It is by no means clear whether or not the UP chief minister, Mr. Ram Naresh Yadav, has lost the confidence of the state Janata legislature party. For, while the dissidents claim the support of 253 members out of a total of 383, they have submitted to the party’s central leaders a memorandum which carries only 106 signatures. And one cannot be too sure either that all signatures are genuine or that some of the signatories are not less than firm in their opposition to Mr. Yadav. But he himself cannot deny that he has, rightly or wrongly, forfeited the support of a significant section of the legislature party and that once again he is obliged to demonstrate his strength. This means that he should be willing to convene a meeting of the state Janata legislature party either at his own initiative or in response to an anticipated directive from the central leadership. But reports from Lucknow suggest that instead he proposes to insist that the dissidents requisition a meeting of the party, if they want one. Apparently this gives him a technical advantage in that the dissidents will need not a simple majority but a two-thirds majority to carry a vote of no-confidence against him. But this is not a particularly effective distinction. For, once the dissidents are able to demonstrate that they have the majority of the party legislators with them, Mr. Yadav will not be able to continue to hold on unless, of course, he is willing to lean on the support of a major opposition party and on that basis prove that he has the majority support in the legislature. But is he so inclined? Have those who are backing him decided to risk splitting the Janata and staying on in office with the help of an opposition party, most probably the Congress (I)?
In this kind of context where numbers are all that count, it is obviously irrelevant to speak of Mr. Yadav’s lacklustre performance and to argue in favour of his replacement by someone who can provide the sprawling state with a more effective administration. However deplorable the consequences for the state and the country, the issue is going to be settled on the basis of the size of the rival battalions. The Janata chief, Mr. Chandra Sekhar, has spoken angrily of Mr. Yadav’s actions in precipitating the present conflict and in ignoring his advice and said that he and his colleagues in the central leadership would neither rescue Mr. Yadav nor put up with his insolence. But by way of a solution, Mr. Chandra Sekhar, too, is invoking the yardstick of numbers. For he, too, is only asking Mr. Yadav to prove that the latter commands the support of the majority in the state Janata legislature party. And the tragedy is that he has no other choice if only because the party’s central leadership is too divided to be able to impose its will on a recalcitrant chief minister. Mr. Chandra Sekhar has not yet said that behind Mr. Yadav stands Mr. Raj Narain certainly and possibly Mr. Charan Singh as well. But he will not be able to avoid facing this fact for long. Once again the battle for leadership is joined, this time in Lucknow instead of in New Delhi. But the objective remains the same – the office of Prime Minister.
The Times of India, 2 February 1979