-stention till the end of the month.88

On 19 August, there was another attempt by local activists to raid the Gopalpur Inspection Bungalow. They carried away the signboard of the bungalow on failure to enter the building due to the chowkidarÊs opposition. They repeated the raid on 21 August, coming in a larger group of 500 people, carrying Congress flags and shouting Congress slogans. This time, they succeeded in putting up the new signboard with the new name „Swaraj Bhawan, Gopalpur‰. Some of the activists also stayed in the bungalow for two days and destroyed all the government property there.89

The local Congress activists in Jajpur had already resolved to burn down all the police stations and damage all govern-ment property. Until 19 August no arrests had been made by the administration, though by 18 August an extra contingent of the police force had been pumped into Rampa, Bari and Kaipara areas·the emerging zone of militancy·to deal with the situation.90

A campaign to boycott the police, by refusing to sell anything to them, also picked up in Bari when the police camped there to arrest some of the local activists, mostly inmates of the Bari Gandhian ashram (who had reoccupied the ashram).91 On 21 August, seven local Congress workers, including Parshuram Mohanty, who had organized the assault on police in Hariharpur haat, were arrested in Baliapal haat. A crowd of 1,000 supporters followed the arrested leaders and amidst anti-British slogans demanded their release.92 When the police reached Bari, the crowd had swelled to 3,000, with nearly 500 of them carrying lathis. Once the police were gone, another batch of ashramites and local activists took possession of the Bari ashram. They set fire to the house of one Gokhei Jena, a fellow villager who had disobeyed the collective decision of the villagers to boycott the police and not to sell any articles to them. Gokhei was physically

88 WWCC, 17 August 1942, ACC-97.89 HPD, „P.S. Case No. 20 of 1942‰, 2 December 1942, ACC-2202.90 WWCC, 20 August 1942, ACC-55.91 HPD, Special Report 66/42, 29 August 1942, ACC-2447.92 WWCC, 28 August 1942, ACC-55.


assaulted and his property looted for the twin crimes. Gobardhan Puhan, a zamindar, took an active part in this action.

A similar incident occurred in Kaipara (Binjharpur PS) on 26 August,93 which resulted in the killing of at least five people. Kaipara had already emerged as the centre of popular mili-tancy. A police force had been dispatched there on 25 August to arrest some of the local leaders in connection with a post office arson case. The police force was greeted in the village with massive general boycott. Rations were refused to them. A plan was hatched by the villagers to burn the building where the policemen had camped. On 26 August, batches of Congress workers arrived in Kaipara, crossing the adjoining Baitarani River. Nearly 400 people had gathered on the riverbank to join them. The police reached the ghat in an apparent bid to disperse the gathering. When the policemen asked the boatmen to ferry them to the other side of the ghat to obstruct the movement of the outsiders into the village, they were refused ferry service by the boatmen. The police issued a warning to the gathering to disperse and later arrested 11 leaders.

The mob, far from being frightened, followed the arrested leaders, who were being taken to Jajpur under police protec-tion. In no time, nearly 3,000 people gathered. A warning by police to disperse only brought in fresh waves of crowds, who, armed with lathis, started attacking the police force, including the deputy superintendent of police (DSP). The police then fired 28 rounds, killing one person and injuring 12. Later, four more died. Despite the firing, the crowd kept waiting at a safe dis-tance. The police left the place without even carrying the dead body. A Congress bulletin,94 released and widely circulated on the Kaipara incident, described Laxman Mishra, the DSP who had ordered the firing, as a „murderer‰.

The very next day, the Kaipara firing had its repercussions. Nearly 10,000 people from different parts of the Jajpur sub-division reached Jajpur town in batches, with the proclaimed objective of attacking public offices, looting the sub-treasury and setting fire to the houses of government officials and the

93 Ibid.94 WWCC, „Congress Bulletin No. 9‰, ACC-97.


armed police.95 The protesters, some of them carrying lathis, shouted anti-British slogans, invited the public to join them by beating of drums and reached the SDOÊs office. In order to ter-rorize and disperse the crowd, the authorities had made heavy police deployment. Before reaching the SDOÊs office, some marchers had already looted two wine shops and attempted to enter the police station. At a distance of about 50 m from the office, they were ordered by the armed forces to wait, which they did. Then, three Congressmen garlanded the SDO and the DSP and revealed that they had organized the march to prevail over them to resign their jobs. On the way back from Jajpur, a section of the crowd set fire to a post office at Rambag after looting it. The postal official who tried to resist the attempt was threatened that he would be thrown into the fire.

There was an attempt at rescuing the arrested Congress work-ers from police custody at Tirtol PS.96 Some 500 men of Balipatna Guda village (populated mostly by the weaver community), armed with lathis, attacked „the police force‰, comprising a constable and a few chowkidars, which was escorting the ar-rested local activist Brundaban Nayak. An English translation of the abusive language used by the people for the police follows: „Catch hold of sala [an Oriya slang] red pagdiwalla [the one with the red turban, implying the police] and the blackheaded bitches.‰ This was followed by a brutal attack from the crowd, which had surrounded the police force. In the midst of cheers for victory to Gandhi, the arrested leader was released from police custody; and the crowd snatched away the lathis, uniforms and turbans of the policemen.

There were numerous attacks on colonial symbols like dak bungalows (government rest houses), police stations, revenue offices and post offices in the rural belt of Cuttack during Au-gust. In all such cases, people in large numbers armed with lathis would loot properties and set fire to such symbols. They would threaten the chowkidars and peons if they protested

95 HPD, Special Report 73/42, 1 September 1942, ACC-2388; WWCC, 3 September 1942, ACC-30; WWCC, Report of SDO, 28 August 1942, ACC-98; WWCC, 28 August 1942, ACC-53.96 HPD, Special Report 82/42, 31 August 1942.


against or resisted such attempts. Table 7.1 is an enumeration of these attempts in official language.97

97 HPD, Special Report 74/42, 28 August 1942, ACC-2389; HPD, Special Report 48/42, 23 August 1942, ACC-2273; WWCC, 28 August 1942, ACC-55; WWCC, 28 August 1942, ACC-98; WWCC, 17 August 1942, 14 September 1942, ACC-97; WWCC, 21 August 1942, 24 August 1942, 10 September 1942, ACC-30; HPD, Special Report 83/42, 19 September 1942, ACC-2383; HPD, Special Report 46/42, 27 September 1942, ACC-2386; HPD, 3/30/42, Parts I and II.

Padmanav Roy, Parsuram Mohanty and several others had offered to lead in organizing the destructions in different rural areas of the Jajpur sub-division.

Table 7.1

Attacks on Colonial Symbols in August 1942

Date Place Nature of Occurrence

17 Aug. Paipara Post office burnt; postcards burnt as well as distributed

19 Aug. Kaipadaghat Attack on a peon of munsif court [civil (Binjharpur) judgeÊs court of the lowest rank] when he

refused to hand over the official papers he was carrying. The papers, along with the haversack and parwana of the peon, were burnt by „Congressmen‰

20 Aug. Neulpur Burning of canal revenue collection (Dharmasala) office at Neulpur (Dharmasala PS)

20 Aug. Jenapur „Military special‰ train derailed between Mandala and Baruva

21 Aug. Rambag (Jajpur) Postal runner Kanhai Jena robbed of his cash worth Rs 400 by a group of „Congress workers‰

21 Aug., Cuttack town Security and political prisoners

24 Aug. adopted obstructive attitude and violated jail regulations to „undermine the author-ity and incite the convicts to commit acts of indiscipline‰

22 Aug. Balichandrapur Attack on tehsil office. Records and Arai burnt to ashes. Balichandrapur post office

with its records burnt

22 Aug. Jobra (Cuttack Telegraph wire cutting town) and Barang

(Table 7.1 Contd)


22 Aug. Kuanpala Post office burnt and records de- (Mahanga) stroyed

24 Aug. Ahiyas (Jajpur) Attack on dak bungalow by 300 people under local leadership like Padmanava Roy, and Bhagaban Sahu

24 Aug. Jaintara (Jajpur) Police beat house with the records burnt by nearly 100 people, armed with lathis, crowbars, axes, and knives. The crowd kept saying that police and government officials should be killed

25 Aug. Dasarathpur Inspection bungalow, government train-ing school and canal revenue office burnt

26 Aug. Jajpur Attack on irrigation rest house

27 Aug. Mundarkhand Tehsil office burnt

30 Aug. Jenapur Madras Mail (Up) was obstructed; its lookout glass broken, fireman attacked

31 Aug. Nuapara Canal revenue office burnt (Jagatsinghpur)

31 Aug. Jagatsinghpur Arrested leaders rescued from police custody. Telegraph wire cutting

n.d. (Aug.) Akarpara, Peasants cut the distributory Andola bank without seeking permission of PWD

authorities

n.d. (Aug.) Barda, Kharghpur Chowkidars were stripped and left naked; people forced inside the house

of chowkidars to collect uniforms

n.d. (Aug.) Kumuda Records of opium shops along with pound house burnt

n.d. (Aug.) Kuanpala Constables stripped of their uniforms and the uniforms burnt

n.d. (Aug.) Kendrapara town Seven „Congressmen‰ of Jajpur entered Kendrapara town and instigated students to carry on subversive activities. Also, trouble created in the civil court by destroying of papers on the peshkarÊs (a native officer in a judgeÊs or a collectorÊs office) table


(Table 7.1 Contd)


98 HPD, Special Report 78/42, 3 September 1942, ACC-30.

In Kosala (Chhendipada PS, Angul), during the celebration of Ramachandi mela, a local festival, there was an attempt at setting fire to the police beat house.98 Here, the local Congress activists comprising Dibakar Mishra, Ananda Sahu, Dibakar Pradhan, Lokanath Pradhan and Bhagaban Behera led the people and organized large-scale destruction of government property. They cut down the wooden bridges connecting public roads, uprooted road signals, and removed the timber kept on the public road. In the meeting organized on 27 August, during the celebration of the mela, Dibakar Mishra said, „We have obtained Swaraj from the date of arrest of Gandhi, Nehru ⁄ The British are on

Table 7.2Disturbances in Jajpur Sub-division

Nature of Occurrence Number

Burning of chowkidar uniforms 26Burning of canal revenue offices and PWD bungalows 10Burning of post offices 4Burning and looting of excise shops 5Burning of zamindari kutcheries (courts) 6Mail robbery 1Dacoity 1Looting of granaries 2


In fact, by the end of August itself, the report on disturbances in Jajpur sub-division indicated a number of cases, as summa-rized in Table 7.2 (Source: WWCC, Report of SP, Cuttack to SP, Orissa Special Branch, 10 September 1942, ACC-30).

n.d. (Aug.) Ahiyas Attack on Ahiyas School·the campsite of the police·and attempt to burn it. Gokulananda Mohanty, who had ar-ranged shelter for the police and supplied rations to them despite the boycott of police by the villagers, was criticized. The local activists under Padmanava Roy had planned to burn the school building to harass the police. But, Gokulananda, with the help of 1,000 Muslims, attacked the „Congress activists‰ with lathis


the verge of being ruined. The government should be removed and we will establish our new government. DonÊt go to British courts, but decide cases by forming village panchayats.‰

Mishra was arrested soon after his speech. Thereupon, nearly a hundred people pounced upon the policemen, severely assaulting them with lathis and bricks, and rescued Mishra. The „armed mob‰ then set fire to the Kosala forest beat house, assaulted the forest guard, burnt his uniform and damaged his bicycle.

Though Jajpur remained, by and large, the most active mili-tant zone, by September the movement came to be experienced more intensely in the rural pockets of other sub-divisions with incidents of attack on colonial symbols multiplying. We can get a glimpse of the intensity of popular militancy if we look into the incident at Erasama on 6 September. Here, nearly 700 people, armed with various kinds of „weapons‰, approached the police station. The sub-inspector (SI) and assistant sub-inspector (ASI) of police „requested‰ the mob to refrain from violence but this only infuriated the „crowd‰. The „crowd seized the sub-inspector‰ and kept him under confinement. The other police personnel were forced to remain silent „on pain of being put to death‰ while the crowd started its work of „wanton destruction‰ of the furniture along with the records in the police station and finally burnt everything. They also proceeded to the constablesÊ barracks and destroyed the furniture there. Then the crowd proceeded to the post office and set it on fire. This climaxed in a virtual „looting‰ of a ganja and opium shop. The crowd all along shouted slogans like „Gandhi/swaraj ki jai‰ and „British government should go away from India‰.99

The intensity of the attack on symbols of colonial authority during September, until the end of 1942, is clear from Table 7.3.100

99 HPD, Special Report 89/42, 14 September 1942, ACC-2389; HPD, F. No. 169 of 1943 (undated), ACC-2564.100 WWCC, 13 September 1942, 15 November 1942, ACC-98; WWCC, 9 Sep-tember 1942, 21 August 1942, 28 November 1942, 10 September 1942, ACC-30; WWCC, 11 October 1942, 15 October 1942, ACC-53; WWCC, 15 October 1942, ACC-43; WWCC, undated, ACC-97; HPD, Report of SDO (Cuttack Sadar) to DM, 7 September 1942, ACC-2202; HPD, IGÊs Report, 31 December 1942, ACC-2202; HPD, DMÊs (Cuttack) Report, 4 December 1942, ACC-2202; HPD, Report of SP, 20 November 1942, 21 November 1942, ACC-2202.


(Table 7.3 Contd)

Table 7.3Attacks on Colonial Symbols in September November 1942


n.d. (Sept.) Jagatsinghpur People resisted the attempt at construct-ing a wireless and signalling station by picketing the proposed site. They also prevented coolies to work at the site. Their contention was that establishment of military station meant harassment and molestation of civil population by the military personnel

3 Sept. Jagatsinghpur PWD rest house, quarters of canal revenue tehsildar, canal revenue tehsil office and the patrol at Sahuria village of Nuapada (Tirtol) burnt

6 Sept. Meramundali Five rails removed from the railway Talcher rail line track causing derailment of the engine

of a goods train. Nine telegraph posts pulled down at the same spot

6 Sept. Jagatpur Railway culverts demolished Kendrapara line

Second half Marshaghai Telephone wire cuttingof Sept.

Second half Kendrapara A young man entered the courtroomof Sept. of SDO, Kendrapara, and attempted

to destroy the official papers and „ap-pealed‰ to the officials to resign

Second half Dampur Post office burnt downof Sept. (Kendrapara)

Second half Kujanga Fishermen exhorted to indulge inof Sept. „unlawful‰ acts

Second half Tikhidi Records of Tikhidi U.P. School burntof Sept. (Kendrapara) down by the pupils under the advice of

„Congressmen‰

2 Oct. Cuttack town „Glass splinters, gramophone needles, broken razor blades‰ strewn all over the football field in Killa Maidan to spoil a football match played between Cuttack XI and B.N. Railways team

4 Oct. Salipur Canal revenue office burnt at Dharma-gatpur

4 Oct. Binjharpur PS Summons/notices snatched from two peons


(Table 7.3 Contd)


10 Oct. Cuttack Railway Prisoners being taken to Berhampur Station jail under police custody shouted slo-

gans and jeered at RAF military staff, who were also waiting at the station to go to Charbatia. The latter, under provocation, shot two rounds of fires in the air to terrify them. However, the prisoners continued shouting slogans, undeterred

12 13 Oct. Angul Dibakar Mishra led a group of people and took possession of Angul Congress ashram seized by the police

14 Oct. Cuttack town Posters addressed to hackney carriage and rickshaw drivers appeared in the carriage stand at Chaudhury Bazaar. It contained threats to drivers of violent consequences if they continued to carry Europeans

Mid-Oct. Kosala (Angul Villages burnt down by Ganesh war sub-division) Sahu, apparently at the instance of some

underground agitators

16, 20 and Marshaghai Telephone lines between lighthouse26 Oct. and Marshaghai were cut down by villag-

ers of Chadeiguan, Janra and Kachla

18 Oct. Kosala (Angul Upper primary school burnt down sub-division)

n.d. (Nov.) Napang „Congress workers‰ entered the room (Binjharpur) of tehsildars and took away Rs 700 in

cash

n.d. (Nov.) Baliapal (Jajpur) Villagers of Baliapal and Bainsaria marched in a procession to the post office at Bainsaria. Seven Congress workers entered the post office and destroyed the records. The postmaster and peon who could have easily resisted did not do so. Instead, they „indirectly‰ helped the „Congress workers‰

n.d. (Nov.) Jajpur Inspection bungalow at Chhatrapur with its furniture burnt to ashes by „Congress workers‰ with the help of villages of Chasakhanda, Chhatrapur, Chadakpara, Keruna, Radhaballavpur, Banlang and Madhupur also. The said villagers were


In September, the studentsÊ agitation in Cuttack town con-tinued at a high pitch, paralyzing academic activities. Nearly 300 students of Ravenshaw College, including girls, took out a procession and raided the Cuttack General Hospital compound. The students were protesting over the decision of the authori-ties to remove the six girl students of Ravenshaw College who were accommodated in the Medical School GirlsÊ Hostel. The crowd mobbed the professor working as superintendent, and attempted to force its way into the nursing home; more impor-tantly, the „men followed the lead of women‰. The agitators prevailed upon the students of the nursing hostel to join them. The police resorted to a „mild lathi charge‰ as the boys refused to disperse. This incident was followed by another, when some students of Ravenshaw College restrained and manhandled a constable in the college compound.

The students also unleashed a massive poster campaign throughout Cuttack town, the text of which appealed to the police officers in the name of Gandhi to resign from their posts and thereby help the Congress movement. The activities in Ravenshaw College had affected the other schools of the town. School students attended demonstrations, dropped their classes and shouted anti-British slogans. The engineering school also joined the strike, leading to its closure sine die. Ravenshaw College was declared closed for a month from 19 September.


„never helpful to police in detection of political cases but helped the rioters‰

5 Nov. Kissen Nagar A vaccinator was attacked by (Binjharpur PS) „Congressmen‰. His registers were

snatched away and burnt down. The village of Krishnanagar was referred to as „the worst village in Binjharpur, where everybody is active‰ in the report of SP

11 Nov. Gobindapur 42 telegraph posts were uprooted and (Cuttack) wires cut down; canal lock office at

Somepur (Kissen Nagar) was burnt. Raid on police station and picketing of excise shops. Considerable agitation for burning of police uniforms, assault on police


This dampened the movement in the town to some extent. The authorities had to experience a tough time in quelling student unrest when the college reopened on 30 November. The prin-cipal had demanded a deposit of Rs 20 from each hosteller. This incensed the students and they petitioned the managing committee challenging the rationale of such an action. They also demanded the unconditional readmission of the rusticated stu-dents, and the release of the imprisoned and detained students in connection with political offences.

The Anti-feudal Thrust of the Movement

The attack on colonial symbols and the attendant popular mili-tancy also at times took the shape of anti-zamindar manifesta-tions in certain areas, particularly in some of the estates of the district. For instance, in a meeting at Kharagpur haat in Tigiria (largely attended by villagers of Kolengiri, Pallipur, Balipadia and Ramdaspur) on 17 August,101 two local Congress activists, Krishna Mohan Rout and Brundaban Tripathy, exhorted the audience to not to obey the zamindars, and to not to pay chowki-dari tax. They also asked the people to challenge the authority of the British government and not to „allow British officials to cross the river‰ by refusing services at the ferry ghats. People were also told to set fire to the kutcheries (courts) of zamindars and destroy their property. The crowd instantly responded by rushing to the police posse present in the haat, forcibly remov-ing their uniforms and setting the uniforms on fire.

On 25 August, a group of persons of Kalkala estate, led by Alekha Prasad Das and Krushna Mohan Rout (ex-members of the Cuttack District Board and Jajpur Local Board, respectively), marched in a procession to village Samia, beating drums and shouting anti-war slogans. Upon reaching the village, the leaders made inflammatory speeches, which was followed by a raid on the Kalkala kutchery. They also burnt down the Khamar depart-ment of the estate.102 The estate staff cooperated enthusiastically. Interestingly, a clerk named Balaram directed the invading crowd to burn specific „bundles of old paper‰.

101 HPD, Special Report 50/42, 2 August 1942, ACC-2312.102 HPD, „Petition of A.P. Das to Godabarish Mishra‰, ACC-2395; HPD, Report of SDM, Jajpur to DM, Cuttack, 7 December 1942, ACC-2395.


We have evidence of the circulation of cyclostyled leaflets in Madhupur estate contemplating action against the raja.103 These leaflets were widely circulated in Cuttack town too. Some copies were thrown into the compound of Godabarish Mishra, a minister in the coalition ministry headed by the raja of Parlakhemundi.

We have yet another reference to an attack on the kutchery of Darpan and Madhupur estates in August.104 This may, of course, be seen also as a consequence of the prolonged peasant mobilization in the earlier years. In the rest of Orissa too, by November, Congress workers were touring the interior areas, instigating people to withhold the payment of land revenue and to form village panchayats.105

By September, Erasama (Jagatsinghpur) had emerged as another area of intense anti-British activities. In meetings or-ganized in the villages, people were exhorted to kill „all the police officers‰, burn government buildings, cut telegraph lines and indulge in acts that would force the British to leave the country. Besides, people were also asked to burn the houses and kutcheries of local zamindars.106

In October, at Balikuda, a local-level activist named Kshetra Mohan Biswal, in meetings and through pamphlets, advised the people to not to pay rent and taxes to the government, to disobey the law and to burn government offices.107 Ramachan-dra Swain, a local leader of Mahakalpada, collected men and money for Congress propaganda work and also tried to circulate „lithographed pamphlets‰.108 A yuvak sangha formed in Ker-kera village of Tirtol took up a campaign to refuse payment of chowkidari tax.109

A batch of young men of Bagalpur trained

themselves in lathi exercises to fight with the police in case any Congressman was arrested at Bagalpur. An association called

103 HPD, Report of CS, 29 August 1942, ACC-2394. The leaflets were issued by Hrudananda Satapathy, a teacher of the local board school. Unfortunately, the leaflets are not available.104 WWCC, 27 August 1942, ACC-98.105 WWCC, 2 November 1942, ACC-30.106 WWCC, 11 September 1942, 17 September 1942, ACC-97.107 HPD, Special Report, Cuttack, 24 September 1943, ACC-2481.108 HPD, Special Report, 13 October 1943, ACC-2481.109 WWCC, 6 October 1942, ACC-30.


Rakta Bahini („Blood Brigade‰), mostly comprising the youth, came up in Batimura, with the objective of cutting telegraph wires and digging up roads.110

The social basis of the anti-imperialist activities also broad-ened, with people at the bottom of the social ladder joining the movement. In Kujanga, the fishermen, and in Tirtol, the weavers actively participated in violent anti-British acts.111

Balasore

The anti-British campaign in Balasore began in a rather militant form, with hartals in different parts of the district. The markets of Duggadebi, Garuda, Remuna and Balasore town remained closed on 14, 16 and 18 August. On 23 August 1942, Congress workers picketed the excise shops (shops selling liquor and other intoxicants like ganja and opium) in Balasore town. Students launched strikes in many places and took out processions to draw public attention to the movement. They, in fact, became the mainstay for picketing government offices, excise shops and courts of law. Telegraph wires were disconnected in Chandabali region.112

On 17 August, Bhandari Pokhari PS was burnt down113 and the policemen were attacked. For a meeting in village Kahanra Pokhari (under Bhandari Pokhari PS), processions from neigh-bouring villages like Palda and Bahadalpur culminated at Ka-hanra Pokhari and the crowd marched on to Bhandari Pokhari carrying mashals (torches). The crowd attacked the police station, set fire to it, burnt the houses of policemen and destroyed all they could lay their hands on. The SI rushed to the spot from Kahanra Pokhari and found the thana burning. Baishnaba Charan Nayak, one of the leaders of the crowd, „seized‰ him and ordered him to say „Mahatma Gandhi ki jai‰. As the SI remained silent, he was stripped and assaulted with a lathi. The constable and daffadar (a sub-officer of rural police in command of a number

110 WWCC, 3 September 1942, ACC-30.111 WWCC, 17 September 1942, ACC-97; HPD, Special Report 82/42, 31 August 1942, ACC-2385.112 WWCC, SPÊs Report, Balasore, 22 August 1942, ACC-30.113 HPD, Special Report 16/42, 21 August 1942; HPD, SPÊs Report, 25 August 1942, ACC-2346; WWCC, 18 August 1942, ACC-61.


of chowkidars) were stripped and made to shout „Gandhi ki jai‰.114 The crowd also attempted to attack the PWD officer, but he had escaped by then. The wooden bridge at Bhandari Pokhari had already been dismantled to restrict the entry of the police force into the area. Afterwards, the mob also cut the telegraph connection between Akhuapada and Manjuri Road. The postal peon who attempted to go to Bhadrak to inform the authorities regarding the incident was assaulted near the bridge. The mob set fire to the post office too.

