I don't intend this to be an account of Thursday's meeting that district minister D.T. Jaykumar had with us stakeholding citizens of Mysore on the central theme of safeguarding our interest. Newspapers have already reported it to varying degree of details.
The meeting was well attended and the proceedings, well conducted. Ideas and opinions, suggestions and requests were expressed aplenty - some old, some new, but all made due note of by DTJ with equal earnestness. Deputy commissioner Selvakumar, Acting-MUDA commissioner Ashokananda and municipal commissioner Chandrashekar (hope the correct spelling) gave him company intermittently and for durations increasing in the order their names figure.
The striking characteristic was that DTJ did not look restive or impatient. There was no evidence of ministerial showiness of ignorance. What he did not know he did not make a pretense of knowing it. He earnestly asked to know, though it was not encouraging that he was not informed about a few things he ought to have known as a man from the region. There were no more than three interruptions in the form of telephonic calls, handed to him by his personal assistant. Luckily, they were brief. Each time he was thus interrupted, he did not lose a single moment to get back to the point. He did not exert his facial muscles to be overly courteous, another ministerial weakness betrayed on such occasions.
There were two lapses on part of the audience. There was a conspicuous number of post-lunch absentees. Then there was a fair share of cross-talks and talking-overs, but it did cross tolerable limits.
A highlight of the meeting that should be of particular interest to those mymysore community members who could not be present at the meeting, is that an Australian company is interested in spending Rs. 1500 crore on tourism promotion in Mysore. This was announced at the meeting by Mr. Raghavendra, of Mysore Chamer of Commerce. He requested the minister to facilitate the coming of the company. During the coffee-break, I briefly met Mr. Raghavendra. (According to their original plan, they had a proposal for spending Rs. 3000 crore on promoting tourism in the triangle of Mysore, Bangalore and Goa. I did get Mr.Bede Hampton, the chairman of the company going by the name Mobeus International, a key contact. He promised to get back, but never so much as acknowledged a letter written to him as a followup of our meeting. This was three years ago). I was really surprised that the company was still interested in getting back. Hope its attitude will be more positive this time.
It is indeed surprising how DTJ, despite having held tourism portfolio earlier, did not get a chance to go through a file pertaining to such a major initiative. Positively viewed, it was nice to see him not feign knowledge of the issue.
That notwithstanding, his responsiveness was to be understood by the keen attention he paid to every speaker. It was past lunch time, but he showed no signs of winding up in a hurry. He adjourned the meeting for lunch when it was past 2.30. "There are some elderly persons (in the audience). Some may be diabetics," was his diplomatic way of reminding us that it was time for lunch.
At the end of the brainstorming he announced that: a citizens' committee would be set up; a booklet incorporating all the suggestions would be brought out; and an inquiry would be set up into widespread encroachments along the foothills of the Chamundi Hills.
It would be unrealistic to expect wonders to result from yesterday's efforts. However, I hope not to be proved wrong in my reading of his body language. DTJ was a different man, a climbdown from his usual haughty self. I say all this not because he lent me a patient ear twice during the course of the day and offered to meet for an exclusive extended session on his return from Canada, a trip on which he is embarking tomorrow.
Critic of repute, Prof.G.H. Nayak, was one of the leading citizens present at the deliberations. His main questions: a) the desirability of continuing the royalty baggage in a modern democracy (I hope I have understood this question correctly, as I was not fully attentive when he began); b) why should the script that Lingadevaru Halemane did for the sound and light programme be reviewed, just because the former maharaja has objected to not being consulted: and c) the inappropriateness in a secular democracy of taking Chamundeswari in the Dasara procession.
DTJ was at a loss for words, particularly to answer the last question. "You have identified yourself as belonging to Secular Janata Dal; my question is even more relevant. This is not the first time we have aired this question. We have been asking this question for 15 years, now."
There were a couple of feeble voices offering resistance to the issue being discussed. It was not on the agenda, they seemed to say. DTJ seemed to echo it. During the coffee-break, DTJ, face to face with Prof. Nayak, seemed to engage the latter, though briefly, in a convincing exercise. But, it was apparent that he was no better off than before to handle the tricky situation that Prof. Nayak had created for him.
I will write about the questioner again, after waiting for some stimulating responses to the issue on this forum.
Amazing to know that DTJ did not have an answer for the last question! Dasara is a hindu cultural event and taking Godess Chamundeshwari on a procession is an ancient practise and according to the Indian constitution (based on a secular democracy) permits religious freedom. What is the relevance of this question? What has secular (or non, if there is one!) democracy got to do with religion? Prof Nayak seems to be confused with Communist style of Government and secular. Nothing prevents a secular country from celebrating its various religions and religious practises. Again, Singapore is a secular country, true to the word and not farsical as in Inda (do you read me Prof. Nayak?) and they have annual Thai Pusam of the minority hindu community with the processions et all. Same goes for the Buddhist practises, we were there this year during the Buddha Purnima and Chinese Buddhists Singaporeans were there celebrating with parades, pandals, prayers (public) and so on. Every one partakes of this. If one is truly secular, Professor, one will take part in all religious functions, thats what makes us secular-our ability to include everyone and exclude none. Shame that our elected chaps can't come out with this. As for the professor asking this question, he only needs a bit of introspection to come up with the same answer. Plain and simple.
