Mysore/Mysuru: Strongly opposing the Government’s plan of installing the statue of Sir M.Visvesvaraya (Sir MV) alongside that of Nalwadi Krishnaraja Wadiyar in front of KRS dam, several like-minded groups under the banner of ‘Ekapratime Horata Samiti’ staged a demonstration in front of the Deputy Commissioner’s Office here on Monday.
Addressing the protestors, Bahujan Vidyarti Sangha (BVS) leader Dr. Shivakumar said that Sir MV had served as the Chief Engineer of the dam only for one year and seven other Chief Engineers succeeded him in the construction of the dam that took 21 years, ending in 1932. As such, the statue of only Nalwadi, who alone should be credited for the construction of the Dam, must be installed in front of the dam.
Claiming that the installation of MV’s statue alongside that of Nalwadi will be an insult to the erstwhile Mysore Maharajas, he urged the Government not to install the statue of anyone other than that of Nalwadi in front of KRS dam.
Former Mayor Purushotham said that Water Resources Minister Ramesh Jarkiholi, who recently announced in Mysuru that the works on the installation of the statues were in the final stage, seems to have little knowledge of history. “Ramesh Jarkiholi must understand that Nalwadi made a lot of sacrifices for the construction of the dam and as such only his statue must find place in front of the dam,” he maintained.
Prof. P.V. Nanjaraj Urs, farmer leader Hoskote Basavaraju, leaders Dyavappa Nayaka, Aravind Sharma,Choranahalli Shivanna, Sosale Siddaraju, Maridevayya and others took part in the demonstration.
Its sad that a man who gave so much to the Mysuru kingdom then is being protested at.Even Nalvadi Krishnaraja Wodeyar wouldn’t have approved of this protest.
Both Nalwadi Krishnaraja Wodeyar and Sir M.Visvesvaraya had symbiotic relationship and stand on equal footing in making Mysore the Golden era of the Maharaja’s rule. Both complemented each other and both may have reservation on some issues but it did not take away the focus on the many splendoured development that made Mysore a model state. What characterises is the healthy respect they had for each other despite different points of view on certain issues which is a sharp contrast to the present day attitude. Sir M V followed his sterling value system in his work culture and in administrative capacity without which the all round development of Mysore would not have been possible. DVG in his writing makes a reference as to why the King preferred Sir MV as the Dewan over his senior H.V.Nanjundaiah. Of course both were men of great stature and H.V.Nanjundaiah became the first Vice Chancellor of the University of Mysoree where he distinguished himself. One simple question whether the development of Mysore could have been thought of without the services of Sir M.V should answer as to why both the King and the Dewan stand on equal footing each contributing in their own sphere.
why both the King and the Dewan stand on equal footing each contributing in their own sphere”
Setting aside whether Nalwadi preferred Nanjundaish or Sir MV, it is a debate for another day, Nalwadi as the Maharajah was not a run-of the-mill novice royal, but was well educated and trained thanks to Her Highness Vanivilasa Sannidhana, It is comprehensble that Nalwadi had in his mind the projects he wanted to put in place to modernise Mysore ( I have heard from my father and his friends , how well informed Nalwadi was , and how he was able to convince his boss the Governor General of India on projects that needed heavy funds and effort. He was no novice. Further , Nalwadi was his boss with the resources and authority as well as general plan of modernisation of Mysore, and Sir MV was his Dewan, who he appointed to put flesh on those plans and make them happen. The protocol did mean Nalwadi and Sir MV would not have stood together side -by-side in those days.. The answer is evident.
To add to what I posted earlier, arguing that Nalwadi was not a novice King, but had extraordinary knowledge of how to modernise Mysore. This excerpt is from the Wikipedia on the deathof Sir Struart Fraser in 1963. He was the principal tutor of young Nalwadi, the Fraser Town in Bengalore then was named after hi,
See :https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuart_Fraser_(diplomat):”In 1896 Fraser was selected to be tutor and governor to the minor Maharaja of the | important State of Mysore, then a boy of 12. During the formative six years. which elapsed before the Maharaja was invested with full powers by Lord Curzon he. had a thorough, if sometimes exacting, preparation for his life’s work. Throughout the 38 years of his beneficent rule he entertained a profound affection for his mentor. Aided by a succession of able Dewans and notably, during the last 15 years, bv the tenure of his old classmate Sir Mirza Ismail, the Maharaja enhanced the reputation of Mysore as a model state. .”.
Let Mysoreans give the credit to Nalwadi, the colossus , who had the foresight and knew who to appoint as the Dewan to carry out his plan of modernisation of Mysore. Nalwadi statue at the entrance of the Dam and Sir Mv;s at a suitable place iside.
Correction: not a Governor General those days but Viceroys.