It is, however, important to note that the attack on the thana at Bhandari Pokhari was preceded by active mobilization of people by the local leadership. Baishnaba Nayak had been active in the locality for over a month before the incident, carrying on anti-British campaign and popularizing constructive activities. He had also formed a youth league. They advised the people not to pay rent, water tax and chowkidari tax.115 At Bhandari Pokhari, the postmaster, the local schoolteachers, the police-men and the postal peon lent support to the action of the mob in different ways. For instance, the postmaster went on leave on the day of the incident. The headmaster of the local school organized a drill of the students on that day and asked them to sing „Bande Mataram‰.

Another teacher, who was in charge of the post office because the postmaster was on leave, was instructed by the headmaster to return to the school immediately, after keeping the postal cash in the police station. Besides, the chowkidar, who knew about the plan of the attack on the police station, did not divulge the information to the authorities. The students of the schools were instructed by the teachers not only to join the procession but also to not to „listen‰ when they were called back. Besides, the dismantling of the bridge and the cutting of Akhuapada telegraph lines were planned much in advance by the local leaders who were in touch with the underground leadership of the district.

Following this incident, the anti-British campaign gained mo-mentum through hartals and meetings. By September, Dhamnagar had emerged as another centre of intense campaign for various

114 HPD, Special Report 16/42, 21 August 1942.115 HPD, Special Report 16/42, 21 August 1942.


acts of „lawlessness‰. The SP, with armed guards, visited the area on 2 September.116 He was greeted by nearly 2,000 people, who asked the police to leave the place and resign from their jobs. The armed guards succeeded in dispersing the crowd with a show of force. The chairman of the Balasore Municipality re-signed in protest over the issue. The local leaders of Dhamnagar led the people in burning the uniforms and account sheets of the chowkidars.117 Under the leadership of Muralidhar Panda, some people „extorted‰ the mahajans and „looted‰ paddy in Dhamnagar area, particularly in Srijanga (a well-known site for violent struggle during the salt satyagraha) and Katsahi villages on 18 September. About 350 maunds of paddy were extorted from a local landholder of Bhadrak. The loot was distributed among the people according to the list prepared by „Congress agitators‰.118 The policemen who went to PandaÊs village at Kat-sahi on 22 September were greeted with the blowing of conches and drum beating by nearly 3,000 people from the neighbouring villages. Panda asked the crowd to attack the police force. The SI was assaulted, his hat and shirt were torn and his rifle was snatched. Besides, the mob encircled the police force menac-ingly. The police opened 35 rounds of fire, killing at least six and injuring five people, and then left the village. Muralidhar Panda, who accompanied the injured and the dead to Bhadrak hospital, was arrested the next day.119

In Khaira (Soro PS), the campaign for boycotting police and burning chowkidarsÊ uniforms assumed serious proportions. On 22 September, a police party reached Tudugadia haat and arrested a college student named Baidyanath Rout, a local leader and the principal organizer of the struggle in that area. While Baidyanath was in police custody, nearly 500 people from the neighbouring villages of Chatra, Ranpur, Khunta, Dalang, Harekrishnapur, Khairadia and Panisiali attacked the police with lathis and rescued him from custody. The crowd then proceeded to loot a shop where the SI was staying.120

On 25 September, another police party went to Khairadia to arrest the leaders connected with the incident, but nearly 116 WWCC, 15 September 1942, ACC-98.117 WWCC, DMÊs Report to CS, 23 September 1942, ACC-62.118 WWCC, SPÊs (Balasore) Report, 22 September 1942, ACC-30.119 HPD, „DM (Balasore) to CS‰, 6 October 1942, ACC-2202.120 Ibid.


300 400 people assembled in no time and started blowing conches. Responding to the blowing of conches, people of the neighbouring villages, armed with lathis, rushed to the spot. The crowd attempted to encircle the police. The police opened nine rounds of fire, but nobody was killed. The police felt helpless and withdrew without arresting anybody. It is presumed that the constables who opened fire deliberately avoided hitting their targets.121

The police party again approached Khairadia on 28 September to make the arrests with a fresh contingent of armed force brought from Cuttack. This time, the police conducted a house-to-house search to trace Baidyanath. Suspecting that he was hiding in a particular house, they broke open the house. Once the police entered the house, people set fire to the house from outside and raised an alarm to attack the police party. Upon this call, people with lathis, katuris (cutlasses), bows and arrows proceeded to attack the police force. The police again opened fire, killing two persons and injuring one. As a result, the crowd dispersed and the police returned to the camp in the village carrying the dead bodies. In the evening, nearly 100 people gheraoed the police camp with the objective of taking away the dead bodies. This led to further arrests. But soon, a bigger crowd, armed with lathis, katuris, bows and arrows and shouting slogans to the effect that the policemen should be killed, came rushing in. There was yet another round of firing, killing a Santhal of Nilagiri. The police arrested 19 people.122

Towards the end of September, Eram (Basudebpur PS) emerged as a militant pocket of popular mobilization. We can get a glimpse of the pattern of developments in Eram from the report of the enquiry committee that was instituted to probe the police firing which took place in Eram on 28 September.123 Lo-cal leaders, namely Aniruddha Mohanty, Kamalakanta Kar and Gouranga Charan Mohanty, were actively involved in mobilizing the people of Basudebpur. In fact, Aniruddha Mohanty, who was a committed follower of Jagannath Das (former Congress MLA, who was arrested in the wake of Bhandaripokhari incident),

121 WWCC, 25 September 1942, ACC-62; HPD, „Communiqué Regarding CDM in Orissa‰, F. No. 521/1942, ACC-2399.122 WWCC, 9 October 1942, ACC-62; WWCC, 30 September 1942, ACC-98.123 Report of the Joint Enquiry by the Revenue Commissioner and IG (Police), Orissa into Eram Firing on 28 September 1942 (hereafter RJEE), Cuttack, 1942, pp. 1 6.


had left for Basudebpur from Dhamnagar, leaving Muralidhar Panda there to lead the movement. Being a resident, Anirud-dha made Eram the headquarters of the movement. He, along with his co-workers, organized a large number of meetings at various places in Basudebpur area. The campaigners went round villages asking people to put pressure on chowkidars and daffadars to resign from their jobs. They also advocated non-payment of taxes, seizure of paddy from the zamindars and social boycott of the recalcitrant. In the meetings, they told people that swaraj would be achieved in a weekÊs time. They also held out hope that there would be no need to pay taxes under a swaraj government and the paddy of the rich would be available to the poor.

In the whole of Basudebpur area, villages were grouped under their respective headquarters such as Eram, Sankharo Pradhuan and Suan Sadeipada, and the leadership was able to establish a virtual „parallel authority‰. It succeeded in establishing swaraj panchayats in 12 villages and enrolled nearly 250 volunteers in a group called Marana Sena („Death Squad‰). They also pro-claimed with the beating of drums at the village haats and on public roads that taxes were no more to be paid and fishermen could fish without taking a lease. Claims regarding the existence of a Congress jail at Eram were also made.

The leadership enforced a highly organized system of intel-ligence. For instance, the arrival of government forces or any move by the police in the villages was immediately conveyed to the leaders by signals passed from village to village by the blowing of conches. The underground leaders operating at the provincial level sent circulars and directives from Cuttack town, and, in turn, got regular feedback from Eram. Mukunda Prasad Das (former speaker of the assembly), Bichitrananda Das (former MLA), Nanda Kishore Das (former deputy speaker of the legislative assembly, and a resident of Soro, Balasore) and Loknath Mishra (former Congress MLA) kept in touch with the developments at Eram through secret correspondence under pen names.124 The linkage of the local leadership of Eram with the Congress ashram at Bari was yet another feature.125

124 HPD, Special Report 102/42, 4 October 1942, ACC-2443. Bichitrananda Das and Dwivedi were called Swamijee and Babajee, respectively.125 Sudhakar Das, Swadhinata Sangramara Bhumi Iram (Oriya), Cuttack, 1977, pp. 22, 23.


We may also briefly touch upon the version of the activities by the leadership at Eram as presented in a nationalist account.126 According to this account, the leadership at Eram comprised Laxmi Narayan Padhi, Sapan Pradhan, Nisakar Dalei, Banchha-nidhi Agasti, Bhagirathi Pati and Arjun Biswal. The leaders, in fact, had organized four karmee sammilanis (conferences of activists) at Eram, Suan, Baranda and Guda. They organized meetings and processions, held picketing before government establishments and advocated boycott of educational institutions. They also gave a call to the people to refuse paying taxes and rent. The leaders declared the area between Kansabausa and Gomei an independent zone far from the control of the British government. The area was christened „Swadhina Banchhanidhi Chakala‰, after the famous nationalist poet and stage artist of Orissa, Banchhanidhi Mohanty.

However, this area, as indicated above, remained inaccessible during the monsoons, with all communications disrupted. Thus, it provided an ideal political climate to sustain the hopes of having a „parallel government‰ structure with an administrative council, secretariat, courts of law and jails. In this „independent zone‰, all government authority disappeared. A local activist named Basu Tarai (Basudebpur) campaigned against the governmentÊs restrictions on the use of boats. A Shanti Sena (Peace Corps) was formed to mobilize the people politically, raise subscriptions for the Congress and also to recruit volunteers.

The leadership stepped up its anti-British campaign in September not only through meetings and processions, but also through various forms of direct action. For example, a raid was organized at the coastal watching stations on 20 September; the staff was assaulted by pickaxes and crowbars, and driven out of the stations.127 Most of the people refused to pay chowkidari tax. On 17 September, chowkidars and daffadars were asked to hand over their uniforms and when they refused, they were called slaves by a „large crowd‰.128 The leaders, particularly Aniruddha Mohanty, Kamalakanta Kar and Gouranga Charan

126 Ibid. Mass meeting organized at Eram, 27 August 1942, 7, 17 and 22 September 1942; Sankaru, 9 September 1942; Bedhada, 11 September 1942; Guda, 13 September 1942; Brahmana Gaon, 13 September 1942.127 WWCC, 28 September 1942; RJEE, pp. 1 2, ACC-59.128 RJEE, pp. 1 2.


Mohanty, exhorted people in a huge meeting at Basudebpur on 18 September to attack the police station on 22 September.129 Incidentally, the force came to camp in Basudebpur on 18 September. On 19 September, the police arrested three activists in Eram but they could not arrest the leaders. When the police was returning with the arrested, a large crowd garlanded the arrested activists, but otherwise the incident passed off peace-fully.130 In fact, for at least three weeks, the government control was reduced to naught in Swadhina Banchhanidhi Chakala.

Colonial authorities took a serious view of the developments at Eram. As mentioned earlier, a police camp was opened in Basudebpur on 18 September to deal with the situation in the area, particularly in Chakala. The police party faced stiff boycott by the boatmen while crossing the river to reach the village.131 The police camped at zamindar Radha Kanta PadhiÊs residence. Once in the area, the police swung into action by seizing the Sudeipada Satyagraha Ashram, one of the headquarters of anti-British struggle, and arrested a few prominent leaders like Banchhanidhi Agasti and Arjun Biswal. Protest meetings and hartals were organized in the haats of Basudebpur, Bedhada, Eram, Padampur and Brahmana Gaon. On 28 September, another batch of armed contingent moved to Eram to arrest the princi-pal leaders, including Aniruddha Mohanty and his associates, and to prevent the holding of a meeting. The entry of police in the village was strongly opposed. In this context, the enquiry committee report observed:132

In Milanpada, they encountered a crowd of about 3,000 strong. It is clear from evidence that this crowd was in a very excited and determined mood. They were carrying lathis and shouting „Mahatma Gandhi Ki Jai‰, „Angreji Rajya Dhwans Heu‰, and „Bharat Mata Ki Jai‰. The Inspector was sent a few yards ahead by the DSP to order the crowd to disperse and return the kit and release the chaukidars and to warn them that if they did not obey, fire would be opened.

However, as the crowd continued to advance and encircle the force, the police opened 142 rounds of fire in the near-total

129 Ibid. The attack, however, did not materialize on 22 September.130 RJEE, pp. 1 2.131 S. Das, Swadhinata Sangramara Bhumi Iram, pp. 26 30.132 RJEE, p. 2.


darkness of the evening for nearly half an hour. This led to the killing of 26 people, while 46 sustained serious injuries.133 The people killed in the firing comprised inhabitants of at least 12 villages and included people of higher and lower castes as well as tribals.134

Commenting on the nature of the struggle in Eram, the report pointed out:

The people who took part in the disturbances were mostly men of the landless class and belonged to the poorer sections of the public. They were attracted by the free distribution of paddy extorted from their more prosperous neighbours and there is no doubt that the ringleaders played freely upon their economic difficulties.135

It is fairly evident that the so-called parallel authority, which lasted in Eram for at best three weeks, was possible only in the overall context of the breakdown of authority at the beginning of the Quit India Movement. The „inaccessibility‰ of the region was another important factor that went into the making of such a reality possible. However, once the colonial crackdown began, the parallel authority could hardly withstand it. The killing of so many dampened the peopleÊs morale and demobilized the peasantry and the people in general. In the context of the long-term hegemonic war (as the Indian national struggle was), an attempt to build up a mass movement based on violence could have only helped the colonial authorities to break the movement by more effective violence. And in such a situation, the popular struggle, instead of scoring a victory in terms of extending its hegemonic space, only loses it and allows the colonial state to assert its own concentrated hegemony.

We also have references to the formation of a „National Gov-ernment‰ in the Gurpal area of Balasore.136 Here too, a strong

133 Ibid.; WWCC, 23 September 1942, ACC-62.134 WWCC, 23 September 1942, ACC-62. The list of the dead included three tribals from Kumarpur village, four of the Scheduled Castes, 10 from lower castes and nine from higher castes. The dead included a woman called Pari Bewa (Eram).135 RJEE, pp. 4 6.136 WWCC, SPÊs (Balasore) Report, 8 October 1942, ACC-30. However, we do not have much information on this specific development.


local-level campaign was carried out to boycott the police and to force the rural police to resign. In the meeting organized in this area during September October, people were advised to paralyze the existing administration by refusing to pay taxes. However, this was part of the overall campaign (existing in many parts of the district during September October), which motivated people to non-cooperate with „all forms of law and order‰ and not to pay chowkidari tax and other government revenues.137

We also see various attempts to destroy colonial symbols and properties in other parts of the district during September. In Soro, the offices of the sub-registrar and SDO were attacked and documents and records torn. Students entered the room of the DM, and after garlanding him, asked him to resign. They then tore up some of the records.138 In October, Balasore was hit by a severe cyclone. This, in fact, aggravated the misery of the people of the district who had not yet recovered from the spell of successive floods in the preceding monsoon. As a result, nearly 2,000 people were rendered homeless; and a number of people suffered from starvation. We come up with the evidence of the looting of a rice mill at Lakshmannath Road (Jaleswar PS), where police action led to the death of one person.139

The leader Atal Bihari Mohanty had, in fact, associated himself with the „revolutionary suspects‰ of Calcutta like Mahendra Nath Das, Harendra Nath Ghose, Kishori Mohan Ghose, Satish Chandra Das and Kalipada Das since the 1930s.140

An interesting feature of the movement in Balasore was the increasing participation of teachers and doctors of various lo-cal boards in the struggle.141 They lent all kind of support to the leadership in stepping up the struggle. This was at least observed very clearly in the Lakshmannath area, where many doctors became active associates of Atal Mohanty.

At Bhandaripokhari, Kumbharia, a Congress woman activist, tried to reoccupy the already seized Congress ashram by enter-

137 WWCC, 8 October 1942, ACC-30.138 WWCC, ACC-98.139 HPD, Special Report 40/1942, „Report No. II‰, 6 November 1942.140 Ibid.141 WWCC, 29 October 1942, ACC-61.


ing it forcibly. She was arrested. An attempt was made to burn down the sub post office of Balasore town.142

In the context of the struggle assuming violent proportions and resulting in large-scale deaths in different parts of the dis-trict, the Congress leadership organized a conference of activists around December.143 In the meeting held at Khaira, 150 activists from 20 villages participated. Nilambar Das, who presided over the meeting, emphasized the need to enroll volunteers for the Shanti Sena to guard the villages. He warned the zamindars and the rich that they would be ruined if they failed to help their poor neighbours during the crisis. Simultaneously, he advised the poor to protect the rich when they were faced with any danger of lawlessness. He then went on to stress the need for constructive work. He requested the villagers to send some men to Soro for training in khadi work and advised collection of paddy for maintaining the Soro centre. In response to his appeal, 20 people were named by villagers for khadi work. He also asked the volunteers to monitor law and order in the vil-lages. This position of the Congress leadership was intended to re-inspire the people and provide a new thrust to the move-ment, which had declined after the massive crackdown by the colonial administration.

In any case, by the end of September, and particularly after the Eram incident, the movement on the whole seemed to peter out, except for sporadic incidents in different parts of the district.

Before winding up our survey of the 1942 struggle in Balasore district, let us briefly look at the local leadershipÊs campaign and organization for the movement. As noted earlier, Congress activists mostly withdrew to the rural areas around August to carry on the movement there and to avoid arrest. The Congress Bulletin and the True News were being posted to selected places in Bhadrak since the third week of August.144 The Congress bul-letins prepared in the light of news „heard‰ from Tokyo were drafted and circulated in October. Such bulletins advocated the use of violence and arson.145

142 WWCC, „Narrative Account of Congress Disturbances in the Different Districts of the Province of Orissa from August 1942 to December 1942‰, 1 November 15 November 1942, 16 November 30 November 1942, ACC-98.143 HPD, „Congress Meeting at Khaira‰, 28 December 1942, ACC-2076.144 WWCC, SPÊs (Balasore) Report, 22 August 1942, ACC-30.145 WWCC, SPÊs (Balasore) Report, 8 October 1942, ACC-30.


We also come across a pamphlet detailing the Congress pro-gramme, distributed by the Chandabali ME School to the public in August. The pamphlet instructed them146 (i) to plunder salt stocks; (ii) not to furnish any information to the government servants; (iii) not to work under the government officials; (iv) not to provide boat, motor vehicles or other modes of conveyance to them; (v) to compel merchants not to withhold the supply of foodstuff to government servants; (vi) to induce government servants to resign from their jobs; (vii) to stop communication; (viii) to observe hartal in factories and mills and to close down schools and colleges; (ix) to cut telegraph lines, to break and loot postboxes, to stop communication of postal papers; (x) to store foodstuff in villages; and (xi) to form swaraj panchayats.

By September, the struggle was mostly carried on by the lo-cal leaders and often supported by the underground Congress organization. In fact, several „villages appeared in the role of leaders of groups of villages‰.147 In the rural areas, this leadership evolved its own methods of mobilization of the people. One of the novel methods of resistance to the police, the administra-tion and the officials which were evolved, was the blowing of conches and beating of drums at the approach of government forces in the villages. This was meant to signal to the people of the nearby villages to group together with „any weapons‰ they possessed to resist the entry of the police and officials.

Side by side, the campaign was on to boycott rural police and mobilize people to „ignore government‰ in reporting criminal cases. People were advised to take to swaraj panchayats to iron out their differences. In Balasore district, there were fewer cases of burning of police stations and post offices compared to other districts. The reason was that the agitators did not endorse such plans, as they thought buildings like post offices and police sta-tions would be useful to Congress bodies in future: apparently after the „last struggle‰.148 Moreover, local-level pamphlets, addressed to the police and jail officials, urged them to disobey their officers on the issue of taking action against political agita-tors.149 In Jaleswar, people slapped the effigy of a policeman and

146 WWCC, SPÊs (Balasore) Report, 22 August 1942, ACC-30.147 WWCC, SPÊs (Balasore) Report, 15 September 1942, ACC-30.148 WWCC, „OPAI‰, Vol. VII, No. 36, 27 September 1942, ACC-30.149 Ibid.


twisted its ears·a symbolic expression of popular anger against colonial authorities·before setting it on fire. In response to the brutal killing of people by police firing in different parts of the district during September, lawyers and local leaders came out in open condemnation of the governmentÊs repressive policy. Nanda Kishore Das (former deputy speaker during the Congress ministry) circulated pamphlets appealing to the government officials to express their disapproval of government measures by refusing to become party to these measures.150 The Balasore District Board denounced the repression of the district police and administration. We have indicated earlier how the movement came to be increasingly supported by doctors and teachers.

The no-tax and no-rent campaign picked up momentum in September. People of Bhadrak, Dhamnagar, Eram, Bhograi and Jaleswar areas refused to pay chowkidari tax as a result of the campaign. As noticed earlier, attempts at looting rice mills and extortion of paddy from zamindars formed another significant feature of the movement in the district, though only for a short while. There was also a certain violent orientation of the movement in the district. This was partly due to the campaign through pamphlets going on since the third week of August. For example, we come across a pamphlet titled „Do or die‰ circulated in Balasore.151 Supposedly originating from a Bengal revolutionary, it was probably re-drafted by the local-level underground leaders in north Balasore. The message of the inflammatory pamphlet was as follows:

Mahatma Gandhi started this movement and dared to bring a revolu-tion depending entirely on you. This is the golden opportunity for you. Another important factor is that in spite of proper payment, paddy, rice, dal, oil and other such commodities are not available and because of this all are much excited. If you incite them against the British, they will be yours and join you. They will not be afraid of death. Hold meetings daily in every village and in every hamlet and excite the masses to the extreme as a result of which their blood will boil and simultaneously, they will be thirsty for British blood. Let Hindus, Mohammedans, males and females·all take to this

150 WWCC, 2 October 1942, ACC-30.151 WWCC, ACC-57. „Do or Die‰ (pamphlet, undated) was issued by Harlal Bandhan, Kassijora Lane, Calcutta.


work. Try your best to persuade the police, the Indian Army, the ARP [Armed Reserve Police], coolies and the railway employees to go on strike. The rice mills and Mission Technical School should be closed and looted. I enumerate below the various ways which we should adopt to cause loss; following the non-violent principles of Mr. Gandhi: (1) to destroy the Railway lines; (2) burn the stations and loot them; (3) loot the goods trains and throw away the things carried in them; (4) to burn and loot post offices, courts, residences of the Europeans and the electric power houses; (5) churches to be demolished and attempts to be made to kill the Europeans at first sight ⁄ First we will tamper the railway communications so that the movement of troops and sending of arms and ammunitions would not be possible. Cause extensive damage to the GT Road making its repair impossible so that no conveyance can move. We have is-sued another true and secret bulletin. It is mentioned in it that the Japanese have bombed Madras and Bombay at midday. Again, the Japanese are helping the provinces of Madras, Bombay, UP and CP by supplying weapons through their submarines and have said, „Try your best, we are at your back‰. The Indian Congress and the Congress leaders now in Japan have said, „We will finish everything by 15 September‰. So, I say, be not afraid of death or jail and try to keep up the prestige of the Congress. If this movement ends in failure, the whole world will laugh and spit at us.

Another bulletin, issued soon after, said that the leaders of our country had been poisoned and killed, and „you are still indifferent. Take the vow of ÂDo or DieÊ; and make strenuous efforts to plunge yourself in the blood of foreigners. Vengeance ⁄ The British kept you so far as tame insignificant dogs. Now make them forget that.‰

However, the intensity of the movement tended to slow down around October due to the massive arrest of local leaders as well as the seizure of underground organizations. Political prisoners in jails attempted to guide the movement by sending out instructions.152

The anti-feudal trend was also evident in Kanika estate. Here, under the leadership of Chakradhar Behera, a Congress MLA, peasants looted the houses of mahajans.153 They „forcibly‰ took

152 WWCC, 22 November 1942, ACC-30.153 HPD, „Petition by Banamali Khilan of Vinipur and Others against Chakradhar Behera (MLA)‰, ACC-2403. The petition referred to an incident on 31 August when the houses at Vinipur village were looted.


away cattle, ploughs, agricultural implements from the fields, even „uprooted‰ and threw away the paddy plants and saplings into the river. They continued to carry away everything of value including rice and paddy from the houses of mahajans.

In fact, the report154 of the sub-deputy magistrate who conducted an enquiry into the „lawlessness and disorder‰ in Chandabali area makes very interesting reading. Holding Chakradhar Behera responsible for the lawlessness in the area, the report noted:

He [Chakradhar Behera] fought for the general cause, or at least, pretends to do so and he has thereby commanded the respect and confidence of the masses. His election to the Legislative Assembly has added another feather to his cap ⁄ He does not stir out from his house, does not hold meetings in public places, nor does he encour-age people to burn police stations or to do similar acts of violence against the Government. But he has successfully dissuaded people from coming to the police or to the law courts of Kanika raja for redress of any grievance. People run to him for settling disputes. He imposes fines and realises them. Things have come to such a state that 50 to 60 people gather at his place at Haldia daily and he practically acts as the ruler. When the number of cases gets heavy, he engages some Bhadraloks [respectable members of society] to try a few of them; and if the parties are still dissatisfied they come to him again for a retrial; but from his decisions, there can be no appeal. If he wishes to raise any subscription, he does it. If anybody does not abide by his decisions, refuses to pay fines or subscriptions, challenges his authority, connives against him, deposes in any case against him, or any person in whom he is interested, he has his own way of dealing with him.

