SC verdict – A tight slap on ‘frenzied’ activists rooting for renaming of historical places

Apex court dismissed the PIL of BJP leader Upadhyay, stating that it was against the principle of secularism enshrined in the Constitution; citizens state that there are so many problems and issues concerning them, which need urgent attention

PANJIM: The Supreme Court verdict dismissing the public interest litigation (PIL) filed by BJP leader Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay seeking renaming of the historical places across the country has come as a tight slap on those frenzied activists, who were pressing for renaming Margao as Mathgram, Chandor as Chandrapur and Vasco-da-Gama as Sambhaji Nagar. The court put an end to the plans of the right-wring organisation to rename the historical places.

Dismissing the PIL, the court stated that it was against the principle of secularism enshrined in the Constitution of India.

It may be recalled that in Goa too, a few frenzied activists were pressing in vain for renaming of some of the places such as Margao to Mathgram, Chandor to Chandrapur and Vasco-da-Gama to Sambhaji Nagar. However, their demand too did not receive public support with the Apex Court now putting the issue the rest.    

When contacted, Mathgramasth Hindu Sabha, Margao, president Pandurang ‘Bhai’ Naik said, “Has anybody have guts to go against the Supreme Court order? But there were some genuine demands to rename places; however, we need to accept the orders of the Supreme Court. There are some people who still exist with the genuine requests to rename the places.”

Luel Fernandes, a social activist from Chandor said that people are not interested in renaming the cities and historical places; instead citizens are more concerned about the general administration. Citizens are facing tough times and hardships due to collapse in government administration and hence renaming cities and places hold no value. The verdict given by the Supreme Court should be welcomed, as there are so many problems and issues concerning the people, which need urgent attention.

However, Jayant Jadhav from Vasco opined that names of historical places should be changed claiming that people’s sentiments matter the most. He asked, “What is the contribution of Vasco da Gama? What good has he done for Goa? My daughter asks me: Who is Vasco-da-Gama? What should I tell her? Is he a freedom fighter? Vasco da Gama never came down to Goa. If Vasco is renamed as Sambhaji Nagar then at least I can tell her that he fought against Portuguese and Mughals. We are raising our demand to rename Vasco town as Sambhaji Nagar before our MLA and government. Let the government decide.”

Raje Kiran from Vasco, who is also demanding that Vasco be renamed as Sambhaji Nagar, claimed that renaming Vasco town has nothing to do with religion. History needs to be given due respect. “Vasco da Gama looted, tortured and did a number of things against India and Goans. So tell me whether he needs to be respected or the freedom fighters and the people who fought and sacrificed their lives for Goa’s liberation from Portuguese needs to be respected?” he asked.  

According to heritage promoter Sanjeev Sardesai, most places across the country are named based on the historical events. History is written by the winners and not losers. 

“The new generation follows things blindly, you ought to decide what is more important, whether the identity or the deeds of the person. It is wrong to generalise and demand that all names should be changed. If justified well, certain names of places can be changed,” he said.

Though the petitioner has prayed that the names of historical places be changed as they were named after “barbaric foreign invaders”, the Apex Court said, “We are secular and supposed to protect the Constitution. You are concerned about the past, and dig it up to place its burden on the present generation. Each thing you do in this manner will create disharmony.”   

“Our country had so many problems to attend to… Hinduism is a way of life, because of that Indian has assimilated everybody. Because of that we are able to live together. Divide and rule policy of British brought about schism in our society… Let us not bring that back. Do not drag a religion into this,” the Court said, while dismissing the PIL.  

Share This Article