Nalvadi Krishanraja Wodeyar wanted to help the drought stricken people of Mysore and Mandya and was looking for a solution. The then chief engineer of Mysore Sir M.V came with a plan to build the dam and after much oppostion from govt of Mysore and Madras, finally was approved by Nalwadi Wodeyar. Much of the credit for this dam goes to Sir M.V. Also he was credited to build state of the art crest gates at that time. His deep insight for the location of the dam, the then Kannambadi village where 3 rivers join (Kaveri, Laxmana theetha, and Hemavathi) was the best move. I would say 3 people statue should be erected. Wodeyar, Sir MV and Mirza Ismail (who planned and built Brindavan Gardens).
@Swamy You mention, 2 great Dewans: Sir MV and Sir Mirza Ismail. It is not the mere issue of erecting statue for Sir MV( and Sir Mirza), but whether these statues should stand ALONGSIDE the statue of Nalwadi, on an equal recognition.
Nalwadi was a visionary, the ruler with great foresight and he knew well the drought situation of particularly Mandya, besides the need for modernising Mysore.
In 1952,a visiting relative of mine who worked in the Palace as an official mentioned when the discussion of KRS Dam, which he was visiting in his old age,and which he first visited in 1932 along with other Palace officials when it was completed, that Nalwadi had an idea of a Dam-which engineers and officials knew for long was the only way to direct water to dry Mandya. SirMV as an engineer had precise plan of where the Dam has to be located and the best means of directing the Kaveri (Cauvery) water to Mandya.
Nalwadi had an extraordinary vision. His tutors led by Sir Stuart Fraser, not only taught him the educational subjects,but also took him around Mysore state to get the young man familiarised with his kingdom, its people and its necessities.
Nalwadi deserves to be recognised as the father of modern Mysore,hence his statue at the entrance of the Dam. The statue of Sir MV and Sir Mirza inside would be fitting tributes to them.
Conntruction of a Dam across Kaveri was not a new idea. There was already a small dam across Kaveri called Kallanai near Tiruchirapalli constructed in 2AD during the Chola period:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kallanai_Dam. I had visited it along with my relatives in 1950s, when it was still operational.I guess,it is still albeit with many renovations.
@Strangeworld. In my opinion, the dam was already named after Krishnaraja Wodeyar. A statue can be erected in his name, but Sir MV is much greater person than Wodeyar. He has been conferred much coveted Bharata Ratna and Sir from England. Wodeyar may be important in Mysore state, but Sir M.V is well known and respected in all of India and the world. His achievements are all visible thruought Karnataka Maharastra, Gujarat and even few foreign countries. Just because some short sighted goons protesting about the statue will not lower his status.. Ask anybody in Karnataka about KRS and who is respsonsible for it, first name comes up is Sir MV. To solve this problem of statue, I would say all three statues should be erected with Wodeyar in the middle and the two on his side. If Wodeyar was alive, he would do the same as what I said.
@swamy
You are simply ignorant.
@Hello, hello! – We cant believe such mentally retarded, dumb but extremely arrogant ASSSHOLES should be allowed to exist! You dont want to read anything and incapable of learning anything factual or logical or real! Your arrogance is sky high!! But all your Divya Gyan comes from where? Rahul Gandhi’s Tweets? You call others ignorant? Look at the mirror and I can promise you the Biggest Ignorant Arrogant idiotic asshole whose life must be a total waste and useless to the entire human civilization! !! Even human excreta turns out to be a fertilizer! you are much worse and waste of a human being! Shut up you King of Morons!
@Swamy
Just read about Nalwadi to learn how much he was popular all over the world. Read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krishna_Raja_Wadiyar_IV:uch were the strides that Mysore made during his period that Gandhiji was moved to remark that the Maharaja was a Rajarishi (“a saintly king”).[7] Paul Brunton, the British philosopher and orientalist; John Gunther, the American author; and the British statesman, Lord Samuel, were also among those who heaped praise on the king. Lord Sankey said during the Round table conference that Mysore was “the best administered state in the world”. Princes from other sections of India were sent to Mysore for administrative training. The Pandit Madan Mohan Malaviya described the Raja as “Dharmic” and Lord Wellington echoed the sentiment by calling Mysore’s industrial development “incredible”. In an obituary, The Times called him “a ruling prince second to none in esteem and affection inspired by both his impressive administration and his attractive personality”
Do you know who Lord Wellington was. He was the British PM and before that he defeated Napoleon at the battle of Waterloo, and even before that he was called Arthur Wellesley, who visited Srirangapatna in Tipu;s time, and his intelligence gathering allowed Tipu to be defeated later.
You have a lot of learning to do as Nalwadi was king and Sir MV as Dewan carrying out his vision.
But no point in arguing with the likes of you at all.
@Hello hello! Somebody using my handle and writing derogatory comments.. I pity that person and need mental help. I am for healthy discussion and don’t indulge in name calling or make vulgar comments..
@swamy I said, you are simply ignorant. Just look at how you respond like a retarded brain dead Indian, who you really are! All you can dish out is vile abuse, which Indians are famous for. Read, about Nalwadi, idiot, and learn. You are just an ignorant sod.