The report further pointed out that when opposed by any-body, Behera „plundered‰ the property of the person in broad daylight, or initiated social boycott against him whereby the services of washermen, barbers and such others were denied to him. Moreover, standing crop in dissentersÊ fields could be damaged with a herd of buffaloes being driven through; cattle, if any, impounded with the help of goondas (hooligans); and ploughing of fields obstructed. The report summed up that

154 HPD, „Enquiry Report on the Allegations of Lawlessness and Disorder in the Chandabali Area‰, 26 October 1942, ACC-2401.


„willingly or otherwise, all are under his thumb‰. Other reports also give information about an attempt at running an almost parallel government in Kanika area, and the virtual breakdown of authority therein.155

Koraput

The strength of the struggle was signalled when two boys carrying Congress flags marched through the streets of Jeypore, reading out GandhiÊs message sent from Bombay.156 Radhakrishna Biswas-ray, who attended the All India Congress Committee (AICC) session in Bombay, had sent copies of the Congress bulletins and GandhiÊs message to the DCC leadership of Koraput by the second week of August. The message was widely circulated in the entire district and it was immediately grasped and practised. People were goaded into action when the leaders interpreted the Congress message to mean that swaraj had already been attained, the British were no more ruling and nobody should just sit back until Gandhi was released from jail. However, all the three top leaders of the district were arrested under the DIR, and all Congress units were put under seizure.

With the seizure of all Congress offices and arrest of leaders, Congress activists immediately slipped into the interior pockets. Two local-level leaders, Phagunu Bhadra and Dhana Disari, organized a number of meetings in the villages of Nowrangpur area.157 The following text shows how Dhana Disari explained the situation to the people in the meetings organized in Pha-rasaguda and Kodinga:

The British Government has ceased to exist from now. Gandhi Sarkar [government] will now be formed. You will have to obey Gandhi laws from now on. You need not pay rent any longer. DonÊt obey the Government officers. Cut the reserve forest and harida trees. Join the Congress.157

155 HPD, „Petition by Circle Officer‰, Matto, 18 September 1942; HPD, „Petition by Tahsildar‰, Ghanteswar, 14 September 1942; HPD, Report by DM, Balasore, 17 November 1942, 20 December 1942, ACC-2401.156 WWCC, 21 August 1942, ACC-30.157 HPD, Report of Sub-divisional Magistrate, 31 October 1942, Nowrangpur, ACC-2477.


The audience at Kodinga and Pharsaguda meetings was also asked to feed the Congress workers. In some of the meetings in the area, the leaders carried guns and spears while addressing the crowd.

On 13 August, when police seized the Congress office at Nowrangpur, G. Annaji Rao, the president of the unit, declared to the people who had assembled there that swaraj had been achieved right since 9 August with the arrest of Gandhi. In a hastily arranged meeting at the nearby public road, he advised people not to pay revenue to the government or rent to Jeypore estate. This was followed by a procession of nearly 150 people. They marched through the streets, shouting Congress slogans and asking people to disobey the British government and its officers.158

The message of the movement was propagated in the vil-lage shandies (marketplaces) through picketing and meetings. Nilakantha Patra, member of the Koraput DCC and president of the Ghumsur (Ganjam) Primary Congress Committee, advised the people in Boipariguda PS to use shandies as centres for preaching civil disobedience. His advice to a gathering of people on 14 August was: „Go to the shandies and tell the people that the Sarkar [government] has gone and that they should not pay any sort of tax or rent to the authorities.‰ As per his advice, a group of Congress activists moved on to the shandies at Tarapur village the next day, preaching civil disobedience.159

In Nandapur, nearly 700 Congress workers under the leader-ship of Bhagaban Kimudu organized a meeting near the PWD inspection bungalow on 14 August. The police arrested the lead-ers and took them to the police station, but the crowd followed them. On the way, the crowd attacked the arrack (country wine) shop and depot, destroyed alcoholic drinks and set fire to the records of the shop. This was followed by an attack on the cattle pound situated nearby. They destroyed the doors and furniture of the cattle pound and released the impounded ram.160

158 HPD, Report of Sub-divisional Magistrate, Nowrangpur, CC No. 35/42, ACC-2477.159 HPD, Report of Sub-divisional Magistrate, Nowrangpur, 28 October 1942, ACC-2477.160 HPD, Special Report 35/42, 15 August 1942, ACC-2372.


On 15 August, the Pukili haat161 (Pottangi) was attacked by a group of nearly a hundred Congress workers, who came in a procession, carrying Congress flags and lathis. Entering the shandy, they shouted: „Mahatma Gandhi ki jai, Congress ki jai! Swadhinata miligala; kehi loka governmentku sistu Diana; Raja ku sistu Diana. Government bhangigala; Ae sarkar bandar bala hoigala‰ („Victory to Gandhi/Congress; we have achieved Swaraj; donÊt pay rent to the government. DonÊt pay rent to the raja/maha-jans. The Government is gone; this Government is worth pubic hair‰). They also shouted slogans like „Kehi hata panu diana; yara police ku darana‰ („Let nobody pay haat taxes. DonÊt be afraid of the police.‰). The crowd instructed shopkeepers to close their shops and leave the shandy. Shopkeepers who refused to do so were manhandled and driven out of the shandies by the lathi-wielding processionists. Grocery and eatery shops were attacked, and people took away coconuts and ate the sweets. A pottery shop was looted and Rs 2 in cash were taken away. Kerosene kept for sale in the haat was used to burn mill-made clothes. Importantly, the money and receipt books of one sahu-kar (moneylender), who was also the shandy contractor, were forcibly taken away.

On 16 August, the Pukili shandy was attacked. On the same evening, the workers convened a meeting and decided to de-stroy the Pottangi thana and Pukili palace. The Pottangi taluk office was also attacked and destroyed on the same day under the leadership of Malu Samanta, Asanda Kartik, Dhanu Santara, Hantal Jaybandhu, K. Boloram, Mongolu and Pangi Asu (all members of Koraput DCC). This was followed by a meeting near the taluk office.162 Nearly 1,000 people from different parts of Pottangi, carrying Congress flags and lathis, assembled for the meeting. The objective of the meeting was to launch an attack on the nearby police station and the taluk office. The police failed to persuade the crowd to disperse as people refused to go away. The police arrested six leaders, only to find that

161 HPD, Report of Sub-divisional Magistrate, Koraput, 21 September 1942, ACC-2477; HPD, Special Report 14/42, „Case No. 31: Charge against Certain Congressmen for Rioting, Dacoity and Other Acts‰, 16 September 1942, ACC-2371; WWCC, 21 August 1942, ACC-30.162 HPD, Special Report (Report of SP), „Case No. 33‰, 20 September 1942, ACC-2370; WWCC, 29 August 1942, ACC-30.


more people in large groups joined the agitators. The crowd insisted that they should be arrested along with the leaders. Thus, when a group of people was detained by the police and kept at a distance from the swelling crowd and subsequently shifted to a more spacious ground in front of the taluk office under armed custody, another group tried to join the arrested crowd. They blocked the entrance to the police station and started preparing to settle down for the night at the place. Two of the leaders·Malu Samanta and Asanda Kartik·who had not yet been arrested, exhorted „Bharat is now independent, we must release Mahatma Gandhi at any cost from jail. The Government is removed in Bombay and Allahabad. DonÊt pay sistu [land revenue] any more.‰ Following this, the people burst into the taluk office and damaged it badly. This was followed by a lathi charge by the police. The people, despite injuries, insisted on remaining at the spot. It is important to observe that the people offered themselves to be arrested en masse and the police had to disperse them by resorting to lathi charge. On 17 August, nearly 200 Congressmen again assembled at the Semiliguda revenue rest shed.

The attack on colonial symbols co-existed with the attack on shandies. For instance, a group of people returning from Jeypore (who had gone to attend a meeting at Tardiput on 17 August and where the Congress policy regarding shandies was announced by one Gora Dalapati) got divided into two groups.163 One group led by Gopi Kirsani, Mangala Kirsani, Kodria Man-gala, Udukudia Pambia and Kona Khoda took charge of the attack on shandies in Lambadaput, Gunaipada and Badigoda mutt (Padwa region); and the other group under Gora Dalpati moved on to attack the Redangi shandy.

On 18 August, the first group attacked the Gunaipada shandy. Carrying flags and sticks and shouting slogans, it first beat up and chased away the constable. Then Mangala Ratan, the shandy contractor, who was collecting the haat fees by issuing stamped receipts, was mobbed and asked how he could dare disobey the mandate of the Congress. His receipt books were snatched away. Then the crowd asked the people not to pay shandy tolls as independence had already been achieved. They proceeded to

163 HPD, Special Report 26/42, „Case No. 53‰, 6 September 1942, ACC-2368.


attack shops selling mill cloth and yarn and used the kerosene stored in the shops to burn down the articles. This was followed by looting of the eatery shops. One common feature that may be mentioned here is that the tribals mercilessly assaulted the Dombs (low-caste people) present in the haat, alleging that they were police informers.

After attacking and looting the shandies, the crowd then impulsively decided in a meeting to visit the nearby villages and extort rice and rations from the rich and hold a feast.164 They then went to Deolpara and raised subscription of rice, dal and plantain from a rich man there named Pangiguru and organized a feast. They also damaged roads and removed the milestones in Badigoda area. These activities of extortion and raising of subscriptions continued till 20 August. Finally, when they were hunted down by the police, the group crossed the border across Machhkund River and fled to the Madras region. Of the 20 tribals who were involved in these acts, three each belonged to Mathili and Padwa regions. They were backed by the DCC leaders operating from underground in Jeypore.

On 20 August, under the leadership of Lima Santa, nearly 200 Khonds (people belonging to an ethnic tribe) attempted to raid the police station at Lachhipur.165 The crowd proclaimed that the Lachhipur police station was abolished from that day. They raised slogans saying „British rajatwa uthigala, Congress rajatwa hoigala‰ („The British government is gone and the Con-gress government has been established‰). Lima also instructed the people not to go to the police station to report anything, nor to obey the samasthanam (estate) and forest officials. He further stated that the dongars (hills/forest) should be cut down, gov-ernment officials should go away and no rent should be paid. The crowd present there abused the officials in foul language and openly asked the thana officer to resign and leave the thana building for them.

A similar incident occurred in Dasmantpur on 18 August when a large mob assembled at the thana and demanded that the thana be handed over to them. Excise shops, courts of law

164 Ibid.165 HPD, Special Report 12/42, „Case No. 43‰, 21 August 1942, ACC-2440; HPD, Report of Koraput Magistrate, 19 September 1942, ACC-2477.


and government institutions in Gunupur area were also pick-eted.166

On the same day, the Padwa shandy was approached by a huge group of Congressmen. Their intention was to raid the police station and attack the arrack shops as well as the cattle pound. The crowd moved into the thana in batches, determined either to „die or demolish‰ the police stations. However, the police made these batches sit on the ground under the threat of guns and seized their Gandhi caps, Congress flags and sticks. They advised the mob to represent their grievances in a peace-ful manner to be looked into by the authorities. Upon this, the crowd stood up and appealed that shandy taxes on headloads should be exempted and they should be permitted to take up podu cultivation.167

The wood for road bridges and sleepers was supplied by a British company called H. Dear and Co. for the district. Attacks on this company were taken up by the agitators in many parts. The labourers who were engaged in the company for sawing work were threatened, and the sleepers lying in the companyÊs depot were damaged.168 In Dabugaon, Mydalpur and Papadahandi areas, the campaign for destruction of reserved forest area picked up. Sleepers and wooden bridges worth Rs 800 were destroyed on the Ampani Ghat (Koraput Kalahandi border).169

Mathili was yet another pocket of intense mobilization during the Quit India struggle. Lakshman Naiko had been very active in the area ever since 1938, preaching Congress ideology and mobilizing the tribals. After 16 August, he had in fact sneaked into Ghumar, a village in the interiors, to avoid arrest by the police. He stayed there with his friend Nilakantha Patro, a local Congress leader of the area.170 The developments in Mathili area deserve to be detailed at this point.171 On 16 August, the opium 166 WWCC, 21 August 1942, ACC-30.167 Regional Committee for Compilation of the History of Freedom Movement in Orissa, HFM Papers, H.K. Mahatab, ed., F. No. 46/3, New Delhi.168 Ibid.169 WWCC, 21 August 1942, ACC-30.170 Nityananda Das, „Martyr Laxman Naik: A Hero of the Freedom Movement‰, Adivasi, Vol. ix, No. 1, 1967, p. 24.171 The narrative on the developments at Mathili is based on the file on Laksh-man Naiko, available at Mathili Police Station, Koraput, cited in Biswamoy Pati, „storm over Malkangiri: A Note on Laxman NaikoÊs Revolt‰, in Gyanendra Pandey, ed., The Indian Nation in 1942, Calcutta, 1988, pp. 195 98.


shop at Badhigar owned by Sadashiba Choudhury was targeted by the Congress activists. They demanded that the opium stock should be handed over to them or else they would loot the shop. These activists, hailing from the villages of both Mathili and Padwa areas, carried sticks and Congress flags. The owner of the shop, under pressure of the threat, gave away the stock of opium (nearly 10 tolas) along with his weights and measures. The seized opium was immediately distributed among the crowd. This action was supposed to be a protest against the governmentÊs policy of collecting revenue from excise articles.

Then the crowd proceeded to the house of one Kesabo Patro, the mustajar (headman) of Badhigar. Patro had gained notoriety for being very repressive in the collection of kist (instalment) from the local ryots on behalf of the Jeypore estate. The crowd, predominantly the ryots of Patro, thought it to be the right opportunity to intimidate him. However, Patro was away at Govindapally, a neighbouring village, to attend to his property matters. The crowd had to return disappointed. They marched on to Khogan, 3 miles from Badhigar, and picketed the wine shop of Padma Bisoi. They forced Bisoi to close the shop172 and even removed the signboard from the shop. The procession culminated at Badhigar haat, where the crowd destroyed some of the articles kept for sale.

Under Lakshman NaikoÊs leadership, on 17 August, Congress workers conducted an attack on a wine shop at Kongrabeda.173 They destroyed wine barrels as well as the stock of alcoholic drinks. This was followed by a similar attack on the wine shop at Kuntipalli the same day. There too, barrels containing fermented mahua and distillation materials were destroyed. The people who followed Lakshman Naiko and conducted the attack on wine shops included both tribals and non-tribals (viz. Gaudas) and they carried sticks and Congress flags. On 18 August there was a raid on the wine shop at Sindhabeda.174 Then the opium shop at Salimi, 8 miles away from Sindhabeda, was attacked. Lakshman Naiko had entrusted the responsibility of the raid at Salimi to one of his deputies named Padlam Naiko. Padlam led his „party of soldiers‰ to the Salimi opium shop owned by

172 Ibid.173 Ibid.174 Ibid.


one S. Chandrasekhar Pattnaik. The crowd destroyed the stock of 38 tolas of opium. One of the agitators called Bhimo Naiko tore up the shopÊs accounts. This led to a fight between him and the owner of the shop.

We come across yet another instance of an attack on the wine shop at Pushapalli under the leadership of Moti Singh, the Naiko of Tonguguda (Malkangiri) on 19 August. Moti Singh had enrolled himself as a Congress member in 1940 and had raised himself to the status of a local leader in Tonguguda. He was, in fact, known to the people of Tonguguda as „Lal Raja‰. It seems that Lakshman Naiko had a discussion with Lal Raja at the Damapalli shandy on 19 August and he had asked the latter to conduct the attack on the wine shop at Pushapalli. Daya-nidhi, the sahukar of the village, was instructed to close down his shop forever, as the British rule had ended and swaraj had been established·which meant that no tax and revenue would be paid. The crowd then moved on to destroy the distillation material and the barrels in the wine shop. The cash box of the shop was also taken away. Dayanidhi tried to resist the attempt but was thrown out by Moti Singh.

On 23 August, a Congress crowd of 200 people demanded food from Gangadhar Guru of Nuagaon (Mathili PS),175 who had a food store. The crowd threatened Guru that his store would be burnt down if he did not comply with their demands. Guru had to concede to them but complained to the police that valuables worth Rs 200 had been taken away by the „intruders‰. There is another reference to an order served by the Congressmen to a person at Malipara (Nuagaon) to make food arrangements for 200 Congressmen. The person to whom the „chit‰ was sent was a mali (gardener by caste) but a rich man of the locality. Nearly 150 people attended the feast. The gathering, which included both tribals and non-tribals, insisted that the host should join them in the feast. But as the host hesitated to join them on grounds of caste, the gathering threatened „to break the caste barrier‰. Incidentally, five out of the 10 leaders leading the people were mali by caste.

On 21 August, nearly 1,000 people carrying lathis and shout-ing slogans went round in a procession at Mathili under the

175 Ibid.


leadership of Lakshman Naiko.176 They raided the opium shop and destroyed the store. Then they marched into the revenue inspectorÊs office and destroyed the furniture there. Finally, they moved on to the police station. On being obstructed by the po-lice, they sang the Ramdhun and raised slogans saying that the government did not exist any more. Then they came back to the nearby shandy to hold a meeting and chalk out their future plan of action. At the haat, a „procession with music‰ was organized after a speech by Lakshman Naiko where he said:

We are warriors. The British Government is gone and Mahatma Gandhi is our king. Maharaja of Jeypore is dead. Proceed on. Let us first loot and burn the police station. LetÊs kill the government oficials and then proceed to Malkangiri and loot the treasury.177

The crowd threatened the agent of the haatÊs shandy contrac-tor and forbade him to raise the tax by issuing tickets to the vendors. The crowd also resolved to loot the samasthanam office and destroy records. As per the decision, the crowd returned to the thana, shouting that they were warriors and would „murder‰ all government servants and burn the thana. They assaulted the policemen, the magistrate, the excise sub-inspector and the local compounder. A forest guard of Jeypore estate was lynched to death. Nearly 15 officials sustained injuries. This situation led to 18 rounds of police firing, killing four people and injuring three. The mob dispersed after the firing but did not appear to be scared. The huge crowd was determined to attack all the government offices as well as the office of the Jeypore estate located in Mathili.

It is crucial to observe here that the official version of the above-mentioned incident characterized the crowd as a „violent mob‰ intending to „kill officials‰, „burn‰ the police station, and loot the treasury. Besides, it also described Lakshman Naiko as „violent‰, which was highly improbable. On the contrary, under NaikoÊs guidance, the crowd remained rather peaceful.178 The

176 HPD, Special Report 54/42, 21 August 1942, ACC-2369.177 Session Case No. 18 of 1942, „Patna High CourtÊs Decision on Lakshman Naiko‰, cited in H.K. Mahatab, ed., History of the Freedom Movement in Orissa, Vol. IV, pp. 44 48 (appendix).178 This version of the incident is testified by the following sources: Balabhadra Pujari, Saheed Bira Lakhmana Naiko (Oriya), Bhubaneswar, p. 20; N. Das, „Martyr


crowd, however, wanted to hold a meeting and hoist the Congress flag at the police station as a symbol of defiance, and to court arrest. In fact, many willingly courted arrest and overcrowded the jail. Besides, Ramaya, the forest guard, died in police firing which also left 10 demonstrators injured. Even Naiko received bayonet injuries and fell unconscious into a nearby drain where Ramaya already lay dead.

The Mathili incident, in fact, sent panic signals to the authori-ties. A brutal repression was launched thereafter to crush the movement. The apprehensions of the authorities intensified as Mathili had turned into a pocket of intense mass mobilization and was influencing other pockets like Ambaguda and Udaya-giri in Malkangiri and Jeypore taluk. Such activities in Mathili were also expected to whip up the enthusiasm of the Bondas, a war-like tribe of the area.179

In the Nowrangpur sub-division, the pattern of mobilization was extremely militant, and it climaxed towards the end of August with police firing in which 15 people were killed and many more injured.180 Congress bulletins sent from Bombay reached Nowrangpur in the early weeks of August. The local leaders ensured the wide but secret circulation of bulletins in the interiors, explaining to the people that there was no govern-ment any more, tax and rent should be refused and these would only be paid if Mr Gandhi became the „ruler‰. Further, people were instructed to damage bridges, cut telegraph wires, destroy reserve forests, set fire to thanas and government buildings and not to fear death while carrying out such activities.

Sadashiba Tripathy, the leader of the area, was arrested on 11 August. This was followed by seizure of the Congress office on 13 August. However, Gundabrola Annaji Rao, the new local leader, continued the task of interpreting the contents of the leaflets to the tribals in villages and thus helped generate in them a restive

Laxman Naik‰, p. 25; Sanganna, „Revolts in Orissa·Martyr Laxman Naik: A Hero of the Freedom Movement‰, in V. Rangavaih, ed., Tribal Revolts, Nellore, 1971, p. 252; Radhakrishna Biswasroi, Orissa Rajniti Ebang Eka Nua Pradeshara Parikalpana (Oriya), Jeypore, 1973, pp. 25 28. Also, interviews with Manmohan Choudhry (Gandhian) and Sarat Patnaik (communist).179 N. Das, „Martyr Laxman Naik‰.180 HPD, Special Report 70/42, ACC-2441: „Papadahandi Firing‰. The entire de-velopment in Nowrangpur area is based on this report.


frame of mind. Meetings were organized and Congress messages were read and explained to the people. Plans were chalked out to demolish the thana and cut down the reserve forests. Special emphasis was put on damaging bridges and telegraph line so that the attacks could be successful without fear of arrest. On 14 16 August, under the leadership of Sonu Majhi, a group of people damaged the wooden sleepers of Ms H. Deer and Co. stored at Ekamba, Chargam and Benugada Chacheraguda. On 17 August, a threat to damage the Nowrangpur thana was also held out. On the same day, another group under Mira Ghori damaged the Khadakajodi Bridge linking Koraput and Kalahandi. Dur-ing 17 19 August, an attack was made on the Maidalpur thana. The bridges at Maidalpur and Jatabal were damaged. Similarly, an attack on Dabugaon was planned. Trees in the Taragan and Chikili forests were massively felled. A proposal was mooted to damage the bridge near Papadahandi on 19 August. On 21 August, in a meeting organized at Semola village, a scheme for destroying the Maidalpur thana was chalked out. However, all such efforts to attack the thanas could not materialize due to heavy police arrangements.181 Again, on 23 August, the lorry of one Mr Smart was attacked but he escaped by firing in the air. It is important to note that the leaders could mobilize tribals in the interiors by undertaking a massive campaign based on leaflets bearing the signature of Gandhi. Thus, not a single day passed without some form of agitation.

As per the plan, 4,000 5,000 people came in a procession to the Papadahandi thana on 24 August.182 They carried lathis, axes, spears, bows and arrows, and guns. Such a huge gathering speaks highly of the leaders who had been able to mobilize the tribals. The persuasion of the police to stop them from march-ing on to the thana failed. The crowd surrounded the policemen and started assaulting them severely. A constable was hit with an axe and the mob almost went mad in the attempt to kill po-licemen. They shouted „hana, mara, lachha‰ („kill, beat, shoot‰). As the mob almost overwhelmed the police force, the police opened fire on them, killing at least 15 and injuring as many as 100. The police arrested 149 people in connection with the

181 Ibid.182 Ibid.


incident. With the arrest of Sadashiba Tripathy and G. Annaji Rao (President, Nowrangpur Primary Congress Committee), the mantle of leadership was taken up by Lakshmi Chandra Das also, a member of the Primary Congress Committee. He kept sending Congress bulletins to Siba Santa and Madhab Padhani for wider circulation in the interior pockets of Nowrangpur. Das had been to Dabugaon on 20 August to „broadcast‰ the plan of attack. Under Madhab PadhaniÊs overall leadership, mas-sive felling of sal trees was carried out in the Umerkot Jeypore region. The intensity of militancy had reached a peak by the end of August.

After the Papadahandi incident, the administration had to seize all the muzzle-loading guns and gunpowder from the licensed shops in a bid to prevent violent attacks on the police and officials.183 The ARP conducted flag marches to terrorize the people of the area. The government launched a scheme to carry out propaganda in order to counter the work of Congress agitators. Besides, troops were requisitioned from the adjoining Bastar state to strengthen the police deployment in the district. Apart from arresting numerous local-level leaders, including women, the administration resorted to caning. There were inci-dents of raping the women to demoralize the people and crush the movement. In a conspicuous bid to intimidate the people, Lakshman Naiko was hanged to death on 29 March 1943, after a hastily conducted trial. Besides, 30 people got life imprison-ment in connection with the Mathili incident.

