It is not at all surprising that the Congress (I) leadership has finally decided to replace Mr. Babasaheb Bhosale as Maharashtra’s chief minister. The fact of large-scale dissidence against him apart, he just did not fill the bill. It was also predictable that the central leadership would send its representatives (popularly called observers) to try to evolve a consensus among party legislators in favour of the individual it prefers for whatever reasons. Reports have it that the preferred person this time is the former chief minister, Mr. Vasantrao Patil. These reports are, in the nature of things, somewhat speculative. But they sound accurate. Mr. Patil has cancelled his proposed trip to Cuba and Mr. YB Chavan, once the undisputed leader of the Congress in Maharashtra, has let it be known that he favours Mr. Patil.
Beyond that the position is even more obscure. It is difficult to say what will happen if the observers fail to evolve, as they might in view of the Antulay group’s present stand, a consensus in favour of Mr. Patil. The Congress (I) working president, Mr. Kamlapati Tripathi, is quoted as having said that the party’s central leadership has no desire to impose its nominees on state units. By this logic, in the absence of unanimity or near-unanimity, the Maharashtra Congress (1) legislature party would meet and elect a new leader. But when the crunch comes, will the Congress (I) leadership live up to its present assurance which is itself rather vague? And who can say who will be the party’s choice if there is in fact an election for the new leader?
In these uncertain circumstances, it is, on the face of it, rather unfair to say anything more. But it is necessary to do so because it does not appear that the state Congress (1)legislature party can produce a chief minister who can meet Maharashtra’s and its own requirements. The state needs a chief minister who can give it an honest and efficient administration and the Congress (I) a leader who can refurbish its image. There is, of course, no contradiction between these requirements. But only a man of the stature and experience of Mr. YB Chavan or possibly of the toughness and uprightness of Mr. SB Chavan can meet them. The former apparently regards it beneath him to return to an office he held over two decades ago and the latter perhaps lacks the necessary support in the legislature party. But there is no obvious third choice if Mrs. Gandhi is averse to putting the state under President’s rule. Mr. Vasantrao Patil could have legitimately been regarded as the third choice or even a second one if he was not an ailing man. But he is and the load on a chief minister is heavy. Other possible choices would send shivers down the spines of the people in Maharashtra. All in all, the prospect does not look promising either for the state or the Congress (I).