The longstanding debate over the division of Belgaum district has resurfaced, as Public Works Minister Satish Jarkiholi suggested that the government is giving it serious consideration. During a recent press briefing, he proposed the division of Belgaum into separate districts of Belgaum, Chikkodi, and Gokak.
Jarkiholi highlighted the challenges of administering the current expansive Belgaum district, emphasizing its size and population. To support his stance, Mr. Jarkiholi compared the population of the entire Udupi district, which stands at nine lakh, to that of Belgaum taluk alone, also at nine lakh. He argued that this discrepancy necessitates the division of Belgaum into at least three separate districts. The Minister had previously made a similar statement during his Independence Day address last year.
Sanjiv Badiger, the president of the Chikkodi separate district agitation committee, expressed his approval of the decision. He mentioned that their agitation for over 50 years had been in favor of this outcome. He added that they would feel a sense of relief if the government were to consider the proposal.
According to the latest census, Belgaum district has a population exceeding 54 lakh. It encompasses 18 Assembly seats across 14 taluks and comprises over 1,500 villages/hamlets organized into 506 gram panchayats. Following the delimitation of taluks, the average number of taluks per district in the state is seven, contrasting with the 14 taluks in Belgaum.
A former IAS officer, who previously held the position of Regional Commissioner in Belgaum, expressed strong support for the division of the district, citing administrative convenience as a primary reason.
According to him, dividing the district would benefit the public by increasing the presence of All-India Service officers and other district-level officials, as well as facilitating the establishment of numerous departmental offices at the district level. Additionally, he emphasized that smaller districts would enhance rural development by allowing officers to closely oversee the implementation of various schemes.
The issue remains contentious for primarily two reasons. Firstly, Kannada organizations are against the division, fearing it could result in consolidating Marathi-speaking villages within a smaller district. This could potentially bolster the claims of parties like Maharashtra Ekikaran Samiti, advocating for the merger of such areas with Maharashtra. Secondly, there is disagreement among some legislators and leaders regarding the selection of the district headquarters. Some argue for locating it in a town like Gokak, which is perceived as a stronghold of the politically influential Jarkiholi brothers.
Some leaders from Bailhongal oppose the idea of being included in a potential Gokak district and instead advocate for the formation of their own Bailhongal district. Shivarangan Bolannanavar, president of the Bailhongal district agitation committee, stated that Bailhongal has historically served as the seat of the sub-divisional magistrate since British times, thus justifying the demand for a separate district. The committee members have issued a warning of staging protests if their demand for a Bailhongal district is not met, claiming support from Mahantesh Koujalagi, the Congress MLA for Bailhongal. Similar, albeit weaker, demands have also emerged from leaders in Athani, Ramdurg, and Raibag taluks.
Ashok Chandaragi, who leads Kannada organizations in the district, stated that the committee has urged the government to postpone addressing the issue until the border conflict with Maharashtra is resolved. He highlighted previous instances where similar proposals were made but were retracted following protests by Kannada organizations. Chandaragi referenced the resistance faced by the proposal to establish the Chikkodi district in 1997 under the tenure of Chief Minister J.H. Patel, which was eventually abandoned.
Chandaragi noted that another proposal in 2007 was also abandoned. He expressed disappointment that in 2020, when the Vijayanagara district was formed, the state government did not address the concerns of Belgaum.