However, the militant phase of the movement completely fizzled out after the Mathili and Papadahandi incidents as the authorities resorted to a massive crackdown to break the movement. Sporadic incidents still took place in the shape of attempts to burn down schools at Nowrangpur and Jeypore areas in September. In October, there was tension in Kujindri village near Gunupur and in connection with the incident 16

183 For details on the government measures adopted to repress the movement, see: WWCC, 24 August 1942 3 September 1942, ACC-30; Mahatab, History of the Freedom Movement in Orissa, Vol. IV, p. 90; Biswasroi, Orissa Rajniti, p. 26; Gobind Sahai, 42 Rebellion, Delhi, 1947, p. 347. Sahai mentions how 12 women were raped, and three people tied to the trees and mercilessly beaten. Canings on a large scale were resorted to apart from 24 cases of lathi charge. The other forms of punishment such as the confiscation of property and imposition of fines were also adopted.


men and women of the Savara tribe were arrested.184 Again, in December, a large band of Savaras cut down the unripe stand-ing paddy, which led to the arrest of one Saura Pattnaik. Except these sporadic incidents, by September the movement had slowed down, and by October it was almost non-existent.

After surveying the developments at Koraput, it becomes important to locate the nature and composition of the so-called crowd, an oft-repeated category used by the colonial authorities. The composition of the people arrested185 in connection with the Mathili police station incident reveals that both tribals and non-tribal people from most of the castes participated. Pro-fession-wise, they included cultivators, agricultural and non-agricultural labourers as well as rural intelligentsia like teachers and the rural rich like the Naikos. The „crowd‰ was predominantly tribal, Koraput being a tribal tract. Another aspect was the unity between the mustajars and tenants as well as agricultural and non-agricultural labourers. This brings out the fact that the Quit India struggle was, to a large extent, characterized by a broad unity among various castes and classes at the social plane.

However, the attack on specific targets of authority·like burning of mill cloth and yarn, damaging the shandies, bridges

184 Regional Committee for Compilation of the History of Freedom Movement in Orissa, HFM Papers, H.K. Mahatab, ed., F. No. 46/3, Vol. V, p. 88.185 Dasarathi Nanda, Saheed Lakhman Naiko, Berhampur, 1981, pp. 118 120.People arrested in connection with Mathili police station incident (Biswamoy Pati, Resisting Domination: Peasants, Tribals and the National Movement in India, 1920 50, New Delhi, 1993, p. 184):

Tribals Caste Occupation

Bhumiyas, 36 Gaudas, 3 Naikos, 13Khonds, 5 Paikas/Ranas, 2 Cultivators comprising 45 Naikos Outcastes, 3 Agricultural and non-agricultural labourers, 8 Others, 5 Teachers, 1

Date Location Tribals and Outcastes Non-tribals

16.8.42 Badhigar 4 417.8.42 Kuntipally 23 418.8.42 Salimi 21 519.8.42 Pushpalli 27 2

File on Lakshman Naiko, Mathili PS.Nature of participation of tribals and non-tribals in the meetings at Mathili region:


and milestones, and attacking police constables·reveals sheer anti-imperialist fury. However, attacks on shandy contractors and burning of receipt books and refusal to pay shandy tolls as well as rent and revenue point to the subtle anti-feudal current which the struggle contained. But this current remained marginal in the face of the violent anti-imperialist current. After all, as examined earlier, it was the very mobilization of the tribals by the Congress leadership of the district right since 1937 which explains the manifestation of this trend. Moreover, the roots of this anti-feudal dimension lay in the popular interpretation of Gandhi and the Congress ministry during the 1937 39 phase.

Puri

The movement in this district began when the students took to the streets and organized strikes after the arrest of the DCC lead-ers, including a socialist like Prananath Patnaik. The students of the Sanskrit College as well as schools at Puri town, Nimapara, Khurda, Olasingh and Banpur went in for picketing, strikes and organization of processions and boycotting their classes during the whole of August.186 The studentsÊ protest even extended to activities like disruption of the telecommunication system and railways and attacks on police. Many of the students were ar-rested. A Banara Sena organized in Gop carried on activities like burning of police uniforms and attacking police stations. The massive protests by students also received impetus from the activities of communists like Bhagabati Charan Panigrahi and Satyendra Nath Guha, an ex-detenue of Bengal who had settled down in Puri. SatyendraÊs place (Mangu Math) in Puri and BhagabatiÊs residence sheltered many young, enthusiastic participants of the struggle, with revolutionary dreams. However, these two leaders were also arrested by the end of August.

The Puri DCC kept functioning from Delanga and the un-derground leadership of the district used it as headquarters of the movement.187 As elsewhere, the intensity of the movement became more marked in the rural belt. Mohan Das (ex-Congress

186 WWCC, „Narrative Account of Disturbances in the Different Districts of the Province of Orissa from August to December 1942‰, 16 August 31 August 1942, ACC-98.187 HPD, Report of IG, 25 August 1942, ACC-2311.


MLA and a socialist), a top leader of the area, was associated with the Congress ashram at Hansapada. The wife of the zamin-dar of Manijang village, a sympathizer of the national move-ment, was popularly known as „Santani‰188 though her name was Sulakshana Mali Jema. With the seizure of the Hansapada Congress ashram, the headquarters of the movement shifted to the house of Santani, where underground leaders chalked out their course of action.

Interestingly, Padma Charan Samantasinghar, the son of San-tani, and a host of students and young activists constituted the leadership of the area and preached the Quit India message. They convened the Nimapara meeting on 16 September,189 which was attended by villagers of Hansapada, Bhatbanda, Chandrapara, Manijang, Andhia, Dihasahi and Villigram. The participants also included the Bauris (a low caste) of Dihabari. In the meeting, Lakhan Barik of Chandrapara village urged the audience not to give rent and revenue to zamindars and the government. The meeting also resolved to „persuade‰ the police to resign from their jobs and non-cooperate with the British government. Just after the meeting, 5,000 people proceeded to the police station carrying the national flag. They garlanded an SI and asked him to resign from his job. A section of the people forcibly entered the thana and lay prostrate on the ground, obstructing the entry of the policemen. They also tried to enter the thana and fly the tricolour, despite warnings by policemen. The crowd pelted stones at the police. The processionists were soon joined by other groups of people, including students. The police arrested 10 leaders, which provoked the people. As a result, they started pelting stones and brickbats with greater vehemence. This led to the police opening fire, in which one person was killed and 16 injured. The crowd left the spot but then attempted to set fire to the PWD bungalow and the post office instead. The administration imposed a collective fine of Rs 1,500 on the villagers of Manijang, Chandrapara and Hansapara for taking part in the incident.190

188 S.N. Patnaik, Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Itihasa (Oriya), Cuttack, 1972, pp. 175 77.189 HPD, Special Report 18/42, 16 September 1942, ACC-2442.190 HPD, Report of DM, Puri, 27 September 1942, ACC-2202.


Educational institutions continued to be paralyzed by strikes in September. Attempts at disrupting telegraph lines also con-tinued. The intensity of this form of activity was such that the authorities slapped a collective fine of Rs 1,000 on the villagers of Ankoi for their involvement in the cutting of telegraph lines. The cutting of wires became widespread in Bhubaneswar and Delanga areas in September.191 The local-level underground lead-ers held a number of secret meetings in the Ankoi Delanga area and organized massive cutting of telegraph and railway control wires along the railway tracks near Ankoi. Due to large-scale cutting of cables, telecommunication was entirely paralyzed by 16 September.192

As elsewhere, the underground leaders mobilized people in the rural areas by circulating bulletins and leaflets. A booklet, Congress Gitika,193 authored by Raghunath Mishra, was widely circulated in the rural belt. Biswanath Parida, a local-level leader, who was in touch with the underground activities of Surendra Dwivedi in Cuttack, did a lot to circulate leaflets, literatures and messages in the different parts of the district.

There is a reference to an assembly of 400 weavers at Bolgarh, mostly from Nayagarh state, who demanded the release of the Dighri Khadi Centre. They dispersed when the authorities as-sured them of looking into their grievances. However, the leaders who had organized the protest were arrested.194

In November, the prisoners of Nimapara gave a hard time to the jail authorities and the administration by offering „obstruction and objectionable demonstration‰ on their way to and from the jail. In the course of the trial, they gheraoed the jailer and the superintendent and threatened them. Other political prisoners also joined them in causing such obstruction. This continued

191 WWCC, „Narrative Account of Disturbances in the Different Districts of the Province of Orissa from August to December 1942‰, 16 September 30 September 1942, ACC-98; WWCC, 27 September 1942, ACC-30.192 HPD, Report of IG, 24 September 1942, ACC-2202; HPD, Report of SP, 23 September 1942, ACC-2202.193 HPD, „Orissa Gazette Extraordinary‰, 1 August 1942, ACC-2174.194 WWCC, „Narrative Account of Disturbances in the Different Districts of the Province of Orissa from August to December 1942‰, 1 October 15 October 1942, 16 October 31 October 1942, ACC-98; WWCC, 6 October 1942, ACC-30.


all through November.195 However, the pace of the movement had slowed down September onwards.

Ganjam

Ganjam also witnessed studentsÊ protests in the opening weeks of the Quit India struggle. Students in Aska, Berhampur Rus-selkonda and Nuapada went on strike.196 Since the Ganjam DCC was under the control of Nilakantha Das Dibakar Patnaik group (supporters of the coalition ministry), it had a negative approach to the movement. Dibakar Patnaik made an appeal to the students of the district to desist from indulging in „lawless-ness‰.197 However, hartals and closing down of shops continued to characterize the developments in the district throughout August. At Nuapada,198 students went round in a procession on 20 August and asked the shopkeepers and weavers to observe hartal. They also organized meetings on the same day and ex-plained to the people that Subhash Bose would come to liberate India with the help of the Japanese. Hartals were also observed in Kullenda and Bellagunta, where shops remained closed. At Bellagunta, a woman activist called Champa Devi took lead in organizing the hartal.

Towards the end of August, a campaign for tree felling began in the Russelkonda circle of Ganjam. Villagers were organized into a „united body‰. They conducted encroachment on reserve forests and felling down of trees.199 The entire Ghumsur taluk experienced massive tree felling in the reserved forest in Sep-tember under the aegis of the Koradabadi Congress ashram.200

The campaign against arrack (alcoholic drink) shops, threat-ening of government officials and the cutting of telegraph

195 WWCC, „Narrative Account of Disturbances in the Different Districts of the Province of Orissa from August to December 1942‰, 16 October 31 October 1942, ACC-98.196 HPD, Report of Press Advisor, 8 September 1942, ACC-2096; WWCC, 22 August 1942, 31 August 1942, ACC-30.197 WWCC, 3 September 1942, ACC-30.198 WWCC, 31 August 1942, ACC-30.199 WWCC, 7 September 1942, ACC-30.200 WWCC, „Narrative Account of Disturbances in the Different Districts of the Province of Orissa from August to December 1942‰, 1 September 15 September 1942, ACC-98.


wires continued throughout October.201 Posters were put up in Berhampur town urging people to „paralyze‰ the administra-tion by non-cooperation. They also asked the people to disrupt communication systems, „burn‰ post offices and police stations and even rob the banks.202

On 10 11 October, a lathi-wielding mob, mostly from Ganjam district, burnt down several schools, dak bungalows and other offices of Nayagarh, the neighbouring state. They also attacked the Nuagaon thana. The police had to open fire to disperse the people.203

The political prisoners in Berhampur jail unleashed a move-ment from their cells by resisting the authorityÊs attempt to enforce discipline and threatened the jail staff with violence. The protest climaxed with the burning down of a PWD shed situated in the jail compound.204 The political prisoners of Russelkonda sub-jail also assaulted the jail officials. Numerous instances of burning down of rest sheds and school buildings at Koinpur, Arsiling Kinchiling and Lavanyakota of Ganjam were reported in November.205 Some of the prisoners from Berhampur jail escaped by taking advantage of the collapse of the outer wall of the jail. November also saw continuance of the picketing of opium shops.

The pace of the movement in Ganjam was relatively slow compared to other districts. The movement, however, assumed militancy, though on a limited scale, after September. There was also a plan to attack salt factories at Ganjam and Sumadi. The authorities made heavy police arrangements to protect the factories in October.206 Attempts were also made to organize the ryots of the Khallikote estate,207 but the plan failed with the arrest of the prominent leaders of the estate in August.

201 Ibid.202 WWCC, 8 October 1942, ACC-30.203 WWCC, 1 November 1942, ACC-30.204 WWCC, 1 November 1942, ACC-30; WWCC, „Narrative Account of Dis-turbances in the Different Districts of the Province of Orissa from August to December 1942‰, 1 November 15 November 1942, ACC-98.205 WWCC, 17 November 1942, ACC-30.206 HPD, Report of the Collector, Salt Revenue, Madras to CS, Orissa, 2 October 1942, ACC-2411.207 HPD, Report of SP, Ganjam, 26 August 1942, ACC-2390.


There is reference to a training camp at Aska, which opened under the leadership of Satrughna Behera and Maguni Das, and offered training on „subversive‰ activities. The trainees at the camp disrupted communication links by cutting telegraph wires between Aska and Nalaganta.208

Sambalpur

Soon after the arrest of the DCC leaders of Sambalpur, the stu-dents of Sambalpur, Jharsuguda and Bargarh went on a strike and organized demonstrations. Bhairab Mohanty, who was work-ing as an assistant in the Orissa Secretariat (the secretariat base office had shifted to Sambalpur in view of the war), resigned from his job. He, along with Siba Narayan Padhi, took up the underground leadership of the district.209

Mohanty secretly took away some of the confidential files from the base office, burnt them and then went underground. He would stay with Padhi and Prahlad Roy Lath,210 who received secret Congress bulletins and messages from the Cuttack underground headquarters managed by Dwivedi. The funds collected from Sambalpur to finance the movement at the provincial level as well as letters were sent through the mailbags of the secretariat to Cuttack. The men in charge of receiving the dak (post) at both the points·Cuttack and Sambalpur·were acquainted with the symbols indicated by the underground leaders and delivered the articles at the right destination. Mohanty accomplished the important task of mobilizing the secretariat staff and helped generate in them a strong support for the Quit India Movement. Both Padhi and Mohanty established contact with the prison-ers by managing to appoint a cook (who had served Mohanty earlier) as the warder of the jail. Padhi also kept in touch with the underground leaders of Padampur and Bargarh, who were mostly involved in propagating khadi activities after the seizure

208 WWCC, „Narrative Account of Disturbances in the Different Districts of the Province of Orissa from August to December 1942‰, 16 October 31 October 1942, ACC-98.209 WWCC, „Narrative Account of Disturbances in the Different Districts of the Province of Orissa from August to December 1942‰, 16 August 31 August 1942, ACC-98.210 Interview with Prahlad Roy Lath, Cuttack, 25 October 1988.


of the Congress office. Prahlad Roy Lath, a committed Gandhian, provided financial support for the sustenance of a Congress of-fice. Lath, hailing from the Marwari business community, had joined the struggle in the 1930s and raised himself to the stature of an important leader of Sambalpur.211

There are references to forcible entry of workers to the SDOÊs office in August, asking the SDO to resign from his job. In Sep-tember, there was an attempt to open an institute to train the youth in using lathis and other weapons, apart from imparting drill exercises, but the organizers were immediately arrested. Circulation of pamphlets (in Oriya, English and Hindi) picked up in September. Under the secret guidance of Fakir Behera and Rajendra Panda (DCC leaders), the records of George High School (Bargarh) were burnt. When the two leaders were ar-rested, there was widespread protest in Bargarh town. A huge procession, which included 500 low-caste people, marched to the thana. The police arrested 18 persons and persuaded the mob to disperse. The leaders who were arrested in connection with the burning of the school office were the prominent personalities of Bargarh, such as Fakir Behera, Rajendra Panda, Ram Puri, Mangalu Pradhan (a peasant leader), Rama Satapathy and Lak-shman Pujari (the last two were communists). Rajendra Panda had supplied petrol for the burning.212 The arrest of leaders led to a strong popular protest. A procession of nearly 10,000 15,000 people, including peasants, agricultural workers and landless labourers,213 marched to the SDOÊs office.

The whole of October was marked by sporadic events like attempts at burning down school buildings. One such attempt occurred at the Sambalpur zilla school. In November, boys car-rying Congress flags and shouting slogans in GandhiÊs name

211 Interview with Siba P. Padhy, Sambalpur, 27 October 1988; Interview with Prahlad Roy Lath, Cuttack, 25 October 1988. He revealed how he used to feed the Congress activists of the district in his house. His brothers, who were in big trading business, supported him financially, he himself being involved in Gandhian politics. He claimed that he managed the DCC entirely, and contrib-uted substantially to the PCC and the Kasturba Fund. The latter was given a contribution of Rs 75,000. He also said how they approached the cloth traders and asked them to part with a certain proportion of cloth. This, he said, pre-vented the possibility of any shop being looted or burnt. The cloth collected from the merchants was burnt afterwards on the river bed.212 Interview with L.P. Mishra, Sambalpur, 28 October 1988.


entered the Sadar police station, Sambalpur, and asked the SI to resign. A similar incident took place in Bargarh. There is reference to an interesting incident in Bargarh relating to Parvati Giri of Sambalipadar village, who mobilized the women.214 Under her leadership, a procession of women was organized at Pradhan Pada and a meeting at Hatapada. Giri, who had graduated from the Gandhi ashram at Bari, was involved in a sustained campaign against the caste system for several years. During the Quit India struggle, she, along with others, led a procession to Bargarh and „overpowered‰ B. Mukherjee, the SDO. After tying down the SDO with a rope, she took the chair of the SDO and ordered his arrest after a mock trial. The drama was enacted before the public, to its utter jubilation. However, this led to her arrest along with a host of other leaders. Prabhabati Devi and Jambubati Devi were two other leaders of the district. The former, with her Gandhi ashram orientation, mobilized people in Bargarh, and the latter, wife of the nationalist Bhagirathi Pattnaik of Barapali, along with Prema Devi, led a procession of students from Ghormara Training School to Tumuka in Bihar.

The intensity of the movement can be gauged when we see the arrest of 35 people from a small village like Panimora.215 With

213 Ibid. MishraÊs views should be taken as providing a participantÊs perspective. He also said that the landlords·not overtly but tacitly·supported the move-ment. He went on to add that as Quit India was not an „economic movement‰, it did not affect the „classes‰. He emphasized the fact that the participation of intelligentsia and students was a significant feature of the struggle.214 Orissa District Gazetteer, Sambalpur, p. 81.215 Interviews, on 30 October 1988, at Panimora:

These villagers, interestingly, said that the call of swaraj attracted them to the movement rather than the existing economic exploitation. Gandhi, for them, was God, Parameswar („Supreme God‰). They also revealed that all classes of people had joined the movement, including the brothers and sons of Gountias (landlords). The 32 villagers who got arrested during the Quit India Movement were all poor agriculturists, including low castes.

Name Education

Chandrabhanu Parida 7th classChamru Parida 5th classChaitanya Sahu 2nd classDibyasunder Sahu 4th classPhulser Pradhan 7th class


the beginning of the movement in the second week of August, the villagers of Panimora decided that each house should con-tribute at least one worker for the movement. In the process, 42 workers were recruited. The villagers organized a meeting in the village in the second week of August, but they could not decide how to go about the movement. A local leader named Chamru Parida went to Sambalpur to meet Bhagirathi Patnaik. On his request, Bhagirathi Patnaik came down to Panimora and a secret plan was chalked out on their course of action. The workers were divided into groups. One group, led by Chamru Parida, went to Bargarh and the other group took to anti-British campaigning in other villages.

The first group picketed the court and the SDOÊs office.216 The protestors also attempted to recapture the seized Congress office. The group entered the courtroom in a dramatic fashion. Chamaru Parida entered the room, took a chair, and sat down, declaring to the audience that the court session was on. When the magistrate intervened and asked Parida who he was, he shot back and said, „I am the SDO of Gandhi Raj.‰ Records of the court office were torn by his followers. However, the agitators were arrested and jailed. Once in jail, Parida started persuading fellow prisoners, who were being asked by the authorities to join the war as soldiers, with the promise of a monthly salary as well as remission of their tenure in jail. The persuasions of Parida yielded results when nearly 25 young prisoners refused to join the war as per the proposed agreement.

Princely States

We cannot have a comprehensive picture of the nature of the Quit India Movement without a reference to the patterns emerging in the princely states during the period. We will briefly touch upon the developments in the three princely states of Nilagiri, Dhenkanal and Talcher.

Nilagiri

With the beginning of the Quit India Movement, the Prajamandal in Nilagiri undertook a course of action, which included burning

216Interview with Chamru Parida, 30 October 1988, Panimora.


the thana at Berhampur, stopping the ferry service in the river Suno, burning of police uniforms, destruction of bridges, and thereby the disruption of the communication system. There was also violation of prohibitory orders of the government by hold-ing meetings and protests against the arrest of leaders and an attack on the police in case of any arrest of the activists. Besides making appeals to state officials to join the struggle, they also initiated the boycott of officials and burning of their uniforms to register their protest against the arrest of leaders.217

A meeting was held under the presidentship of Kailash Chandra Mohanty (President, Prajamandal), and attended by participants from Soro and Bhadrak, the neighbouring areas of Balasore district. It was resolved that Prajamandal activists would go underground to evade police arrest. On 12 August, prominent Prajamandal leaders were arrested except Banamali Das (Secre-tary, Prajamandal), who went underground and avoided arrest. To suppress the movement, the state stepped up its repressive machinery. Even planes were used for attacking processionists and participants of the meetings in areas like Chandipur, Gopi-nathpur, Kanthapada and Ayodhya. At Berhampur, following a prearranged plan, people gheraoed the police force. This led to firing, and three persons were killed. Similar attempts were made at the Iswarpur thana.218

However, popular protest against the arrest of the leaders was so intense that 11 leaders were released. The released lead-ers continued to campaign, often from places beyond the state border.219 Areas like Panchakhada and Athakhunt remained active pockets of protest against fines and taxes imposed by the state administration. Despite brutal repression in terms of collective fines, looting, rapes, caning, etc., the ruler of Nilagiri had to remain away from the state. He stayed at Ranchi from November 1942 to 1946. He was, however, obliged to reduce the

217Nilagiri Praja Andolana Compilation Committee, Nilagiri Praja Andolanara Itihasa (hereafter NPARI; Oriya), Balasore, 1982, pp. 100 105; „Case No. 73 of 1942 43‰, cited in Bijaya Chandra Rath, Quit India Movement in Orissa, Cuttack, 1994, pp. 121 30.218 NPARI, pp. 100 116; Mahatab, History of the Freedom Movement in Orissa, Vol. IV, p. 86 (appendix).219 Annual Administration Report, 1942 43, Nilagiri State. But, perhaps, the released leaders were mostly communists.


amount of collective fines. The people saw this as a victory.220 As elsewhere, the participation of both tribals and low castes was significant in the Nilagiri movement.221

Dhenkanal

The prominent Prajamandal leaders of Dhenkanal were arrested by 19 August. However, Baishnaba Patnaik, one of the leading activists of the preceding years, took refuge at the underground headquarters of the movement at Cuttack and kept moving in Murhi and Parjanga areas to mobilize the villagers. He also circulated leaflets and sent secret information to the villagers in these areas.

Ably supported by Debaraja Patra of Manikarma, he could recruit 31 local-level leaders from villages such as Baligorada, Khatakhura, Mota, Bangursingha, Kandarsingha, Kuanlu, Pitani, Palasuni and Pangatira and grouped them into a „Marana Sena‰ („Suicide Squad‰). At this point of time, Baishnaba operated from his secret hideout at Rangathali jungle.222

After a few abortive attempts at capturing police stations in places like Parjang on 26 August under Baishnaba, the Marana Sena succeeded in virtually taking over the police station at Murhi. They locked up the armed guards and chowkidars in the hazat (police custody). They also looted the armoury and took away four rifles and 200 catridges, along with cash to the tune of Rs 1,000.223 They also fired a few blanks and raised slogans in the name of Gandhi and Prajamandal. By noon on 26 August, the offices of the SDO, revenue and forest depart-ments, the thana and the residential quarters of government employees had been burnt down. All the government records, files and furniture were set to fire. However, school buildings and hospitals were spared and employees were given time to

220 Annual Administration Report, 1942 43, Nilagiri State. NPARI, pp. 106 120. Mahatab, History of the Freedom Movement in Orissa, Vol. IV, p. 145. The collec-tive fine was reduced from Rs 78 154 per village to Rs 35 123.221 „Nilagiri Ra Itihasa‰, Gyanmruta (Oriya), 1972, pp. 59 60, as cited in B. Pati, Resisting Domination, p. 203.222 „Dhenkanal Disturbances of 1942‰, Manuscripts of Raghuram Dehrury, Sampadi Sahu, Nasaghan Behera, Bhagirathi Sahu, cited in B.C. Rath, Quit India Movement in Orissa, Cuttack, 1995, pp. 94 100.223 Jatayu, 15 August 1985.


take out their personal belongings before the houses were set on fire. The policemen locked up in the hazat were released before the thana was put on fire. These events took place in quick succession and before the eyes of the cheering villagers. In the afternoon, a public meeting was held to chalk out the next course of action. Nearly 5,000 10,000 people participated. Later, a group of 500 people went to Malapara village, looted the Debottar granary and distributed the paddy among the people. Records of the sahukars containing names of the indebted were burnt or destroyed. The Marana Sena made excellent use of the favourable circumstances available in Muri for such a raid. The region, being not easily accessible from Dhenkanal and under the impact of floods of the Brahmani River during August, provided the right opportunity to them. The raja had no prior information of the incident.224

Emboldened by the success at Murhi, the Marana Sena at-tacked and burnt down Chandpur police station and tehsil office on 2 September.225 However, the administration at Chandpur had taken precautionary measures by removing the arms and ammunitions from the thana as well as the tehsil records to safe places. It seems that the Marana Sena was seriously planning to raid the state headquarters at Dhenkanal, but the administration had also been gearing itself and taking precautions.226

On 4 September, the squad conducted a raid on Parajang thana. The squad divided itself into two groups and approached Parajang, covering various villages en route. The strategy was to raise people to accompany them in their mission to attack the thana. The Marana Sena, accompanied by a large following of people, reached Parajang, carrying guns and other weap-ons and chanting nationalistic songs and slogans. The march climaxed in a clash with the police force at Janhapara. Nearly 1,000 people participated in the encounter under the guidance of the squad. In the police firing which followed, two activists named Bira Sahu and Benu Sahu died on the spot. Baishnaba himself sustained a bullet injury; but he escaped to Cuttack and

224 Jatayu, 9 August 1985.225 HPD, Dhenkanal Situation Report, F. No. P-1-26/1946, 29 August 1942, 2 September 1942, ACC-1026.226 Ibid.


stayed at Surendra DwivediÊs hideout there.227 Afterwards, he left for Calcutta and stayed there until 1946.

