While escorting (walking, as he  would insist) President K.R. Narayanan at the Mughal Gardens, when it was still  called so, one could broach topics that could otherwise be construed as out of  line. It was always a privilege to get unfiltered insights into the  workings of this most illuminated mind on constitutional propriety,  sensitivities, and morality.    President K.R. Narayanan was  unpretentious, confident, and extremely open to questioning. He was visibly  committed to the principles of accountability and responsibility as part of his  public duty. He had initiated Rashtrapati Bhavan communiqués to initiate  transparency and famously allowed an outspoken editor known to ask tough questions  to interview him. He remained open to questions abroad and was known to work on  his own communications, as part of the necessary checks-and-balances messaging  to the government of the day. He gently dissented whenever he thought the  constitutional morality was at risk, albeit, as he said, “within four walls of  constitutionality”.    He was clearly uncomfortable  with condescending and patronising labels like “First Dalit President” that  politicians loved to categorise individuals according to the prevailing  societal norms, and to reduce individuals to a “rubber stamp”. Instead, the man  of letters framed the significance of his journey to Rashtrapati Bhawan as a  testimony to equity in a thriving democracy, where “my life encapsulates the  ability of the democratic system to accommodate and empower marginalised  sections of society”. The vacuous labels given to him were simply inadequate  and reductive for a man who held the most significant posts in the land owing  to his merit, integrity and sheer brilliance as a professional.    Despite unimaginable  socio-economic tribulations in his youth, the favourite student of Harold Laski  at the London School of Economics had joined the Indian Foreign Service and  hailed as the country’s “best diplomat”. He held ambassadorial posts in the  United States, China and elsewhere, and the erudite academic later went from  teaching at the Delhi School of Economics to being vice-chancellor of  Jawaharlal Nehru University. He earned his political stripes by winning three  consecutive Lok Sabha terms from Kerala (despite it being a Left bastion) and  then joining the Union Cabinet. Narayanan completed the loop of all possible  offices by becoming vice-president, before winning the presidential polls with  among the highest margins in the electoral college. With such impeccable  accomplishments, Narayanan wasn’t beholden to anyone or to any partisan  ideology, but only to his own conscience and to the book that he genuinely  considered to be the holiest of all: the Constitution of India.    One evening, while escorting  him, I asked why he seemed to avoid going to religious places or meeting godmen  or even famous spiritual leaders? I vividly remember him taking more than a few  seconds to respond to the unexpected question. After walking for a few seconds  in silence, he stopped and acknowledged that he did avoid doing so as he felt  that as the conscience-keeper of the Constitution and its lofty spirit, it was  perhaps best. He then alluded to subliminal, lingering and conflicting wounds  of religiosity that naturally reside in a 5,000-year civilisation, and that as  a constitutional person, it was important that he wasn’t adding weight to any  side of conflicting perceptions. Every perception mattered, equally. For him  the imagined past could derail the progress of the future.    K.R. Narayanan was that rare  being who walked the talk of his personal beliefs, by not going to any  religious place or ascribing any role onto any religious event during his term.  He was acutely conscious of the power of optics, and used it to only  suggest inclusivity, healing and reforms. His undeniable background was a fact,  and yet not a means for bitterness, convenient invocations or even  aggrandisement, but only to reiterate the power of possibilities with the  Indian Constitution, if pursued earnestly.    He was to famously countenance  revisionism, reimagination and reinterpretation of doing away with parts of the  Constitution by sagely positing: “Has the Constitution failed us or have we  failed the Constitution?”. India then had an equally committed  constitutionalist in Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee, who quietly buried  the murmurs, recognising the import of Narayanan’s subtle message.    In a situation that now seems  unimaginable, K.R. Narayanan frequently expressed concerns to the PMO and these  were handled by two people who truly believed in the necessity of healthy  disagreements and believing at the end of the day, they were on the same team.  If one had constraints of constitutional rectitude in expression, the other  perhaps had partisan considerations and postures to maintain; yet Narayanan  spoke on matters like the 2002 riots (as did Vajpayee) and his restrained and  “distanced” position on all religious matters were duly respected. It was  equally to Prime Minister Vajpayee’s large-heartedness and inherent decency  that K.R. Narayanan was allowed to be so. The proverbial midnight oil burnt  bright till late at Rashtrapati Bhavan, as Narayanan worked and chiselled draft  speeches to convey restorative and reassuring commitments to the Constitution  of India, and act as the functioning means of checks and balances in a  democracy.    He, perhaps more than most,  would have seen all sides of organised religion and its power over people and  impact over the proverbial “others”. Hence the need to maintain an official,  avowed, and respectful “distance” from all matters of faith, while  recognising the cultures of individual practitioners who were free to partake  in a non-discriminatory and non-imposing way. The carefully curated  constitutional “Idea of India” had to be secular in both words and actions.  This deliberate “distance” from any kind of overt religiosity did not alienate  the highest office of the land from citizens, but perhaps strengthened  secularism,    constitutionality and dignity  for each citizen, without fear, favour or electoral considerations.
Source link 
                मुरादाबाद की खबर: मुरादाबाद की महिलाओं ने हुनर दिखाया, मटके में गन्ने का सिरका तैयार कर रही हैं, बाजार में भारी डिमांड है।
मुरादाबाद की महिलाएं आत्मनिर्भर बनकर अन्य महिलाओं को भी रोजगार से जोड़ रही हैं। इसके साथ ही नए-नए…

