Report Wire - Political warmth over Karnataka-Maharashtra boundary dispute escalates
December 3, 2022

Report Wire

News at Another Perspective

Political warmth over Karnataka-Maharashtra boundary dispute escalates

4 min read
Political heat over Karnataka-Maharashtra boundary dispute escalates

By PTI

BENGALURU: The political warmth over the inter-state border row has escalated with Karnataka Chief Minister Basavaraj Bommai hitting again at Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis terming his assertion on the problem “provocative”.

“No village in Maharashtra will go to Karnataka! The state government will fight strongly in the Supreme Court to get Marathi-speaking villages in Karnataka including Belgaum-Karwar-Nipani!,” stated Fadnavis.

In a retort, Bommai, terming it a provocative assertion, stated: “His (Fadnavis’) dream will never come true. Our government is committed to protecting our state’s land, water and borders.”

He additional stated that there was no query of giving up any house within the border districts of Karnataka.

In reality, he stated: “Our demand is that the Kannada speaking areas of Maharashtra like Solapur and Akkalkot should join Karnataka.”

The dispute over Belagavi dates again to the Nineteen Sixties after the reorganisation of States on linguistic traces.

Earlier this week, the Eknath Shinde authorities in Maharashtra appointed two ministers to coordinate with the authorized group relating to the courtroom case on the dispute set to return up within the Supreme Court.

Bommai stated quickly after that the State has deployed a battery of high attorneys, together with Mukul Rohatgi and Shyam Diwan, to combat its case.

Bommai stated since 2004, the Maharashtra authorities has filed a case within the Apex courtroom over the border difficulty.

“So far they have not succeeded and they will not succeed in future as well. We are geared up to strengthen our legal battle.”

The Karnataka CM had claimed that the Panchayats in Jath Taluka in Sangli district of Maharashtra had handed a decision up to now to merge with Karnataka when there was a extreme drought state of affairs and acute consuming water disaster, and his authorities has developed schemes to assist them by offering water.

Responding to this, Fadnavis advised reporters in Nagpur on Wednesday: “These villages (in Jat Taluk) had introduced a resolution on the issue of water scarcity in 2012. Presently, none of the villages have introduced any resolution.”

Karnataka has repeatedly maintained that the Mahajan Commission report on the border difficulty is remaining, and “there is no question of letting go even an inch of Karnataka’s border”.

Bommai reiterated this week that there is no such thing as a instance to indicate that what had been achieved underneath the States Reorganisation Act was reviewed.

“The border dispute is a political tool used by all parties in Maharashtra. But they will never succeed,” he had stated.

Shinde stated earlier this week: “Late Balasaheb Thackeray was always a staunch supporter of the state’s demand to make Belgaum (Belagavi) a part of Maharashtra. We have concentrated our focus on solving the issue. If required, the number of lawyers would be increased”.

BENGALURU: The political warmth over the inter-state border row has escalated with Karnataka Chief Minister Basavaraj Bommai hitting again at Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis terming his assertion on the problem “provocative”.

“No village in Maharashtra will go to Karnataka! The state government will fight strongly in the Supreme Court to get Marathi-speaking villages in Karnataka including Belgaum-Karwar-Nipani!,” stated Fadnavis.

In a retort, Bommai, terming it a provocative assertion, stated: “His (Fadnavis’) dream will never come true. Our government is committed to protecting our state’s land, water and borders.”

He additional stated that there was no query of giving up any house within the border districts of Karnataka.

In reality, he stated: “Our demand is that the Kannada speaking areas of Maharashtra like Solapur and Akkalkot should join Karnataka.”

The dispute over Belagavi dates again to the Nineteen Sixties after the reorganisation of States on linguistic traces.

Earlier this week, the Eknath Shinde authorities in Maharashtra appointed two ministers to coordinate with the authorized group relating to the courtroom case on the dispute set to return up within the Supreme Court.

Bommai stated quickly after that the State has deployed a battery of high attorneys, together with Mukul Rohatgi and Shyam Diwan, to combat its case.

Bommai stated since 2004, the Maharashtra authorities has filed a case within the Apex courtroom over the border difficulty.

“So far they have not succeeded and they will not succeed in future as well. We are geared up to strengthen our legal battle.”

The Karnataka CM had claimed that the Panchayats in Jath Taluka in Sangli district of Maharashtra had handed a decision up to now to merge with Karnataka when there was a extreme drought state of affairs and acute consuming water disaster, and his authorities has developed schemes to assist them by offering water.

Responding to this, Fadnavis advised reporters in Nagpur on Wednesday: “These villages (in Jat Taluk) had introduced a resolution on the issue of water scarcity in 2012. Presently, none of the villages have introduced any resolution.”

Karnataka has repeatedly maintained that the Mahajan Commission report on the border difficulty is remaining, and “there is no question of letting go even an inch of Karnataka’s border”.

Bommai reiterated this week that there is no such thing as a instance to indicate that what had been achieved underneath the States Reorganisation Act was reviewed.

“The border dispute is a political tool used by all parties in Maharashtra. But they will never succeed,” he had stated.

Shinde stated earlier this week: “Late Balasaheb Thackeray was always a staunch supporter of the state’s demand to make Belgaum (Belagavi) a part of Maharashtra. We have concentrated our focus on solving the issue. If required, the number of lawyers would be increased”.