The incident at Janhapara was followed by the burning of the police outpost and the forest department beat house at Gang-utia on 5 September under Debaraj Patra, another activist and a close associate of Baishnaba.228 DebarajÊs party of 42 workers carried on their stray activities, remaining underground in the Manikarma forest till November. For example, they attacked a revenue camp at Kandhar on 5 October. Again, towards the end of November, they raided the villages of Kushia, Pathargarh and Badasahi. The objective of the raids was to punish those villagers who had helped the administration in the arrest of four prominent associates of Baishnaba, namely Musa Mallick, Ananda Swain, Anukul Sahu and Baidhar Swain.229

As elsewhere, once violent incidents took place, the state administration came down heavily on the people of the state by imposing collective fines and arresting the leaders. Cash rewards were declared for people who provided information about the leaders.

Talcher

In the context of the 1940 41 uprising, we have discussed how the Talcher Prajamandal under Pabitra Mohan PradhanÊs leadership continued to voice popular grievances against the state and thus tried to keep the people sufficiently mobilized. Pradhan, who was arrested in November 1940, was released in January 1942, only to be arrested again in March.230 But he escaped from the state jail on 31 August231 and fled into the far-off interior jungles of Tisimali in Dhenkanal, beyond the Talcher border. His escape to the jungle was so secretive that even the Prajamandal leaders did not know about it. This gave rise to a rumour that Pradhan had been re-arrested and killed inside the jail.232

It was in this context that the new leadership of Talcher Pra-jamandal convened an emergency meeting on 2 September at

227 Ibid.; Jatayu, 31 August 1985.228 Amrit Bazaar Patrika, October 1942.229 Rath, Quit India Movement, p. 101.230 Talcher Prajamandal Itihasa Committee, Talcher Prajamandal (Congress) Ra Itihasa (hereafter TPRI; Oriya), Cuttack, 1950, pp. 42 46.231 Pabitra Mohan Pradhan, Mukti Pathe Sainika, Vol. I, Cuttack, 1979, p. 107.232 All India State PeopleÊs Conference (AISPC) Papers, F. No. 164; TPRI, pp. 46 49.


Paniola (Angul subdivision).233 In the meeting, they decided to liberate Talcher by initiating direct action against both the state and the British rule. Bichhanda Chandra Pradhan was appointed as the Dictator for the purpose. Direct action was to be launched by raiding Talcher rajaÊs palace on 6 September and breaking of the state jail. The decision of the meeting was further endorsed by the Prajamandal leadership in a meeting at Kumunda on 3 September. It was decided that a chasi-mulia (peasant-worker) rule would be established.234 This was somewhat like the idea of a parallel government.

After his escape, Pradhan got in touch with the Prajamandal leaders. Some of the leaders met him on 5 September.235 Though Pradhan did not quite support the already planned out course of action, he had to abide by the decision of the Prajamandal.236 He was against any hasty action against the state. He was, in fact, thinking of waging a guerilla war against the state on a date after 15 September with adequate arrangements.237 How-ever, it is important to note that the active leadership of the Prajamandal had struck upon the idea of „chasi-mulia raj‰ in response to the Quit India resolution. The people of Talcher had interpreted it to mean that Gandhi had allowed the use of violence („use of lathi‰) to establish a parajaraija („peopleÊs government/swaraj‰).238

As per the plan, the Prajamandal units kept functioning at the village, block, pragana and sub-divisional levels, under the overall supervision of the apex Prajamandal authority operating for the entire Talcher state. The village headmen, chowkidars, school teachers, block officers, the policemen and excise and revenue department officials either voluntarily surrendered to the locally constituted Prajamandal authorities or were made to surrender under threats.239 The garhnaik (headman) of Seepur village was killed for his defiance of the Prajamandal author-ity. At places, government offices and residential quarters of

233 TPRI, p. 49.234 P.M. Pradhan, Mukti Pathe Sainika, p. 125.235 TPRI, p. 50.236 Ibid.237 P.M. Pradhan, Mukti Pathe Sainika, p. 129.238 P.M. Pradhan, Mukti Pathe Sainika, pp. 120 128; TPRI, pp. 49 50.239 P.M. Pradhan, Mukti Pathe Sainika, pp. 131 35.


the officers were attacked and set on fire. The uniforms and records of the state officials were also destroyed. Arms were seized from state officials. Schools, courts of law and offices were virtually closed down. The anger was aimed not only at the state authority and the rulerÊs family, but was also intended to drive out any vestige of British authority from the state. As an alternative, the notion of village panchayats inspired by Gandhi remained a popular idea.240

To stall the movement of troops to the state, all communica-tion network was disrupted by cutting off telegraph and tele-phone lines. Several miles of the Cuttack Talcher railway track were damaged. The three rural police stations of Kania were captured. Thus, except Talcher town, the entire state seemed to be taken over by the Prajamandal authority.241 A chasi-mulia government seemed to have been established in the state except in the four square miles of Talcher town. The Prajamandal also toyed with the idea of taking over collieries from the control of foreign companies and advocated increase of wages for the labourers.242 The other welfare measures focused upon by the prajamandal were provisions for reduction of rent, generation of employment opportunities, emphasis on education, health and water supply, as well as the overall objectives of providing food, shelter and cloth to all.

By 4 September, the state administration had requisitioned the services of the British air force and the army to counter the dangerous developments. However, the chasi-mulia government had already constituted its administrative structure. It raised a volunteer army, called the Krushak Sena („Peasant Militia‰), which was provided with crude arms and implements arranged from the villagers. The gunpowder and dynamite were procured from local collieries.243 The militia was raised by recruiting all able-bodied male members from every family, except one which had an only son. Bichhanda Pradhan was appointed as the commander of the militia and two deputies served under him. As per the scheme, the people marched on to Talcher town

240 Ibid., pp. 133 136; AISPC Papers, F. No. 164, p. 2.241 P.M. Pradhan, Mukti Pathe Sainika, pp. 133 136.242 P.M. Pradhan, Mukti Pathe Sainika, p. 136; Pati, Resisting Domination, p. 177.243 AISPC Papers, F. No. 164.


under the Prajamandal leadership, armed with all conceivable crude weaponry such as country-made guns, lathis, kerosene, petrol and jute rags. They also carried with them dry food like rice, sag (lentil) and mudhi (parched rice) to cover at least three days. People also gave them food when they marched through the villages. It is worth mentioning that before setting out, the people had resolved not to use arms and get violent unless and until they were attacked by the enemy. The processionists raised slogans like „Bharat chhada‰ („Quit India‰), „Kara ba mara‰ („Do or die‰), „Karibu, maribu‰ („Will do or die‰), „Bharat ru tadibu‰ („Will drive out from India‰), „Talcherru tadibu‰ („Will drive out from Talcher‰), „Raja ku maribu‰ („We will kill the raja‰) and „Chasi-mulia sarkar gadhibu‰ („We will bring about a peasant-worker government‰).244 The beating of drums and blowing of war pipes by the processionists seemed to drown the rattling sound of the aeroplanes, which kept hovering over their heads to intimidate them.

Due to heavy rain and floods, the proposed aim of taking over Talcher could not materialize on 6 September. On the next day, nearly 10,000 people surrounded the town in a semi-circle by encamping in a mango grove on the outskirts of Talcher town-ship. By that time, the state administration, with the assistance of the political department, had already deployed a heavy mili-tary force. In the beginning, some of the officials representing the state administration initiated negotiations with the leaders of the peasant militia. The Prajamandal leadership agreed to negotiate with the ruler for transferring power to the newly constituted peopleÊs body, with the ruler himself acting as the constitutional head.245 But the crucial condition it imposed was that the ruler had to severe linkage with British imperialism·a condition that the ruler could hardly accept.

Once the negotiations failed, the peasant militia marched ahead to capture Nijgarh (the seat of the ruler) by crossing over the enemy line. As a result, the armed contingent of the state triggered volleys of bullets on the people. There was also machine-gun firing from the air. Gas shells were dropped on

244 AISPC Papers, F. No. 164, p. 4; P.M. Pradhan, Mukti Pathe Sainika, pp. 133 34.245 AISPC Papers, F. No. 164; P.M. Pradhan, Mukti Pathe Sainika, p. 137.


the people to create a smoke wall.246 On being machine-gunned, bombarded, fired at and chased for miles, the people had to flee. The event ended with the killing of four people. Nearly 100 people sustained severe injuries,247 and 300 people were arrested.

After the 7 September incident, the state authorities stepped up repression by continuously dropping gas shells and pamphlets from the air sending warning signals to the people. Collective fines (known as tinijuna jorimana, fines realized 3 times of the rent) to the tune of Rs 25,000 were imposed on 35 villages, which were most active in the functioning of the peasant militia. The minimum amount of fine was equal to a peasantÊs annual land rent. There were also unauthorized collections of fines. Though 35 villages were officially earmarked for collective fines, in reality 118 villages had to pay fine to the tune of nearly Rs 80,000.248 People were beaten mercilessly and individual fines were also imposed. Properties of the Prajamandal activists were confis-cated.249 After the incident, Pabitra Pradhan, who had remained underground, took the initiative in raising a secret armed squad with a view to offering protection to the helpless subjects of the state against the stateÊs terror and repression.250 He, however, soon gave up the idea of direct action against the armed forces of the state. All the leading activists of the Prajamandal were advised to abscond. Pradhan himself left his underground hideout in the state for Bihar and Bengal. The guerrilla squad functioning under the leadership of Maheswar Pradhan and Padia Behera was finally nabbed and liquidated in May 1943.

Leadership and Agitation

In this section, we will examine the agitational activities of the underground leadership which sought to offer a direction to the movement in the absence of a dominant leadership. Under

246 AISPC Papers, F. No. 164, p. 4; B.C. Rath, Quit India Movement, p. 114.247 TPRI, pp. 64 65.248 AISPC Papers, F. No. 165; B.C. Rath, Quit India Movement, p. 115.249 AISPC Papers, F. No. 164, pp. 7 10; P.M. Pradhan, Mukti Pathe Sainika, pp. 142 58.250 TPRI, p. 58; P.M. Pradhan, Mukti Pathe Sainika, pp. 142 57; B.C. Rath, Quit India Movement, pp. 116 17.


the overall initiative of Surendranath Dwivedi, a socialist, an underground leadership was operational in the entire province. However, Dwivedi was arrested in October. He had, in fact, coordinated the agitational and organizational aspect of the movement by drafting, cyclostyling and circulating various kinds of Congress bulletins, including AICC leaflets in different districts. After attending the AICC session at Bombay in August, he had gone underground, but he kept himself in touch with leaders of the other provinces.

The headquarters of the secret Congress organization was housed in Cuttack in the residence of one Nandi Sahu, a nation-alist activist. Activities and developments in different districts were sought to be coordinated from the Cuttack headquarters by sending regular instructions and also receiving feedbacks. To avoid any interception of the correspondence between Dwivedi and local-level leaders, the former had styled himself as the CO (Chief Organiser) and the latter as BAs (Branch Assistants). Dwivedi had also assumed the pseudonym of Babajee. At the district level, a few leaders were selected to supervise the pace of the struggle by receiving and circulating Congress bulletins and sending information to the respective districts.251 By the

251 HPD, Special Report 102/42 (I V), „Case against S.N. Dwivedi and Others for Organizing Illegal Conspiracy‰, 12 October 1942, 3 November 1942, ACC-2443. The leaders selected for different districts remained as follows:Cuttack: Narayan Prasad Mohanty (Tirtol), Padma Charan Mohanty (Govin-dapur), Jaydrishna Mohanty (Raghunathpur), Ram Fena (Bari), Bipina Bihari Mohanty (Triran), Nilamani Biswal (Tirtol), Gouranga Charan Das, Nishamani Khuntia, Lokanath Rai, Govinda Ch. Mohanty, Narasingha Mohanty, Loknath Mishra (MLA), Anil Kumar Ghose, Banka Bihari Das, Bhairaba Mohanty (ex-Assistants of Orissa Secretariat).Balasore: Gour Ch. Das, Pyari Mohan Das, Dukhishyam Padhi, Nityananda Mohapatra, Sura Mohanty, Gokulananda Mohanty, Santilata Dash (Barbati), Upendranath Behera (Motiganj).Ganjam: Aparna Patra (Berhampur), Ghanashyam Patnaik, Puddi-Peddi Krishna Murty (Berhampur), Y. Sanneya, Pratap Ch. Patnaik.Puri: Satyabadi Mishra, Biswanath Parida, Harekrushna Mohanty, Jadumani Jena, Satyabadi Satapathy, Sridhar Rath.Sambalpur: Laxminarayan Babu.Calcuttak: Sailendranath Sen, Biren Ray, Harekrishna.Cuttack town: Udayanath Rath, Raj Kishore Das (student of engineering school), Sachidananda Mishra (teacher, Victoria School), Sura Mohanty (BA student of Ravenshaw College), Gadadhar Das, Dukhishyam Mohanty (member of Cuttack District Board). Besides, Lokanath Rai, Narottam Mohanty and Khetra Mohan Biswal operated as leaders in Jagatsinghpur.


time Dwivedi was arrested in October, he had already drafted 17 bulletins.252

The bulletins, while relating incidents and developments at various places of the province in connection with the struggle, exhorted people to burn the symbols of colonialism like police stations, dak bungalows, railway stations, schools, colleges, sub-registrar offices, and even the secretariat building. The bulletins also provoked people to loot the properties of the rich and the zamindars if they did not part with their wealth. Government servants were asked to resign from their jobs.

A bulletin titled ÂInstructions from the Congress: DonÊt Pay FineÊ253 congratulated the villagers of Tirtol, Erasama and Ni-mapara for their „daring acts, in accordance with the instructions of Congress‰, and observed:

You are the forces of the Congress. The Congress is your panchayat in your country. You have only obeyed the mandate of the Con-gress. The propaganda by them that this is not the desire of either Gandhi or the Congress is false. They want to perpetuate the system of zamindary and moneylending to exploit us as before. These can-not prolong any longer. The British Government is at the verge of death. At such a time, donÊt you be timid. DonÊt pay tax. DonÊt bid call in auction sale. Establish panchayats in villages and obey their instructions. If the police or any hakim [official] visits your area to realise fine, surround and disarm them. DonÊt allow them to touch your fire or water. Let not anyone help them. If they oppress more, arrest them. DonÊt pay tax or revenue until the establishment of an independent government. Unite your neighbours. This is the desire of Gandhi. Have courage. You will see that victory is yours. Repres-sion will go during the supreme crisis. Peasants will be all in all. Administration will be in your hands. The atrocities of zamindars and moneylenders will stop. The foreign government will be put to an end. A new era will emerge. Then you will enjoy your own country.

Also, the quota of Congress bulletins for the different parts of the province stood as follows: Jajpur, 100; Bari, 100; Binjharpur, 100; Kendrapara, 100; Salepur, 100; Tirtol, 150 (all names so far in Cuttack district); Cuttack town, 500; Puri, 100; Balasore, 200; Sambalpur, 100. The bulletins contained the instructions that people should read out a particular bulletin to at least 10 persons and write out 10 copies for distribution.252 HPD, Special Report 102/42 (I V), 12 October 1942, 3 November 1942, ACC-2443.253 HPD, „Utkal Congress Bulletin‰, 3/31/42, No. 13.


If you abandon this golden opportunity, your misery will be age-long.

Similarly, students were advised to treat the schools and colleges as „fortresses‰ of the enemy and asked to indulge in „lawlessness‰ till the authorities were compelled to use „force and open fire‰ on them. The police and jail authorities were also requested not to arrest and detain, nor use force against Congress workers, by pointing out that British imperialism was at an end and they should join the movement in their own interest. A bulletin, referring to the developments at Bari (Cuttack), mentioned that the British government had been re-placed by swaraj panchayats in Bari and asked „every man to consider himself independent‰ and thus „paralyse‰ the British government.254

Yet another bulletin titled „Congress Message‰255 sharply reacted to the method of collecting collective fines from Bari villagers and condemned police brutality. It noted:

The Additional District Magistrate of Cuttack (Musahib Khan), at the point of gun, and with the help of Muhammadan goondas forcibly took ornaments from the women of Bari, Kanthapol, Aurangabad and Malisahi and realised the collective fine of Rs 5,000. He pulled down the houses of persons where nothing was available. He de-molished the Seva house, khadi store, and many other houses at Bari. Many poor people have fled due to the atrocities committed by these men.

Another bulletin,256 however, was quite interesting in its instructions: „The ADM, after causing destruction at Bari is moving to the Erasama PS. He is the incarnation of oppression. He is true to the British salt. He is our brother. Arrest him for his safety, intern him in the Azad Jail.‰ A similar threat was held out against Lakshman Mishra, the DSP who had ordered the firing at Kaipara. Another bulletin advised people to take revenge against SP, Cuttack, for his ill treatment of political prisoners. It also pointed out that the Indian Army had already

254 HPD, Special Report 102/42 (I V), 12 October 1942, ACC-2443.255 WWCC, „Bulletin No. 9‰, 10 September 1942, ACC-97.256 WWCC, „Bulletin No. 11‰, 17 September 1942, ACC-97.


been „gained over‰ and added that the British government was using the British army in suppressing the movement. A bulletin issued on Gandhi Jayanti (2 October) asked the people of Cuttack to observe complete hartal and advised them not to accept paper currency notes, which, it stated, were mere pieces of paper without any exchange value. A bulletin under the cap-tion „What is to be done on GandhijiÊs birthday on October 2‰257 opened with the statement:

You are living on greens and roots for last two months. What is the benefit of living like cows and bullocks? Dedicate your lives. Carry out the words of Gandhi·obey the instructions of the Congress and come forward to put an end to the Government.

Better start sabotaging railway communication on which paddy and rice are being transported; cut telegraph wires ⁄ damage roads and bridges ⁄ In doing so, you will find whether your miseries are disappearing or not.

The bulletin also exhorted the people to „do‰ something on GandhiÊs birthday or „die‰.

Bulletins containing messages for merchants, especially the Marwaris, were also issued. An appeal to the merchants asked them neither to subscribe to war funds nor to sell commodities to the government. One bulletin titled „Words for the Police Officers‰ reminded them of the certainty of the retreat of the British in the face of Japanese invasion, and gave a call to the people to take revenge on policemen by „exterminating‰ them.258 Another bulletin instructed people to take possession of police stations by „raiding‰ them during the lonely hours of night. It also asked people to disarm the police officers, burn the records and arrest officers who were not willing to join the movement. Some of the bulletins appealed to the „Muslim brothers‰ to join the struggle. Certain bulletins contained reference to the coali-tion ministry of Orissa, characterizing it as „unlawful‰ and its members as „Fifth columnists‰ for the British government. It asked people to „boycott, insult and arrest‰ these members.259

257 HPD, Undated pamphlet: „What is to be done on GandhijiÊs birthday on October 2nd, Friday‰, 3/31/42. 258 HPD, Special Report 102/42 (I V), 12 October 1942, 3 November 1942, ACC-2443.259 Ibid.


A bulletin drafted and released by Dwivedi in October, titled „Devi Aradhana‰ („Prayer to Goddess Durga‰),260 metaphorized imperialism, fascism and Nazism as „demons‰:

These evils are exploiting our properties, minds and lives. These powers have gained considerable strength and have appeared in England, Germany and Japan. They are bewildered in their vanity and are fighting among themselves ⁄ People for ever rotting in starvation and under oppression are being preyed upon in this War. There has been lamentation in lakhs of houses. All are anxious to secure the path of salvation. At such a time, the goddess of Inde-pendence has appeared at our door. In order to encourage us the goddess has asked us, ÂHo, Men! Establish your right during this supreme crisis. The demons have become weak by war and blood-shed. They are mutilating their legs with their own hands. Better, have risings now; Awake! Exhibit your lionÊs strength. Inhabitants of India! See how the barbarous Germany is shaking at the assault of 18 crores of people of Soviet Russia ⁄ [how] the Imperialist Japan is fighting against the union of 45 Chinese powers ⁄ But, you will have to fight an important fiendish power, the British. Forty crores of people will have to combat four crores of robber-administrators. Set yourself free now from the grasp of this demon. Let all unite. Let all combine and come forward. The mother wants destruction. Salvation lies in destruction. Take the charm of destruction, be warlike and reduce the administrative camp of the enemy British to ashes. Drive away this power from the country; wipe out all symbols and colours. Let a stream of blood flow by your bloodshed. Play a „blood‰ holi. The real worship of the Mother (Durga) will be performed by the hibiscus of human blood. She will be satisfied by the offer of Independence. In this great crisis, the fiendish power will be destroyed. Out of this crisis will emerge truth, salvation and the age of happiness.

In fact, Dwivedi was arrested while drafting this bulletin on 11 October.

Several pamphlets with instructions released by the AICC, Harijan pamphlets issued by Kaka Kalelkar and bulletins of other provinces were also sent to different areas of the province from the headquarters at Cuttack under DwivediÊs supervision

260 HPD, „Prayer to Goddess Durga‰, 3/31/42; HPD, Special Report 102/42 (I V), 12 October 1942, 3 November 1942, ACC-2443.


after they were translated into Oriya.261 We also come across pamphlets issued by the Balasore DCC exhorting the students to take to anti-British campaigning and the „police brothers‰ to resign from their jobs and join the struggle.262

Another leaflet, addressed to the police,263 by the Balasore DCC pointed out:

The movement that has started this time is, according to Mahatma Gandhi, the last fight. The country wants your action. How will you show your face in Independent India? DonÊt pollute your hands by firing and lathi-chargeing on your countrymen under orders of higher officers. Please join us in this. If you combine and disobey government orders, the white people canÊt do anything in this country. The Congress has started the movement [to ensure] how your sons and daughters will live happily. Better resign and come away. Or else, combine and start a mutiny against the white people. Those who court imprisonment, will at the very beginning be welcomed by Independent India. It is no good fearing anyone. We will ourselves govern our country.

To the detective police, another pamphlet264 titled „Country and duty‰ said:

Brother detectives! Try to resign at the call of the country. He who canÊt resign may retain service and embarrass the Government through service. DonÊt submit any secret information which is to the advantage of the countrymen to the British goonda Govern-ment. Try to cause its [British GovernmentÊs] ruination. Oust it from India. DonÊt be the enemy of this country by neglecting this golden opportunity.

Similar appeals were also made to government servants. A no-tification originating from Calcutta, titled „National Government Ordinance‰, was also circulated. It declared the British govern-

261 HPD, 3/31/42; HPD, Special Report 102/42 (I V), 12 October 1942, 3 No-vember 1942, ACC-2443. For instance, the AICC issued pamphlets like the „Last message of Gandhi‰, „IndiaÊs march for independence‰ and „Last struggle commences‰. 262 HPD, „Let one read and pass on to another: Awake sleeping lion‰, 3/31/42 (Issued by the Balasore DCC).263 HPD, „To police brothers‰ (Issued by the Balasore DCC).264 HPD, „Country and duty‰ (Issued by the Balasore DCC).


ment unlawful and imposed punishment on those government servants who supported the said government in terms of social boycott, blocking food and water supply and basic amenities of life, forfeiture of property and finally „death‰.265

There is evidence that the post-9 August movement had been planned earlier, before August 1942. Referring to the under-ground campaigning of the leaders, a police report observed that Ramanandan Mishra (CSP leader of Bihar, who visited Cuttack) was in possession of the then secret Congress pro-gramme before 27 July (the date of his coming to Cuttack) and that he passed it on to certain select aides. It seems most likely that the visit of Mishra to Orissa and his subsequent meetings with Congress leaders, particularly the socialist group, perhaps helped in sketching out a blueprint for the oncoming movement, in the event of the leaders getting arrested. The meticulous un-derground organization and network under DwivediÊs initiative partly explains the secret planning and programme done much before August.266 This report seems to be borne out by some evidence which suggests the appointment of a new provincial organizer taking charge of subversive activities in Orissa around April. The organizer, however, was „controlled‰ by a person in Calcutta. In fact, someone in Calcutta remitted Rs 500 to meet the expenditure for such activities.267 The correspondence and literature seized from the underground headquarters of Dwivedi in Cuttack reveal his connections with Calcutta. It indicates that, in all probability, he, along with the socialists, had been planning underground activities since April. However, the AICC instructions and GandhiÊs messages were being sent from Bombay by Biswasray (President, UPCC), Malati Choud-hury and Sarangadhar Das (both AICC members) and carried to Orissa by Mahatab much before the AICC meeting. These documents were then passed over to Nabakrushna Choudhury, „who purposefully did not attend the AICC meeting ⁄ to be in readiness in Orissa to lead the campaign as soon as it was decided to start it‰.268

265 HPD, Special Report 102/42 (I V), 12 October 1942, 3 November 1942, ACC-2443.266 HPD, Report of SP, 3/31/42.267 HPD, Spl, Report, 102/42 (I V), 12 October 1942, 3 November 1942, ACC-2443.268 Ibid.


The Congress ashrams and ashram inmates also played a crucial role in the furtherance of the anti-British struggle. Despite the ban on Congress ashrams, the inmates of Bari, Jagatsinghpur, Kendupatna and many other ashrams in Cuttack district remained very active participants of the struggle. Defying the seizure, the ashrams were sought to be „re-occupied‰. At certain places, the ashrams functioned secretly. For example, under Loknath RaiÊs secret leadership, Alaka Ashram of Jagatsinghpur kept function-ing. A new house was constructed and it functioned under the name of Yuvak Sangha to guide the anti-British campaign.269 Throughout August, Gopabandhu Choudhury and Harihar Das (organizers of All India Spinning Association) were busy in pre-paring the list of volunteers to further the movement in Orissa. AISA funds were used for the movement, given the fact that Congress organizations had been banned. Krupasindhu Panda of the Kendupatna Spinning Centre actively organized the move-ment in Kendupatna area in Cuttack district. Members of the Harijan Sevak Sangha270 also made vigorous efforts in stepping up the campaign. The sanghaÊs Orissa branch president, Nanda Kishore Das, was arrested for circulating appeals to government servants to resign from their jobs. Three other members of the sangha, including Harihar Das, were also prosecuted for their anti-British activities.

Table 7.4 provides a glimpse of the local-level leadership that principally guided the course of the Quit India Movement in some of the areas of Cuttack.271

269 HPD, Report of CS, 25 August 1942, ACC-2311.270 WWCC, 5 November 1942, ACC-30.271 WWCC, 15 June 1945, ACC-49.

Table 7.4Cuttack Leadership of Quit India Movement

Name Area Activities

Purna Chandra Barchana, Surveyed the developments in Barchana

Tripathy Cuttack and submitted reports to Krushna Mohan Routray, under whom he operated; en-rolled as a member of a death squad to revive the movement in August 1943

Trilochan Barchana, Formed an underground organization

(Table 7.4 Contd)


Senapati Cuttack towards the end of 1942; drafted and circulated Congress bulletins, enrolled members for a death squad

Rangadhar Rajnagar, Propagated no-tax, no-revenue

Rasik Ray Cuttack campaign. As a result, people withheld the payment of chowkidari tax and land revenue to zamindars

Phani Pal Sukinda, Kisan leader; collected men from Cuttack Sukinda and Dharmasala to indulge in

„acts of lawlessness‰

Gobinda Jagatsinghpur, Organized meetings, mobilized people

Chandra Das Cuttack to attack colonial symbols; took up under-ground leadership and local leadership of various areas

Anil Chandra Cuttack Preparation and circulation of Ghosh district Congress leaflets, mobilizing students

to „acts of lawlessness‰, intermediary between the underground leadership and the local leadership of various areas

Bhagirathi Jagatsinghpur Considerable influence over the people

Mahapatra and Cuttack town

Mayadhar Tirtol, Private secretary of Mahatab;

Mohanty Cuttack considerable influence over people in his area

Hrusikesh Angul, Mobilized people to attack colo-

Tripathy Cuttack nial symbols

Uttara Cuttack town Acted as intermediary between Choudhury the underground leaders and the local-

level leadership

Biraja Prasad Mahanga, Was called the Gandhi of Mahanga.

Roy Cuttack Along with Sachidananda Jena, mobilized people to attack colonial symbols

Dr Braja Nath Jajpur, Mobilized people to attack colonialMishra Cuttack symbolsBasudev Sukinda, Mobilized people to disrupt railwaysMohanty CuttackDuryodhan Sukinda, Co-worker of Phani Pal, a kisan leader;

(Table 7.4 Contd)




Table 7.5 Financial Status of the Cuttack Leadership

Name Area Financial Position/Family Position

Srinath Mohanty Tirtol Only 8 acres of landed property; old mother, wife and two minor sons

Rusinath Sahoo Tirtol Only 1 acre of landed property. Also served in Calcutta on a monthly salary of Rs 10, wife and a minor son

Gobinda Kasta Tirtol No landed property; daily wage-earner; old mother, brother, wife and minor son

Sridhar Das Tirtol No landed property; a priest who wor-shipped the deity and begged. No fam-ily

Daitari Mishra Tirtol 4 acres of landed property; brother, wife and minor child; brother had served in Calcutta

Pranakrushna Nath Tirtol No landed property; had parents, wife and minor child; brother had served in Calcutta on a monthly pay of Rs 10

Dibakar Pradhan Tirtol 4 acres of landed property; full-time Con-gress worker; parents, four brothers

Puri Kasta Tirtol No landed property, earned nothing; son, daughter-in-law and grandson

Mayadhar Tirtol 10 acres of landed property; parentsMohanty two brothers

(Table 7.5 Contd)

Roy Cuttack respected leader of the Pana commu-nity; organized them to attack colonial symbols

Baishnaba Korai, Cuttack Mobilized people to attack colonialCharan Das symbols; asked rural police not to attend

parades and to set fire to government buildings

Gandharba Balikuda, Organized meetings, advocated no-tax

Gochhayat Cuttack to government

Mathuri Sahu Cuttack town College student in 2nd year; his house was used for Surendra Nath DwivediÊs underground organization


Name Area Financial Position/Family Position

Sachidananda Mahanga District board member; earned TA of Jena about Rs 15 a month, wife/two daughters

and son

Anam Charan Binjharpur Served as a cook on Rs 10 per month; Das landed property considered sufficient for

the maintenance of the family; mother, wife

Dambarudhar Binjharpur No landed property. Lived on the in-Rai come of his elder brotherÊs wife, earned

by selling rice; wife, elder brotherÊs wife and a minor daughter

Rasananda Binjharpur Lived on parentsÊ income; father, mother, Sukla two brothers

Bipin Bihari Binjharpur Member of the district board; earned Mohanty TA to meet his expenses; wife, daughter

and mother

Sudarshan Dharmasala Sons cultivate the lands and maintain Nayak the family; wife, two sons, two daughters-

in-law, three granddaughters

Indramani Binjharpur Cultivated othersÊ and his own land; Tripathy mother, two younger brothers

Bibhuti Bhusan Gobindapur 1 1/ 3 acres of land. Primary school teacher Acharya on Rs 5 per month; mother, brother

(6 years), sister (10 years)

Bhagat Samal Gobindapur No income of his own; lived on the pro-duce of his land; wife, child, two young brothers

Brundaban Mahanga Wife, three sons, one daughter; earnedSarangi about Rs 15 from the Congress office

Balkrushna Binjharpur Own landed property; wife, mother, Sukla two younger brothers

Benudhar Binjharpur Own landed property; brother was also Samal in jail for burning chowkidarÊs uniform;

wife, mother, younger brother

Muralidhar Binjharpur Own landed property; two minorRoy daughters


We can also comprehend the class character of the movement by analyzing the financial status (see Table 7.5) of a cross section of the local leaders in Cuttack district.272

Assessing the Climactic Year of 1942

The Quit India Movement was the climax of the mass movement against British imperialism that had been launched in 1920. In terms of territorial reach, the movement expanded both quan-titatively and qualitatively. What had gone into the making of this intensely powerful anti-imperialist movement were not only the two earlier phases of mass movements like Non-coop-eration Movement and Civil Disobedience Movement, but the consistent ideological campaign built up for over two decades in Orissa. Various ideological strands in the Congress·Gandhi-ans, socialists and communists·had shared in the propagation of this ideological discourse. Particularly after the formation of the Congress ministry (1937 39), a rich anti-imperialist political climate started taking shape. The ministry also helped create the space for progressive peasant mobilization. The kisan sanghas, during this period, under Congress socialist (and to some extent under communist) leadership, scaled new heights in terms of popular assertions of rights vis-à-vis landed interests and the government.

Also important was the conceptualization of swaraj at the popular level·a process which the ministry from day one kept nurturing through its „limited‰ legislative and extra-legislative positions. After all, the feeling that the people were going to have their own government instead of British rule had emboldened them and had bred a strong anti-imperialist sentiment. Afterwards, the shifting positions of the Congress in terms of anti-war campaigns and the rehearsal in the pre-Quit India phase in the form of individual satyagraha, along with the necessary organizational preparedness, all combined, had really generated the psychological thrust at popular levels to drive the British out of India.

272 WWCC, 15 May 1944, ACC-49.


As has been brought out in the treatment of the January July 1942 phase, the notion at the popular plane of the collapse of British imperialism had hastened the above process. In a way, the masses at the local level had been so considerably ideo-logically trained over the years, anticipating the end of world imperialism and the eventual dawn of swaraj, that they were prepared to carry on the struggle even in the absence of estab-lished leadership.

Besides, the open-ended character of the Gandhian message in connection with the Quit India Movement was enough for the people to try all sorts of innovations at all levels to keep the movement going. As we have seen, the anti-feudal undercurrent also flowed beneath the Quit India Movement but remained secondary in the face of powerful anti-imperialist current. The peasants had, after all, been drawn into the struggle to liberate the country first. The innumerable instances of attacks, raids and lootings organized against colonial symbols bring out this aspect. The anti-feudal and anti-zamindar consciousness emerged during the course of the movement, primarily in those areas where the roots of the kisan sangha had been strengthened in the post-1937 phase (particularly the coastal belt and Koraput), and were directed mainly at grain seizure because of shortage of foodgrains during the war. Sometimes it was the result of the respective zamindarsÊ pro-government and anti-movement stand.

As we have already noted, the attempts to form a parallel government and a „liberated zone‰ and to adopt methods of „guerilla warfare‰ for the purpose could take place in the context of the virtual breakdown of authority or the inaccessibility of the tract owing to floods or because the areas were surrounded by jungles. These were, however, short-lived phenomena that vanished in the face of an all-out colonial repression. Never-theless, these developments do point to the depth of the „Quit India‰ feelings in these areas. Particularly in some of the princely pockets, where both colonialism and the raja were bracketed together as source of oppression and exploitation, the popular response to any scheme that was evolved by the leadership was momentous.


The movement became successful with the participation of all classes except very rich landlords.273 However, with the progress of the movement, many of the smaller landlords positioned themselves neutrally and, in certain cases, some of them supported the movement, both financially and in other ways. We have also seen how a zamindar joined the people in the attack against the police in Bari. As has been observed, on several occasions, there was a large-scale erosion of loyalty at the subordinate levels of the British bureaucracy. Clerks, peons, chowkidars, even police inspectors, not to mention teachers, doctors, and lawyers came under the spell of the Quit India spirit. There are many instances·the constable at Khaira firing in the air instead of the crowd, the indifference of the police at Eram in arresting the local leaders, or the inspector and the post master deliberately going on leave on the day of the burning of the thana and the post office in Bhandari Pokhari·that are clear indicators of the extent to which the officials had been moved by the nationalist fervor. Students, of course, often gave the lead to the movement in many areas. The inmates of the Con-gress ashrams played a vital role in organizing the movement in different areas even in the absence of top leaders. The wide participation of women was another notable feature. Parbati GiriÊs daring acts in Sambalpur have already been narrated. A host of other women activists, including Nandini Satapathy, also sprang up. In Nimapara, the wife and the son of the zamindar helped in the burning of the thana.

People of all classes of society·high and low castes, tribals and non-tribals, peasants and agricultural labourers, and the wage earners·equally joined the movement. More importantly, actions of the peasants like „paddy extortion‰, stealing of trees from the jungles, non-payment of revenue, burning of accounts books of sahukars, attacks on wine vendors, looting of rice mills, eating away sweetmeats, stealing of cash and opium, ordering the rural rich to organize feasts for the tribal crowd and insisting on the host (a non-tribal) to join the tribals in the same feast,

273 Mahatab, History of the Freedom Movement in Orissa, Vol. V, Cuttack, 1957, p. 57.

The LandholdersÊ Conference (14 February 1942) took up the position of fight-ing any move calculated to drive the British out from India. It urged the viceroy to desist from all negotiations with the Congress until the end of the war.


and looting of haats were various forms which co-existed with the usual forms of struggle.

Broadly speaking, these forms of protest had already surfaced in these areas earlier in the 1937 39 phase, mostly due to the impulse generated by the Congress ministry. In fact, during 1937 39, the notion of swaraj came to be conceptualized in a multi-hued manner at popular levels, emerging out of the as-surances and expectations drawn from the very fact that it was the Congress, the saviour, which was ruling the people and not the British Government. Moreover, the mobilization of peasants and tribals in these regions by the Congress leaders, especially by the socialist group during 1937 39, had helped strengthen the notion. Consequently, the manifestation of nationalism at popular levels during the course of the Quit India Movement should not be seen as primarily a spontaneous expression; it was rather an attempt to grasp the already imbibed notion of swaraj by the peasants. This phenomenon was reinforced by the call for „Quit India‰. To be precise, the long-term ideological orientation imparted in the course of the anti-imperialist move-ment by the Congress had shaped the popular perception of swaraj in varied forms.

The narrative presented in this work deals with a crucial phase of the anti-colonial struggle in Orissa. The major focus of this study has been to locate the nature, pattern and extent of popular mobilization during 1930 42.

The Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM) evoked mass re-sponse in terms of propagation of the message of purna swaraj, salt manufacture and sale, picketing of excise shops and boycott of foreign cloth. Similarly, the anti-chowkidari tax campaign in Balasore and attempts by peasant and tribals in Puri, Koraput and certain princely states to assert their rights over forests by defying the forest laws also evolved as other forms of satyagraha. The campaign against the chowkidari tax in Balasore was effective because popular discontent against the tax already existed. The preparatory campaign for salt satyagraha in Inchudi (Balasore) and the popular enthusiasm for the movement provided the objective conditions, rather, necessitated the continuity of the struggle through a shift to the anti-chowkidari movement when the monsoon set in. A significant aspect of the campaign was the popular rejection of „authority‰ in the forms of assault on the police and massive boycott of chowkidars who were seen as representative forces of colonialism and the landed elements.

As far as the pattern of mobilization was concerned, mass meetings, demonstrations, formation of volunteer corps and Banara Sena squads, organization of sankirtan processions to

Conclusion


move around towns and villages to popularize the message of purna swaraj and setting up of underground Congress ashrams (as in Pharasidinga, Balasore) remained the dominant trends.

In the context of mobilization, a few other observations may be made. First, rural marketplaces and temples became im-portant sites for meetings and other activities. The nationalist sankirtan parties very often either started from or terminated at temples; processionists as well as spectators took an oath for purna swaraj in the temples. Second, the use of Hindu religious symbols and rituals, such as reference to Lord Jagannath in the speeches, appeals in the press and orations on public platforms, and offering of puja by Brahmin priests to satyagrahis in their long march to salt manufacture sites or rituals associated with war/victory performed while flagging off the salt marchers helped to evoke response from wider social sections. This, to a certain extent, invested popular consciousness with the notion of a dharma yuddha·a crusade of sorts·waged under the lead-ership of Gandhi. In the satyagrahisÊ perception, war against oppressive British imperialism was to be fought in the form of salt satyagraha.

Another significant aspect of the movement was the popu-lar response to the Gandhi Irwin Pact. The pact was seen and celebrated as a victory for Gandhi and the Congress, as well as the people in general in many parts of the province. It was this sense of victory that scored against the British rule and emboldened the people to carry forward the struggle in the face of repression and arrest of the leaders in the 1932 34 phase. Local-level leaders and satyagrahis, during this phase, tried out diverse and innovative methods of struggle to keep up the movement. These methods included resistance to the police, rescue of arrested satyagrahis, recapture of the already-seized Congress ashrams·sometimes by women volunteers·and the attempt to sell contraband salt in the court premises.

Attempts at destroying colonial symbols, such as tearing off the uniforms of the policemen and chowkidars, damaging of postboxes and disruption of court proceedings during revenue sales, also surfaced. Another form was the circulation of hand-written or cyclostyled bulletins and news sheets by volunteers, including mango sellers and girls from orphanages. This not only violated the hated Press Act but also gave guidelines to the

Conclusion 389

people and kept up the momentum of the struggle. At Remuna (Balasore), leaflets were kept secretly in the hollow trunks of trees from where the villagers collected the copies. The no-rent campaign or the demand for remission of rent, which featured in certain tracts of the province, emerged, as indicated earlier, from the peasantsÊ emboldened notion of the victory of Gandhi/Congress, following the pact of 1931. It was in this context that initiatives for the organization of peasantsÊand tenantsÊ associa-tions developed. Moreover, the CDM exerted considerable impact on the peasants of the princely states. Popular discontent in the princely states found expression in diverse forms of popular assertion against oppressive laws and feudal practices. After 1931, the nationalist press as well as the satyagrahis released from jail sought to organize the subjects of the princely states against the rajas by focusing on their grievances.

Similarly, it was under the impact of the anti-imperialist mo-bilization that the tribals of Koraput region got integrated in the national struggle for the first time. However, popular protest emerged against exploitation by the muttahadari system as well as estate and forest officials. On the whole, the Salt Satyagraha in Orissa had a broad social basis as well as the new territorial reach of the national movement. Peasants, tribals, youth and women were drawn into the vortex of the nationalist struggle on a significant scale and thus the influence of the Provincial Congress Committee (PCC) expanded horizontally.

One of the major thrusts of this study has been to map the nature and extent of ideological orientation and the attendant popular mobilization attained through the strategy of constructive activities such as organization of Congress ashrams, seva dals, various training camps, promotion of khadi, drive for village industries, education, socio-economic upliftment of Harijans and the campaign against untouchability. The activities of the inmates of the Congress ashrams, in the absence of top leaders, provided a vigorous thrust to the anti-imperialist movement in 1932 34, and more prominently in 1942. Besides the khadi march by the leaders, such activities as spinning exhibitions in mass meetings, establishment of schools for the untouchables, orga-nization of feasts attended by people from all castes, initiatives for temple entry of the Harijans, holding of conferences of the outcaste people and the overall campaign for the reformation of


the tribal population·to quote a few of the innumerable efforts by the leadership during the non mass movement phase·not only helped in mobilizing the socially oppressed classes but also invested them with a powerful sense of identity. One would like to suggest that the strikes by sweepers in Cuttack, Puri and other places (which one comes across at different stages right since 1932), apparently to highlight their demands, were in real-ity the expressions of a subtle campaign against untouchability. The political vacuum created by the withdrawal of the CDM was filled up by the remarkable shift to constructive activities. This is perhaps one of the major explanations for the powerful anti-imperialist current of 1942.

Similarly, while dealing with an otherwise neglected area of modern Indian history, that is, individual satyagraha, insofar as it was a part of the nationalist strategy in the non mass move-ment phase, I have attempted to locate the forms and extent of popular mobilization under this strategy, thereby assessing its strength and viability as a method of struggle. In this connec-tion, it has been suggested that individual satyagraha should be seen as a strategy linked to the broad mass movement of 1942, precisely because it sought to mobilize the people at rural levels and kept them ready for the subsequent onslaught on imperialism. This movement, in consequence, went into the making of the forceful anti-imperialist movement characterizing the 1942 struggle.

The newly emerging leadership of the post-CDM phase, with its prolonged and profound experience of the previous mass movements, came to face the twin problems of mobilizing the peasants and tribals (and bringing in constitutional reforms within the existing provisions of Act of 1935 in order to redress their fundamental grievances) and the popular protest against repression in the princely states. The agrarian leadership which emerged during this period and championed the cause of ten-ants both in British Orissa and the garjats (princely states) was remarkably radical. The other noticeable feature of this period was the thrust of radical ideology inside the Congress move-ment. The broad Left ideology of the socialists, communists and the followers of Nehru and Bose stirred the youth throughout the period and led to a perceptible transformation in the nature of the post-CDM leadership. The broad left-wing leadership

Conclusion 391

of the krushak sanghas sought to popularize the demands of the peasants and focused on their grievances. It thus prepared the initial conditions for the subsequent transformation of the agrarian structure. The campaign by the Congress leadership, more particularly by kisan leaders, during 1935 39 sought to transform the peasantsÊ consciousness in a radical direction.

In fact, it is in this radicalized context of the mid-1930s that the Congress accepted office under the 1935 Act. The Congress ministry attempted to encompass both agrarian radicalism and anti-colonialism, without being co-opted into the colonial structure. The perspective envisaged by the Congress ministry towards agrarian policies was one of class adjustment and not of sheer class struggle. This understanding was reflected in vari-ous measures of tenancy legislation initiated by the Congress ministry. The objective of the ministry was to meet the challenge offered by the 1935 Act by undertaking popular and ameliora-tive legislation. The strategy was to undermine the hegemony of the colonial state by arousing and appealing to rural mass-level grievances. This helped the ministry to acquire the status of a popular representative body. It also helped overcome the post-CDM disillusionment.

In the context of popular movements in the princely states, popular assertion and militancy scaled new heights during the phase of the Congress ministry. The ministry displayed remarkable radicalism in supporting popular movements in the princely states in the name of protecting civil liberties. Similarly, to a considerable extent, the ministry defended the left-wing kisan leaders when the latter incurred the wrath of the colonial authorities for fomenting militant struggles against the landed elements.

It is needless to point out that the ministry, through its action and pronouncements, could create the right conditions for the awakening as well as transformation of the popular conscious-ness. As has been already seen in the case of peasant and tribal mobilization of 1937 39, the popular consciousness came to be invested with a radical vision of swaraj. The inspiration sought to be drawn at popular levels was from the subjective notion that the Congress was ruling over India. This not only helped to overcome the post-CDM disillusionment but also consider-ably eroded the colonial hegemony. Interestingly, the broad


left-wing leadership came to defend the ministry in the face of attempts by the „rightist‰ forces to dislodge the ministry. This also demonstrates the radical orientation of the ministry, though based on the perspective of class adjustment.

While attempting to locate the transformation of the socio-economic ideology of Congress in a mass radical direction since 1935, and the growth of the Left movement within the broad Congress movement, this study deals with the Quit India Move-ment, which marked the climax of the mass movement against British imperialism. The transformation was equally conspicu-ous by its quantitative and qualitative territorial reach as well as its broad social basis. What had gone into the making of this intensely powerful anti-imperialist movement was not only the impact of the two earlier phases of mass movements (Non-cooperation Movement and CDM), but also the consistent ideolog-ical campaign carried on in Orissa for over two decades. Various ideological strands were coalesced to build up the propagation of this ideological discourse. Particularly after the formation of the Congress ministry, a rich anti-imperialist political climate had started emerging. The ministry also helped created the space for progressive peasant mobilization. Importantly, it was the con-ceptualization of swaraj at the popular level, which the ministry from day one kept enhancing through its limited legislative and extra-legislative positions. After all, the subjective feeling that the people were having „their‰ government vis-à-vis the British rule had emboldened them and bred a strong anti-imperialist sentiment. Afterwards, the shifting position of the Congress in terms of anti-war campaigns, and the rehearsal in the pre Quit India phase in the form of individual satyagraha, along with necessary organizational preparedness, had really generated the psychological urge at popular levels to drive the British out of India. Of course, as has been brought out in the treatment of the January July 1942 phase, the notion at the popular plane of the collapse of British imperialism had hastened the process. In a way, the masses at local levels had been so considerably trained ideologically over the years and had in fact expected a crisis in terms of the end of world imperialism and the ensuing dawn of swaraj, that they were prepared to carry on the struggle even in the absence of established leadership.

Conclusion 393

Besides, the open-ended character of the Gandhian message in connection with the Quit India Movement was enough for them to keep the movement going. The Quit India Movement did have an anti-feudal undercurrent, but this remained muted in the face of the anti-imperialist current. Peasants had been drawn into the struggle to liberate the country first. The in-numerable instances of attacks, raids, looting and targeting of colonial symbols bring out this aspect. Whatever anti-feudal and anti-zamindar violence emerged during the course of the move-ment was primarily in those areas where the roots of the kisan sangha had been strengthened in the post-1937 phase (particularly coastal Orissa and Koraput), and was mainly directed at grain seizure. This was either because of the shortage of foodgrains during the war or the result of the pro-government/anti-move-ment stand of the zamindars concerned.

The attempts to form a „parallel government‰, a „liberated zone‰, and to adopt methods of „guerrilla warfare‰ towards this end could actualize in the context of a virtual breakdown of authority or the inaccessibility of the tracts in terms of flooded regions or jungles. These were, however, short-lived phenomena, which vanished in the face of colonial repression. These developments, nonetheless, point to the depth of the „Quit India‰ feelings in these areas. Especially in the princely pockets, where both colonialism and the king were bracketed together as source of oppression and exploitation, the popular response to any scheme which was evolved by the leadership was momentous. The movement was marked by the participa-tion of all classes except very big landlords.

With the progress of the movement, many small landlords positioned themselves neutrally, and, in certain cases, some of them even supported the movement, both financially and in other ways. At least in one instance, a zamindar joined the people in an attack on the police in Bari. As has been observed on several occasions, there was large-scale erosion of loyalty at the subordinate levels of British bureaucracy. The clerks, peons, chowkidars and even police inspectors, not to mention profes-sionals, came under the spell of the Quit India spirit.

Students, of course, often took the lead in different areas. The Congress ashramites played a vital role in organizing the movement in different centres in the absence of top leaders.


The wide participation of women was another notable feature of the movement in Orissa. The movement was, in fact, joined by people representing the various social groups. In short, it was manifested in diverse forms along with the usual forms of struggle. However, broadly speaking, these forms of protest had already surfaced in these areas earlier during the 1937 39 phase, mostly due to the impulse generated by the Congress ministry.

During 1937 39, the notion of swaraj came to be conceptual-ized in a multi-dimensional perception at popular levels on the basis of the assurances and expectations drawn from the very fact that it was the Congress, the saviour, and not the British government, which was ruling over the people. The mobiliza-tion of peasants and tribals in these pockets during 1937 39 by the Congress leaders had also strengthened the notion. Thus, the manifestations of nationalism at popular levels during the course of the Quit India Movement should not be seen as a spontaneous activity, but rather as an attempt to express the already imbibed notion of swaraj by the peasants, a phenom-enon reinforced by the call for the Quit India Movement. To be more precise, the long-term ideological orientation imparted in the course of anti-imperialist movement by the Congress had shaped the popular perception of swaraj in varied forms.

Primary Sources

Government/Organization/Private CollectionOrissa State Archives, Bhubaneswar

(a) Home Political Department Records (b) WhoÊs Who Compilation Committee Records (c) Board of Revenue Records

National Archives, New Delhi

Home Political Department branch records (1930 39)

Nehru Memorial Museum and Library (New Delhi)

(a) All India Congress Committee files (b) All India State PeopleÊs Conference files

Private papers

(a) Linlithgow papers (b) National Front papers (c) Mahatab papers (d) Gopabandhu Choudhury papers

InterviewsBose, Rajkrushna; Cuttack, December 1985Choudhury, Manmohan; Cuttack, November 1988 and July 1989Lath, Prahalad Roy; Cuttack, March 1989

Bibliography


Mishra, L.P.; Sambalpur, October 1988Mishra, Manmohan; Cuttack, March 1989Mahanta, Banamali; Jashipur (Mayurbhanj), September 1989Mahanta, Dibkar; Jashipur (Mayurbhanj), September 1989Mahanta, Gobinda; Cuttack, December 1985Mahanta, Mrs Matamani, Jashipur (Mayurbhanj), September 1989Mahanta, Pitambara; Jashipur (Mayurbhanj), September 1989Mahanta, Radhagobinda; Jashipur (Mayurbhanj), September 1989Padhy, Siba Prasad; Sambalpur, October 1988Panigrahi, Kalandi Charan; Cuttack, October 1985Panigrahi, Prabhakar; Sambalpur, September 1989Patnaik, Sarat Chandra; Cuttack, March 1989Ram, Ram Chandra; Cuttack, February 1989Routrai, Sachi; Cuttack, January 1989

Personal DiariesMahanta, Siba Prasad; Jashipur, MayurbhanjSahu, Purusottam (known as Gandhi of Borasambar); Palsada,

Sambalpur

CorrespondenceRaj, Hadibandhu; Udala (Mayurbhanj)

Booklets/Pamphlets/BulletinsAnon., „British juddhaku sahajya kara nai‰ (Oriya pamphlet), 1941.Anon., „Dhwansare mukti‰ (Oriya pamphlet).Bardhan, Harlal, „Do or die‰ (Pamphlet), Calcutta, 1942.Barik, Kasinath, „Swarajya taranga‰ (Oriya pamphlet), Balasore,

1932.Das, B. Dhenkanal Unrest: A Review, Cuttack, 1938.Das, Birakishore, Ranabheri (Oriya booklet), Calcutta, 1932.···, Rana Dunduvi (Oriya booklet), Calcutta, 1932.Guru, Durga Prasad, Bipalab Jhankar (Oriya booklet), Puri, 1936.Hamid, Dhenkanal Guli Fayer Ra Dukhha Kahani (Oriya booklet), Cut-

tack, 1938.···, Dhenkanalre Daman Lila (Oriya booklet), Cuttack, 1938.Handwritten poems composed by Dhenkanal refugees.Hushiar (news bulletins) released by Dhenkanal refugees.Maharana, Banamali, „Raita bhai‰ (Oriya pamphlet), Berhampur,

1939.Mishra, Gangadhar, Daridrya Nian (Oriya booklet), Puri, 1936.Mishra, Gangadhar, Chasabhai (Oriya booklet), Puri, 1936.

Bibliography 397

Mohapatra, Jatindra Mohan, Chasabhai Gita (Oriya booklet), Bhadrak, 1939

Mohapatra, Nityananda, Gandhi Budha (Oriya booklet), Bhadrak, 1937.

Pal, Phani, „Keonjhar praja sammilani‰ (Oriya pamphlet), Keonjhar, 1938.

Pati, Ramkrushna, Congress Ra Gati Keun Ade (Oriya book), Cuttack, 1941.

Sabat, Kuntala Kumari, Ahwana (Oriya booklet), Cuttack, 1930.Singh, Ram Prasad, Birabidrohi (Oriya booklet), Cuttack, 1930.

Newspapers/PeriodicalsOriya

Asha, 1942Dagara (fortnightly), 1940 42Dainika JajpurDesakathaJatayu, 1985KrushakaLokamataMukti JuddhaNiankhunta, 1937 39Rachana, 1942Satyagraha (weekly), 1941Shrameeka, 1942The Samaja, 1928 40Utkala Dipika

English

AdvanceAmrit Bazaar PatrikaNew Orissa, 1937 42Observer, 1939Statesman

Offi cial Publications

Bell, R.C.S., Orissa District Gazetteers: Koraput, Cuttack, 1945. Dalziel, W.W., Final Report on the Revision Settlement of Orissa: 1922 1932,

Patna, 1934. Das, Nilakantha, Note on the Present Economic Situation of Puri District,

1931.


Government of Bihar and Orissa, Bihar and Orissa Legislative Assembly Proceedings, 1919.

···, Report on the Administration of Salt Department in Bihar and Orissa during the Years 1927 1931, Cuttack, 1928 32.

···, Report of the Orissa Provincial Banking Enquiry Committee, 1929 1930, Vol. I, Patna, 1930.

···, Report of the Partially Excluded Areas Enquiry Committee, Orissa: Memoranda on the Indian States 1930 41, Calcutta, 1931 41.

Government of Orissa, Orissa Legislative Assembly Proceedings: 1937 39, Cuttack, 1937 40.

···, Report on the Land Revenue Administration of the Districts of North Orissa for the Years 1936 39, Cuttack, 1939.

···, Government of Orissa at Work from 19 July 1938 to 31 March 1939, Cuttack, 1939.

···, Report on the Land Revenue Administration, District of North Orissa, 1938 39, Cuttack, 1941.

···, Report on the Joint Enquiry by the Revenue Commissioner and IG Police (Orissa) into Eram Firing on 28 September 1942, Cuttack, 1942.

···, Report on the Land Revenue Administration in the Districts of Ganjam and Koraput, 1941 42, Cuttack, 1943.

Indian Annual Register, (1930 42), New Delhi, 2000.Maddox, S.L., Final Report on the Survey and Settlement of the Province

of Orissa, 1890 1900, Vols I and II, Calcutta, 1900; Vol. II, Ranchi, 1920.

Mahapatra, J.N., Orissa in 1936 37 to 1938 39, Cuttack, 1941.Mishra, Godavarish, et al., Report of the Khurda Forest Enquiry Commit-

tee, Cuttack, 1938.Mozumdar, S., Report on the General Elections in Orissa, 1937, Cuttack,

1937.OÊMalley, L.S.S., Bihar and Orissa District Gazetteers, Puri, Patna, 1929. ···, Bihar and Orissa District Gazetteers, Cuttack, Patna, 1933.Senapati, N. and N.K. Sahu, Orissa District Gazetteers: Koraput, Cut-

tack, 1966.···, Orissa District Gazetteers: Mayurbhanj, Cuttack, 1967.···, Orissa District Gazetteers: Sambalpur, Cuttack, 1971.Senapati, N. and P. Tripathy, Orissa District Gazetteers: Dhenkanal.

Cuttack, 1972. Tottenham, R., Congress Responsibility for the Disturbances, 1942 43.

New Delhi, 1972.

Unofficial PublicationsMahatab, H.K., L.M. Patnaik, and B.G. Mehta, eds, Orissa StatesÊ Enquiry

Committee Report (OSER), 1937, Cuttack, 1939.

Bibliography 399

Secondary Sources

BooksBiswasroi, Radhakrushna, Orissa Rajaniti Ebang Eka Nua Pradeshara

Parikalpana (Oriya), Jeypore, 1973. Brown, Judith M., Gandhi and Civil Disobedience: The Mahatma in Indian

Politics 1928 34, Cambridge, 1977.Chandra, Bipan, The Rise and Growth of Economic Nationalism in Modern

India, New Delhi, 1965.···, Nationalism and Colonialism in Modern India, New Delhi, 1979. ···, Communalism in Modern India, New Delhi, 1984. ···, The Long Term Dynamics of Indian National Congress, New Delhi,

1985. ···, Essays on Indian Nationalism, New Delhi, 1993. ···, Essays on Contemporary India, New Delhi, 1993. ···, Ideology and Politics in Modern India, New Delhi, 1994. Chatterji, Partha, Nationalism and Colonialism: A Derivative Discourse,

New Delhi, 1987. Chaudhury, Valmiki, ed., Dr Rajendra Prasad: Correspondence and Select

Documents, Vols I and II, New Delhi, 1984. ···, ed., Dr Rajendra Prasad: Correspondence and Select Documents,

Vols II and III, New Delhi, 1985.Chopra, P.N., ed., Towards Freedom, 1937 47, New Delhi, 1985.Cobden, Ramsay L.E.B., Feudatory States of Orissa, Calcutta, 1910. Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Vol. 67, Delhi, 1967.Damodaran, Vinita, Broken Promises: Popular Protest, Indian Nationalism

and the Congress Party in Bihar, 1935 46, New Delhi, 1992.Das, B.S., Studies in the Economic History of Orissa from Ancient Times

to 1933, Calcutta, 1978. Das, M.N., ed., Sidelights on History and Culture of Orissa, Cuttack,

1977. Das, Nilakantha, Autobiography (Oriya), Cuttack, 1963. Das, N.K., Mo Jiban Janjala Kahani (Oriya), Cuttack, 1981.Das, Sudhakar, Swadhinata Sangramara Bhumi Eram (Oriya), Cuttack,

1977. Dash, Suryanarayan, Deshaprana Madhusudan (Oriya), Cuttack, 1971. ···, ed., Juga Prakash Madhusudan (Oriya), Cuttack, 1975. ···, ed., Utkalamani Gopabandhu (Oriya), Cuttack, 1975. De, S.C., Diary of Political Events in Orissa: First April 1936 to 15 August

1947, Cuttack, 1964. ···, Trend of Political Events in Orissa: 1882 1936, Cuttack, 1966.···, WhoÊs Who of Freedom Fighters in Orissa (Koraput, Ganjam,

Baud Phulbani Districts), Cuttack, 1969.


Dutt, R.P. India Today, Calcutta, 1979. Dwivedi, Surendranath, August Biplaba (Oriya), Cuttack, 1972. Elwin, Verrier, Bondo Highlander, Bombay, 1950.···, Tribal Myths of Orissa, Bombay, 1954.Freeman, J.M., Untouchable: An Indian Life History, London, 1979. Fuchs, Stephen, Rebellious Prophets: A Study of Messianic Movements in

Indian Religions, Bombay, 1965. Gartia, Rabindra Kumar, Bhagirathi Patnaik: The Freedom Fighter, Sam-

balpur, 1987.Gramsci, Antonio, Selections from Prison Note Books, New York, 1971.Guha, Ranajit, ed., Subaltern Studies: Writings on South Asian History

and Society, Vols I IV, New Delhi, 1982 85.···, Elementary Aspects of Peasant Insurgency in Colonial India, New

Delhi, 1983.Hardiman, David, Peasant Nationalists of Gujarat: Kheda District 1917 1934,

New Delhi, 1981.Henningham, Stephen, Peasant Movements in Colonial India: North Bihar,

1917 1942, Canberra, 1982. Hilton, Rodney, Bondmen Made Free: Medieval Peasant Movements and

the English Rising of 1381, London, 1977. Hobsbawm, E.J., Witold Kula, Ashok Mitra, K. N. Raj, and Ignacy

Sachs, eds, Peasants in History, Calcutta, 1980.Hutchins, F., Spontaneous Revolution, Delhi, 1971. Jena, K.C., Land Revenue Administration in Orissa during the Nineteenth

Century, New Delhi, 1978. Joshi, Shashi and Bhagwan Josh, Struggle for Hegemony in India, 1920 47:

The Colonial State, the Left and the National Movement, Vol. I: 1920 34, New Delhi, 1992.

···, Struggle for Hegemony in India 1920 47: The Colonial State, the Left and the National Movement, Vol. II: 1934 41, New Delhi, 1992.

Kanungo, Binod, Utkalamani Gopabandhu (Oriya), Cuttack, 1976. ···, Gyan Mandal (Oriya), Vol. 56, Cuttack, 1985. Low, D.A., ed., Congress and the Raj, London, 1977.Mahatab, Harekrushna, Dasabarsara Odisa 1920 30 (Oriya), Cuttack,

1972. ···, The Beginning of the End, Cuttack, 1972.···, Gandhiji O Odisa (Oriya), Cuttack, 1979. ···, Sadhanara Pathe (Oriya), 2nd edn, Cuttack, 1979. Mahatab, Harekrushna, et al. eds., History of the Freedom Movement in

Orissa, Vols IV and V, Cuttack, 1969.Mansingh, Mayadhar, A History of Oriya Literature. New Delhi, 1962.···, Saraswati Fakir Mohan (Oriya), Cuttack, 1972. Mishra, Godvarisha, Ardha Satabdira Odisa O Tahinre Mo Sthana (Oriya),

Cuttack, 1958.

Bibliography 401

Mishra, Prasanna Kumar, Political Unrest in Orissa in the Nineteenth Century, Calcutta, 1983.

Mohanty, Gopinath, Paraja (Oriya), Cuttack, 1983 (English translation by Bikram Das, New Delhi, 1987).

Mohanty, Nivedita, Oriya Nationalism: Quest for a United Orissa, New Delhi, 1982.

Moore, R.J., Crisis of Indian Unity, New Delhi, 1974.Mukherjee, Aditya, Imperialism, Nationalism and Making of the Indian

Capitalist Class, 1920 1947, New Delhi, 2002.Mukherjee Mridula, Peasants in IndiaÊs Non-violent Revolution: Practice

and Theory, New Delhi, 2004.Mullick, Muralidhar, Biplabi Chakradhar (Oriya), Cuttack, 1970. Nanda, Chandi Prasad, Towards Swaraj: Nationalist Politics and Popular

Movements in Orissa, New Delhi, 1998. Nanda, Chandi Prasad and M.N. Das, Harekrushna Mahatab, New

Delhi, 2001.Nanda, Dasarathi, Saheed Lakhman Naiko, 2nd edn, Cuttack, 1970, Ber-

hampur, 1981.Nehru, Jawaharlal, Selected Works, Vols VII X, S. Gopal, ed., New

Delhi, 1975 77.Nilagiri Praja Andolanara Itihasa (Oriya) („Nilagiri PeopleÊs History‰),

EditorsÊ Committee, Balasore, 1982. Odissare Gandhiji (Oriya), Department of Public Relations, Government

of Orissa, Bhubaneswar, 1970. Pandey, Gyanendra, The Ascendancy of the Congress in Uttar Pradesh,

1926 34: A Study of Imperfect Mobilisation. New Delhi, 1973.···, ed., The Indian Nation in 1942, Calcutta, 1988.Panigrahi, Kalindi Charan, Ananda Shankar Roy, Sarat Chandra

Mukherjee, Harihara Mahapatra, Suprava Kar, Prativa Kar, and Sarala Devi, eds, Basanti (Oriya), Cuttack, 1969.

Pannikar, K.N., ed., National and Left Movement in India, New Delhi, 1980.

Paradia, Nabin Kishore, ed., Sradhapara (Oriya), Sambalpur, 1985.Pati, Biswamoy, Resisting Domination: Peasants, Tribals and the National

Movement in Orissa, 1920 50, New Delhi, 1993.Patnaik, Gurucharan, ed., Bhagabati Sanchayana (Oriya), Cuttack,

1985.Patnaik, Prananath, ed., Odissare Communist Partyra Janma (Oriya),

Cuttack, 1985.Patnaik, Sudhakar, Sambada Patraru Odissara Katha, Cuttack, 1972.Patnaik, Surendra Nath, Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Itihasa

(Oriya),Cuttack, 1972.Patra, K.M., Orissa Legislature and the Freedom Struggle, 1912 47, New

Delhi, 1979.


Pradhan, Pabitra Mohan, Mukti Pathe Sainika (Oriya), Parts I and II. Cuttack, 1973.

Pradhan, S., Agrarian and Political Movements: States of Orissa, 1931 1949. New Delhi, 1986.

Pujari, B., Saheed Bira Lakhman Naik (Oriya), Bhubaneswar.Rabi, Sailaja, Malati Devi: Chaudati Chitrapata (Oriya), Cuttack, 1989. Ram, Ramachandra, Sangramee (Oriya), Cuttack, 1986. Rath, B.C., Unrest in Princely States of Orissa: Dhenkanal and Talcher

(1938 42), Cuttack, 1993. Rath, Radhanath, The Story of Freedom Struggle in Orissa States, Cut-

tack, 1969. Routrai, Nilamani, Smruti OÊ Anubhuti (Oriya), Cuttack, 1979.Sahai, Gobind, 42 Rebellion, Delhi, 1947.Sarkar, Sumit, Popular Movements and Middle Class Leadership in Late

Colonial India: Perspectives and Problems of a ÂHistory from BelowÊ, Calcutta, 1983.

···, Modern India: 1885 1947, New Delhi, 1983. Sarkar, Tanika, Bengal 1928 34: The Politics of Protest, Delhi, 1987.Satpathy, Nityananda, Sabujuru Sampratika: Forty Years of Modern Oriya

Poetry, 1920 60 (Oriya), Cuttack, 1974.···, Adhunika Odia Sahitya, Cuttack, 1977. Scott, James C., The Moral Economy of the Peasant Rebellion and Subsistence

in South East Asia, London, 1976. ···, Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance, Delhi,

1990.Senapati, Fakir Mohan, Atmajeevanacarita (Oriya) [Autobiography],

Cuttack, 1980.Siddiqui, Majid, Agrarian Unrest in North India: United Provinces,

1918 1922, New Delhi, 1978.Talcher Prajamandal Compilation Committee, Talcher Prajamandala

Itihas (Oriya), Calcutta, 1950.Tomlinson, B.R., Indian National Congress and the Raj, London, 1976.

ArticlesArnold, David, „Dacoity and Rural Crime in Madras, 1860 1940‰,

Journal of Peasant Studies, Vol. 6, No. 2, 1979, pp. 140 67.Atlury, Murali, „Allury Sitaram Raju and the Mamjam Rebellion of

1922 24‰, Social Scientist, Vol. 12, No. 131, 1984.Barik, Radhakanta, „Gopabandhu and the National Movement in

Orissa‰, Social Scientist, Vol. 6, No. 10, 1979, pp. 40 52.Bayly, C.A., „Rallying around the Subaltern‰, Journal of Peasant Studies,

Vol. 16, No. 1, 1988.Behera, Dandapani, „The Civil Disobedience Movements in Ganjam

District‰, in Orissa History Congress Proceedings, Berhampur, 1977.

Bibliography 403

Bhattacharya, S, „History from Below‰, Social Scientist, Vol. 11, No. 4, 1983.

Choudhuri, B.B. „Agrarian Movements in Bengal and Bihar 1919 39‰, in A.R. Desai, ed., Peasant Struggle in India, Bombay, 1979.

Das, Nityananda, „Martyr Lakhman Nayak: A Hero of the Freedom Movement‰, Adivasi, Vol. IX, No. 1, 1967.

···, „Tribal Situation in Orissa‰, in K.S. Singh, ed., Tribal Situation in India, Simla, 1972.

Davidson, Alastair, „Gramsci and Peasant Subalternity in India‰, Journal of Peasant Studies, Vol. 11, No. 4, 1984.

Dhanagare, D.N., „Subaltern Consciousness and Populism: Two Ap-proaches in the Study of Social Movements in India‰, Social Scientist, Vol. 16, No. II, 1988.

Gopal, S., „The Formative Ideology of Jawaharlal Nehru‰, in K.N. Pan-ikkar, ed., National and Left Movements in India, New Delhi, 1980.

Gopalankutty, K., „The Integration of Anti-landlord Movements with the Movement against Imperialism‰, in Bipan Chandra, ed., Studies in History, Vol. III, New Delhi, 1981.

Josh, Bhagwan, „Ministries and the Left‰, Mimeo, Centre for Histori-cal Studies, School of Social Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, 1985.

Joshi, Shashi, „Nehru and the Emergence of the Left Bloc, 1927 29‰, in Bipan Chandra, ed., Studies in History, Vol. III, New Delhi, 1981.

McDonald, G., „Unity on Trial: Congress in Bihar‰, in D.A. Low, ed., Congress and the Raj: Facets of Indian National Congress, 1917 47, London, 1977.

Mohanty, Manoranjan, „Social Roots of Backwardness in Orissa (A Study of Class, Caste and Power)‰, Social Science Probings, Vol.1, No. 2, 1984.

Mohapatra, Bishnu N., ÂÂRepresentations of Belonging: Kanchi Kaveri Legend and the Construction of Oriya Identity‰, Paper presented at the Indo-French Colloquium on Representations and Uses of the Sense of Belonging, Centre for Developing Societies, New Delhi, 1 2 November 1995.

Mukherjee, Aditya, „The Indian Capitalist Class: Aspects of its Eco-nomic, Political and Ideological Development in the Colonial Period, 1930 47‰, in Sabyasachi Bhattacharya and Romila Thapar, eds, Situating Indian History, New Delhi, 1986.

Mukherjee, Mridula, „Peasant Resistance and Peasant Consciousness in Colonial India: Subalterns and Beyond‰, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 23, Nos 41 and 42, Mumbai, 1988.

Nanda, Chandi Prasad, „Nature of Socialist and Nationalist Politics: Facets of Radical Transformation of the Congress Movement in Orissa (1935 39)‰, in P.K. Mishra, ed., Culture, Tribal History and Freedom Movement. Delhi, 1989, pp. 207 230.


Nanda, Chandi Prasad, „Anti-Colonial Resistance and Towards a His-tory of Historyless: Changing Historiographic Paradigms‰, Orissa History Congress Journal, Proceedings of the XV Session of the Orissa History Congress, 1989, pp. 194 201.

···, „Congress Ministry and Tenancy Legislation: A Critique on the Colonial History of Orissa‰, Orissa Historical Research Journal, Vol. XXXIV, Nos 3 and 4, Bhubaneswar, 1989, pp. 69 112.

···, „Book Review of IndiaÊs Struggle for Independence‰, in Orissa Past and Present, Vol. V, Nos IX and X, 1991.

···, „Re-reading Gandhi Swaraj: Understanding Rumours/Myth in Popular Consciousness: Orissa (1937 39)‰, in A. Pradhan and A.K. Patnaik, eds, PeopleÊs Movement in Orissa during the Colonial Era, Bhubaneswar, 1994, pp. 168 76.

···, „Popular Movements in the Garjat: Nature of Popular Mobilisa-tion and the Role of Left and Congress Ministry‰, in Reflections on the National Movement of Orissa, Bhubaneswar, 1997, pp. 175 98.

···, „Re-reading Bose in the Post-Gandhi(s) Days‰, in An Approach to Some Aspects of Subash Bose, Bhubaneswar, 1997, pp. 59 64.

···, „Mobilisation, Resistance and Popular Initiatives: Locating the Tribal Perceptions of Swaraj in the Jeypore Estate of Orissa (1937 38)‰, in Indian History Congress Proceedings, Bangalore, 1998, pp. 543 54.

···, „Nationalist Politics and Popular Movements in the Princely States: Rethinking Nilagiri‰, in Towards Merger, Bhubaneswar, 1998.

···, „Mapping Colonial Orissa: Shaping of Nationalist Hegemony and Popular Protest (1920 42)‰, in Dinanath Pathy and Ramesh P. Panigrahi, eds, The Continuity in the Flux: Orissa, New Delhi, 1999, pp. 173 83.

···, „Community, Culture, Politics: The Life History of Siba Prasad Mahanta‰, in Indian History Congress Proceedings, Vol. 6 (Diamond Jubilee Session), Calcutta, 1999, pp. 837 49.

···, „Validating ÂTraditionÊ: Revisiting Keonjhar and Bhuiyan Insurgency in Colonial Orissa‰, in Georg Berkemer and Margret Frenz, eds, Sharing Sovereignty: The Little Kingdom in South Asia, Berlin, 2003, pp. 205 220.

···, „Mapping the Mahatma: Literary Tracts, Rumours and Late Colonial Orissa‰, in Martin Brandtner and S.K. Panda, eds, Inter-rogating History: Essays for Prof. Hermann Kulke, New Delhi, 2006, pp. 291 302.

···, „Marginal Texts, Marginal Men: A Note on the Social Mobility Movement of the Kundmi-Mahanta of Mayurbhanj‰, in George Pfef-fer, vol. ed., Periphery and Centre: Studies in Orissan History, Religion and Anthropology, New Delhi, 2007, pp. 393 416.

Bibliography 405

Nanda, Chandi Prasad, „Between Narratives and Silences: Centering Gangpur State‰, Paper presented at the 5th Annual Conference of Orissa Research Programme held at Salzau, Kiel, Germany, 13 17 May 2002, In press.

···, „The Civil Disobedience Movement in Orissa: Nature of Popular Mobilization and Popular Protest‰, in B. C. Roy, Mahesh Prasad Dash, Chittaranjan Mishra, Atul Chandra Pradhan, Nihar Ranjan Patnaik, and Ram Chandra Mishro, eds, Freedom Struggle in Orissa·Nationalist Era: Twentieth Century, Vol. II, Bhubaneswar, 2006.

Pandey, Gyan, „Peasant Revolt and Indian Nationalism: The Peasant Movement in Awadh 1919 1922‰, in Ranajit Guha, ed., Subaltern Studies, Vol. I: Writings on South Asian History and Society, New Delhi, 1982, pp. 143 97.

Pandey, Gyanendra, „A Rural Base for Congress: The United Provinces 1920 40‰, in D.A. Low, ed., Congress and the Raj: Facets of Indian Struggle, 1917 47, London, 1977, pp. 199 223.

Raut, Sanjeeb, „Rural Stratification in Coastal Orissa (1866 1900)‰, Social Science Probings, Vol. 3, No. 1, 1986, pp. 136 50.

Raut, Sanjeeb, „Dialectic of Space and Time or Geography and History: Influence of Environment in Long Durational Slow Motion·Peas-ant History of Orissa‰, Peasant Miscellany, Vol. III, Patna, 1997, pp. 70 98.

Sanganna, S., „Revolts in Orissa·Martyr Laxman Naik: A Hero of the Freedom Movement‰, in V. Rangavaih, ed., Tribal Revolts, Nellore, 1971, pp. 247 52.

Sarkar, Sumit, „The Logic of Gandhian Nationalism: Civil Disobedi-ence and Gandhi Irwin Pact 1930 31‰, Indian Historical Review, Vol. III, No. 1, 1976.

···, „The Condition and Nature of Subaltern Militancy: Bengal from Swadeshi to Non-cooperation, 1905 22‰, in Ranajit Guha, ed., Subaltern Studies: Writings on South Asian History and Society, Vol. II, New Delhi, 1984, pp. 271 320.

Sarkar, Tanika, „First Phase of Civil Disobedience in Bengal, 1930 31‰, Indian Historical Review, Vol. IV, No. 1, 1977.

Satyamurthy, T.V., „Indian Peasant Historiography: A Critical Perspec-tive on Ranajit GuhaÊs Work‰, Journal of Peasant Studies, Vol. 18, No. 1, October 1990.

Thompson, E.P., „The Moral Economy of the English Crowd in the Eighteenth Century‰, Past and Present, No. 50, 1971, pp. 76 136.

Dissertations

Kudaisya, Gyanesh, „Office Acceptance and the Congress, 1937 39: Promises and Perceptions‰, M.Phil. Dissertation, Centre for Histori-


cal Studies, School of Social Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, 1985.

Menon, Visalakshi, „National Movement, Congress Ministries and Im-perial Policy: A Case Study of U,P., 1937 39‰, M.Phil. Dissertation, Centre for Historical Studies, School of Social Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, 1981.

Singh, Niraja, „The Right and the Right Wing Politics in Congress, 1934 39‰, M.Phil. Dissertation, Centre for Historical Studies, School of Social Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, 1984.

All India Congress Committee (AICC), 37, 38, 217, 249, 299

All India Kisan Conference, fifth session (1940), 250

All India Progressive WritersÊ Association, 57

All Orissa National Party, objectives, 65, 68

All India Students FederationÊs (AISF), 265, 301

All Utkal Krushak Sangha, 75All Utkal StudentsÊ Federation, 302Amrit Bazaar Patrika, 135anabadi, 97, 112Andrews, C.F., 152, 212, 215Angul, 205, 206, 324, 369anti-feudal movements, 149 51Arat Mahima, 27Asha, The, 33, 68, 236, 240

Banara Sena, 23 24, 356, 388Bazelgette, 143, 161, 166, 175, 189,

194, 375murder of, 168

Ben, Mira, 303, 311, 312Bhangur Gan, 26Bihar and Orissa Provincial Banking

Enquiry Committee (1929 30), 237Bihar and Orissa Legislative

Council, 7Bolsheviks, 218, 272Bose, Purna Chandra, 8, 12

Index

Bose, Rajkrushna, 18, 28 29, 66, 72, 77, 92, 93, 269

Bose, Subhash, 3, 5, 24, 60, 183, 211, 246, 304, 359, 391

Chasabhai Gita, 252 53chasi-mulia government, 370chasi-mulia rule, 369Choudhury, Gopabandhu, 37, 107,

121, 128, 229, 243, 267, 268, 380Independence day celebration,

Cuttack, 2khadi organization, 50Lahore Congress, 1Lal Paik Dal, endorsement by, 34PCCÊs fifth annual session, Presi-

dential note, 101release from jail after Gandhi

Irwin Pact, 29Salt Satyagraha in Orissa, 7 12Satyagrahi, editor of, 280

Choudhury, Malati, 66, 80, 98, 100, 107, 129, 130, 134, 175, 190, 193, 200

All Utkal Garjat Day, 183 84Cuttack District Krushak Confer-

ence, presidency of, 72CSP Orissa unit, formation of,

55 56Kisan ashram at Kulanda, found-

ing of, 105Kosala camp, activities at, 206 19Krushak, editing of, 56


krushak sangha activities, backing of, 98 110

Orissa Kisan Sangha, report on, 69

peasant conference at Lingapur, 285

resisting oppressive rule of Dhen-kanal, 179

salt satyagraha in Cuttack, 16womenÊs conference in Cuttack, 4

Choudhury, Nabakrushna, 55, 265, 269, 272, 274, 286, 289, 380

gulf between socialists and com-munists, 134 35

Kisan agitation in Dhenkanal, 173 217

Kisan conference in Cuttack (1935), 62 63

Mahajan Sabha, formation of, 95 108

Sarathi, edited by, 56zamindari system in Tirtol, activi-

ties against, 63 76chowkidari tax, 7, 20, 21, 22, 88, 94,

97, 278, 328, 334, 336, 340, 381, 388Chudamani, Gokul Mohan Ray, 24,

252, 258Civil Disobedience Movement (CDM)

campaign against untouchability, 44 45

constructive activities carried out, 50 52

GandhiÊs arrest, popular protests against, 44

Left movement in Orissa, 55mobilization of tribals, 54official report on local leaders

and their prosecution, 46pamphlet campaign, 39participation of teachers and

contractors, 45RanabheriÊs role in, 39 42repression in Cuttack, 49resumption in January (1932), 38role of pamphlets, leaflets, bul-

letins and wall writings, 39, 42, 48 49

salt campaign, 39swadeshi spirit, 46

tribal mobilization, support from villages, 54

tribal participation, reasons for, 53 54

womenÊs participation, 52youth participation, 52

coalition ministry, formation, 266Congress

activists, 156, 268ashrams, drive for subscriptions,

140 41camps:

Budhapank in Angul, 190 95conversion into permanent

settlements, 195election manifesto, proposals, 227GovernorÊs leave, position over,

246 47jail reforms, 245

Congress Socialist Party (CSP), 55, 151, 303

Cuttack town, 319 24, 381 82

Dagara, 267, 272, 273Das, Ashok, 264, 266, 303Das, Banamali, 153 57, 164 65, 252,

261, 365Das, Biswanath, 107, 112, 144, 211,

213, 274, 285, 297advocating reduction in interest

rate, 72arguments against Articles 4 and

7 of the Indian StatesÊ Protec-tion Act, 221 23

Budget speech, 243editing of Rachana, 297Ganjam visit, advice to ryots, 138Kisan conference at Jharsuguda,

76Kosala and Kampsala refugee

camp visits, 205 7Madras Estates Land (Amend-

ment) Bill, introduction of, 227Madras Estates Land (Orissa

Amendment) Bill, demand for ViceroyÊs consent, 249 51

MoneylendersÊ Bill, arguments for, 238

Index 409

Orissa Tenancy (Amendment) Bill, arguments for, 234

peasant meetings, 87, 102 3, 126PCC ministry, assumption of of-

fice in July 1937, 79Report of enquiry by AICC

against, 232resignation from Madras Council,

6ryot conference in Polasara, 5

Das, Gouranga Charan, 110, 186 87Das, Nilakantha, 1, 6, 29, 59, 76 77,

90, 101, 107, 138, 144, 231, 282, 289, 303, 359

Das, Sarangadhar, 56, 98, 100, 110, 151, 155 63, 168 75, 183 84, 188, 200, 215, 218 219, 276, 278, 379

Das, Surendranath, 10, 13, 28, 34, 42, 50

DCC, 36, 119, 269De, Golaknarayan, 27, 28Debottar, 83Deshakatha, 51, 135, 184Dutta, Girija Bhusan, 71, 80, 169, 187,

198 208, 213Dwivedi, Surendra Nath, 25, 55 56,

63, 373, 382

Eram, police firing at, 335 36

Gandhi, 2, 19, 29, 44, 52, 205, 211, 214, 246, 351

Gandhian constructive activities, 4Gandhian village reconstruction

drive, 243Gandhi Irwin Pact, 29, 33Ganjam, Athagada estates, 62Garjat Praja Sammilani, 169Ghosh, Rabi, 188, 190, 193 95,

217 18, 266gountias, 129 30, 255Guru, Durga Prasad, 256 57, 301

Harijan Sevak Sangh, Orissa, 50Harijan, 211hijrat, 177, 190, 205Hindustan Seva Dal, 34, 37Hindustan Times, The, 189Hubback, Governor, 229, 246

Independence Day, 21 22, 294 95India League Delegation (ILD), 49Indian Civil Liberties Union, 246Indian Nation, The, 189

Jena, Pada, 307, 308jungle satyagraha, 137

Kanika, Raja of, 23, 61, 80 81, 84, 342Kanungo, Nityananda, 99, 111, 222,

234, 237karmee sammilanis, 333khadi, 1, 2, 50, 297Khallikote estate, 62kisan (peasant) committees, 60Kisan Day celebrations, 66, 81 82,

103 4, 107, 134, 172 73, 251, 287kisan sabhas, 287, 301kisan sangha, 103, 129kists, 114Koraput, 53, 123, 253, 276, 348Krushak, 56, 66, 69, 72 82, 88, 95,

99, 100, 108, 110, 129, 132, 154, 160, 167, 169, 171 86, 193, 201 02, 217 20, 228, 247, 270, 370

Krushak Sena, 370

Lal Paiks, objective, 34land revenue, 82, 327Left movement in Orissa, 55 60, 146,

157, 159, 164, 184 93, 249, 252, 255, 261, 286 87, 291, 292, 391 93

legislation, agrarianMadras Estates Land (Orissa

Amendment Act) Bill (1937), 137, 226, 227 28, 229

Moneylenders Bill of 1938, pro-posed legislation, 238

Orissa Cooperative Land Mort-gage Bank Bill, 241 42

Orissa Small Holders Relief Act, 242

Orissa Tenancy (Amendment) Bill, 233 37

Linlithgow, 216, 229, 231 32Lokamata, 68, 185, 231

Madras Estates Land Actdepression in amended Section

39A, 62


Madras Estates Land (Orissa Amendment Act) Bill, 1937

Madras Esta tes Land Act Amendment Bill, 138

Madras EstatesÊ Land Act, Section 80, 128

rent reduction, 232magan, 149, 150, 167, 171, 200, 203,

213, 216Mahanty, Purna Chandra, 89, 252Maharana, Banamali, 125, 232, 250Major Hennessey, 194, 214Marana Sena, 333, 367MartyrÊs Day, 271, 290melis, 132Mishra, Bibhudendu, 264, 265, 290Mishra, Gangadhar

Daridra Nian, 65poems calling peasants to unite

and stand against oppression, 66

poems on peasants and their miseries, 65

Mishra, Godabarish, 5, 6, 59, 61, 63, 121, 301, 304, 327

Mishra, Jagannath, 4, 137, 138, 242Mishra, Laxmi Narayan, 5, 8, 14, 15,

31, 35, 37, 74, 76, 85 89, 187, 199, 271, 297 300

Mohanty, Durga Charan, 265, 266, 290, 301 2

Moneylenders Bill of 1938, 150, 226, 237 41

mukaddams (headmen of villages or castes), 13, 109

mukhtears (petty lawyers), 18mustajar, 254mustajari system, 127

Naik, Aparti Charan, 64Naik, Purna Chandra, 156, 157, 163,

165Naiko, Lakshman, 253 55, 282,

348 54National Government Ordinance, 379nawaris fee or interstate tax, 70New Orissa, The, 151nij-chas land, 84, 110

Nilagiri:political and mobilization ac-

tivities originating near border areas, 158 59

Non-cooperation Movement, 25, 51, 131, 169, 201, 269, 297, 336, 357, 360, 384, 393

Odishara Swadhinata Andolanara Iti-hasa, 14, 28, 52

Orissa Congress Swarajya Party, 267, 281

Orissa State PeopleÊs Conference (1937), 147, 150 51

Orissa StudentsÊ Federation, 289Orissa Tenancy (Amendment) Bill,

233oppositionÊs stance, 234PMÊs view, issue of mutation fee,

234Orissa Trade Union Conference, 301

Pal, Phani, 80, 89, 106, 110, 178, 183, 191

Pani, Dasarathi, 196, 198, 203Panigrahi, Bhagabati, 55 56, 108,

132 37, 179, 183, 186, 187, 191, 258Pasait, Biswanath, 183, 191, 264Patel of Bardoli (Sardar Vallabhbhai

Patel), 13Patel, Sardar, 230Patnaik, Ananta Charan, 56 58,

90 91, 187 88, 258Patnaik, Bhagirathi, 14, 15, 35, 129,

131Patnaik, Dibakar, 79, 86, 92, 125, 128,

138, 249 51, 266, 285, 308, 359Patnaik, Harmohan, 169, 170 74, 177,

218Patnaik, Lal Mohan, 156, 171Patnaik, Prananath, 55, 70, 82, 90,

107 9, 136 37, 184, 187 88, 252, 356Patnaik, Sarat Chandra, 55, 64, 258PCC (Pradesh Congress Committee)

campaign against war measures and war fund collection, 270 72

communistsÊ domination in, 266

Index 411

Congress rightist leadership, criti-cism of, 265

Congress volunteer training camps, 280

constructive programmes, 268divisons in, 267functioning of, 266 74fifth annual session at Cuttack,

101 3in 1940, estimation of trainees,

269in 1942, shifting to anti-war cam-

paign, 292factions during 1940, 251census of volunteers, 267divisions in, observations by

Dagara, 267satyagraha preparations in 1940,

267march to popularize khadi, 268presidentship, fight for, 101revamp in 1940, 267Satyagraha, appointment of Dicta-

tors for monitoring, 276satyagrahi training centres,

268 70socialist leadership, criticism of,

265Utkal Provincial Congress Com-

mittee, leaflets released by, 269war subscription, resentment in

Jeypore against, 282 83youth and studentsÊ politics,

262 66, 262peasant mobilization in Orissa

anti-war posters, 252effect on movement by arrest of

left-wing leaders, 252floods in Cuttack and Balasore

and arrest of left-wing leaders, 255

Kisan Rally Week, objective of organizing, 249

Madras Estates Land (Orissa Amendment) Bill as motive for, 249, 251

no-rent campaign, 250

Oriyan peasantsÊ and tribalsÊ mobilization, 86 87All India Kisan Day (1 Sep-

tember 1936), resolutions adopted, 66

All India Kisan Sabha at Luc-know (April 1936), 63

at Balasore, 109 12at Cuttack, 104 6at Ganjam, 124 40at Puri, 107 9at Sambalpur, 129 38Congress ministry, formation

and work done, 79 83campaign for scrapping of An-

gul Laws Regulation, conces-sions obtained therein, 83

difference of perception be-tween

the PCC and krushak sanghas (1937), 76

Girijabhusan DuttaÊs campaigns against Angul Laws Regula-tion, 71

kisan meetings in rural areas, 80 81, 78

MahatabÊs initiative, 66NehruÊs visit, 63 64PCC election manifesto and

declarations, 67PCC electoral campaign, 68 70post election phase, 68protest against corruption, Jey-

pore maharajaÊs tour, 75protest meeting at Duburi

against restriction of Phani Pal, 133

Provincial Youth Conference, 134

Puri District Kisan Sangha resolutions, 88

Puri District PeasantsÊ Confer-ence at Balanga, 73

response of landed elements, 93Prajamandal in Dhenkanal, 262Prajamandal in Nilagiri, 261Prajamandal in Talcher, 258 60RanabheriÊs role in, 252


peasant movement, momentum dur-ing the onset of world war, 249

Pharasidinga, 28, 38, 48Pradhan, Pabitra Mohan, 196 98,

216, 259, 368prajamandal

ban on press in Talcher, 202boycott of paan chewing, 170breakdown of talks with ruler,

177brutal assault on activist, 165demands put forward to the state, 171formalization of, 170Khandapara in 1940, Juddha Nian,

262left-wingers in, 157offer by ruler to recognize and

conciliate, 176organized protest against stateÊs

misrule, 170organization of, 169, 172protest against arrest of leaders

of, 174 75response by rulers to demands

put forward by, 171 72rulerÊs discussion with, 173 74support from Congress, 156

Prasad, Rajendra, 230princely states in Orissa

bethi, prevalence of, 148 49cause for Civil Disobedience

Movement (CDM), 149Congress ministry and the move-

ment, 219 24Dhenkanal:

Left leadership of Congress joining the satyagraha, 185 88

newspapers, role in struggle, 184 85

organization of volunteers and refugee camps, 189 96

popular literature on reign of terror by ruler, 179 81

pro-movement press, 177satyagraha in, 178, 181 89struggle against rulers, 169 82

feudal oppression by national move-ment against, 151

magnitude of crisis in the states, governorÊs stance, 220 21

Public Demands Recovery Act, 23purna swaraj demonstrations, 3 6

Quit India Movementarrest of Congress leaders (9

August 1942),district-wise summation of activi-

ties against imperialists, 313Cuttack leadership, 381 82in Ganjam, 359 61in Koraput, attack on colonial

symbols, 347in Orissa, leadership and agita-

tion, 372 84in princely states

Dhenkanal, 366 68Nilagiri, 364 66Talcher, 368 72

in Puri, 356 59in Sambalpur, 361 64peasant mobilization in context

of, 249reaction of Orissa, anti-feudal

thrust, 326 28attacks on colonial symbols in

state during 1942, 323 25Cuttack, studentsÊ agitation in,

325 26district-wise summation of attacks

on colonial symbols, 319 21Jajpur sub-division, report on

disturbances in, 321Kosala sub-division, report on

disturbances in, 321 22

Ranabheri, 39, 42, 48, 49, 182, 252rates of rent in different states of

Orissa, 148Rath, Baidyanath, 58 59, 90, 188,

264 66, 302Ravenshaw College, 6, 14, 58, 188red pugrees, 252Routrai, Sachi, 57, 90, 185, 188, 249,

264 65, 266, 269

Sahajananda, Swami, 64, 218, 250Sahu, Laxmi Narayan, 4, 22, 50, 249Sahu, Laxmidhar, 169, 170, 172, 174,

218

Index 413

Sahu, Radha Mohan, 119, 121, 141, 253

Salt Law, 7, 10, 11, 15, 16, 19, 20violations of, 7, 16, 111, 286

Salt Satyagrahaat Balasore, 7, 8at Inchudi, 10 12, 18at Sambalpur, 15Dandi March, 6Gandhi Irwin Pact, 29 31youth and students, 14literature of nationalist orienta-

tion, 26 27pattern of response to, 17post pact phase, popular re-

sponse, 29protest pattern, 20protests on day of BoseÊs trial in

Cuttack, 18salt manufacturing centres in

coastal province, 16satyagrahi soldiers, enrollment

of, 8Samaja, The, 4, 8, 13, 19, 27, 68, 75,

85, 135, 163, 193, 300Santhals, 161sarbarakars, 33, 108 9, 200, 205, 206,

207, 209, 260Satyagraha

Banara Sena, picketing of excise shops, 23 24

chowkidari tax, againstand resistance offered by villag-

ers, 21at Khersai Village, 22in Balasore, 20 22, 20reign of terror by armed troops,

22in Dhenkanal, results reaped, 189individual satyagraha activities,

270, 277in Balasore, 279 80in Jeypore, 276in princely states, 284in Sambalpur, 276mobilization of youth, 288 291Naiko, Lakshman, 282pattern of, 274 84

reasons for slowing down, 281 82

response of colonial authorities to, 277

support of police, 277tribal mobilization, 283youth politics, 286 88

PCC decision, other kinds of na-tionalist programmes, 23 28

picketing of excise shops, 23picketing of wine shops, 23

Section 144 of CPC, 14, 98, 134, 136, 160, 219

Shastri, Lal Bahadur, 55Singh, Bhagat, 3, 26Singh, Maheswar Subahu, 169,

172 74, 177, 190, 193 94, 218sunia bheti, 69, 174swaraj movement

khadi centres, role in preaching Gandhian ideology, 299

mass preparedness for war and mobilization of popular opin-ion, efforts by Congress, 298

Mira BenÊs visits, 296 97nationalist press, role in arousing

strong popular feelings against war measures, 300 01

village defence committees and, 299

war climate, 304 5, 305 9

Talcher:arrest of satyagrahis and brutal

torture, 203 4exodus (hijrat) by people, causes,

205 09impact of Dhenkanal develop-

ments and Jenapur Kisan Conference, 200

no-haat tax campaigns, 200popular response to rulerÊs re-

pression, 201 2prajamandal in, 196 202refugee camps, 197 215taxation status, rates of rent and

economic exploitation that prevailed, 148


Talcher Prajamandal, 204Tarun Sangha, 105, 106Tenancy Act, 82tenancy laws, 69, 237Tripathy, Sadashiba, 116, 119, 121

United Party, 65, 68Utkal Congress Socialist League, 61Utkal Congress Socialist Party (CSP),

69Utkal Deepika, 20, 68Utkal Gopabandhu Sevaka Bahini, 34

Utkal Kisan Sangha, 62, 82

virtual no-rent campaign, 255volunteer corps, 295, 298 99

war-loan collection, 259workersÊ mobilization in Orissa,

(1940), 256 58

Yuvak Shanti Sena Dal, 252Yuvak Sangha, 152 54

zamindars, 88, 94, 133, 231, 381

Chandi Prasad Nanda is a reader at the Academic Staff Col-lege of the Utkal University at Bhubaneswar. He is a member of several national and international organizations such as the Indian History Congress and has participated previously at the European Conference on Modern South Asian Studies, the aca-demic network of the Global Project on the History of Leprosy and the Orissa Research Programme Sponsored by the German Research Council (1999 2004). He has a research and teaching experience of more than two decades.

About the Author

Vocalizing Silence: Political Protests in Orissa, 1930-42 (SAGE ...

Documents

Transcript of Vocalizing Silence: Political Protests in Orissa, 1930-42 (SAGE ...