Formation of the Province of Odisha - Exam Questions
Part A: Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs)
1. The primary reason for the movement for a separate Odisha province was:
a) Economic exploitation by the British.
b) Religious discrimination against Odias.
c) The scattering of Odia-speaking tracts under different administrative units.
d) To gain independence from British rule.
Answer: c) The scattering of Odia-speaking tracts under different administrative units.
Rationale: Odia-speaking regions were fragmented across Bengal, Madras, and Central Provinces, leading to linguistic and cultural suppression.
2. Who is widely regarded as the 'Father of Odia Nationalism' and played a pivotal role in the Utkal Sammilani?
a) Gopabandhu Das
b) Harekrushna Mahtab
c) Madhusudan Das
d) Maharaja Krushna Chandra Gajapati
Answer: c) Madhusudan Das
Rationale: Madhusudan Das, known as 'Utkal Gourav', was the architect of the Odia unification movement.
3. The Utkal Sammilani (Utkal Union Conference) was founded in which year?
a) 1888
b) 1903
c) 1911
d) 1920
Answer: b) 1903
Rationale: The Utkal Sammilani was founded in Cuttack in 1903 to unite all Odia-speaking tracts.
4. Before its formation as a separate province, major Odia-speaking areas were administered under:
a) Only Bengal Presidency.
b) Bengal Presidency, Madras Presidency, and Central Provinces.
c) Only Central Provinces and Madras Presidency.
d) Bombay Presidency and Bengal Presidency.
Answer: b) Bengal Presidency, Madras Presidency, and Central Provinces.
Rationale: The fragmentation across these three administrative units was the core issue.
5. The demand for a separate Odisha province gained significant momentum during the period of:
a) Early 19th century industrialization.
b) The rise of linguistic nationalism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
c) The Sepoy Mutiny of 1857.
d) The formation of the Indian National Congress in 1885.
Answer: b) The rise of linguistic nationalism in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
Rationale: This period saw the strengthening of linguistic identities across India.
6. Which British administrative committee was appointed in 1931-32 to examine the possibility of forming a separate province for Odia-speaking people?
a) Simon Commission
b) Hunter Commission
c) O'Donnell Committee
d) Cripps Mission
Answer: c) O'Donnell Committee
Rationale: The O'Donnell Committee specifically dealt with the boundary demarcation and feasibility of a separate Odisha province.
7. The separate province of Odisha was formally created on:
a) April 1, 1930
b) April 1, 1936
c) August 15, 1947
d) January 26, 1950
Answer: b) April 1, 1936
Rationale: This date marks the formation of Odisha as India's first linguistically separate province.
8. Which of the following was a key challenge faced by Odia-speaking people due to their fragmentation under different provinces?
a) Economic prosperity.
b) Suppression of Odia language and culture in schools and administration.
c) Greater political representation.
d) Development of modern industries.
Answer: b) Suppression of Odia language and culture in schools and administration.
Rationale: This was a major grievance as their language was often replaced by the dominant language of the administering province.
9. Maharaja Krushna Chandra Gajapati was the ruler of which princely state in Odisha and played a crucial role in the formation of the province?
a) Mayurbhanj
b) Ganjam
c) Paralakhemundi
d) Keonjhar
Answer: c) Paralakhemundi
Rationale: Maharaja Krushna Chandra Gajapati of Paralakhemundi was a tireless advocate for the formation of Odisha and became its first Prime Minister.
10. The Government of India Act of which year provided the legal framework for the creation of the new province of Odisha?
a) 1909
b) 1919
c) 1935
d) 1947
Answer: c) 1935
Rationale: The Government of India Act of 1935 authorized the creation of new provinces, including Odisha and Sindh.
11. The demand for a separate province was articulated through various cultural and literary associations even before the Utkal Sammilani. Which of these was an early association?
a) Odisha Literary Society (Utkal Sahitya Samaj)
b) Ganjam Utkal Hitabadini Sabha
c) Alaka Ashram
d) Satyabadi Bana Bidyalaya
Answer: b) Ganjam Utkal Hitabadini Sabha
Rationale: Early associations like this played a role in raising awareness.
12. The Indian Statutory Commission, also known as the Simon Commission (1927), recommended:
a) Immediate independence for India.
b) The division of India into smaller linguistic states.
c) The amalgamation of Odia-speaking tracts into a separate province.
d) Greater representation for British officials in provincial councils.
Answer: c) The amalgamation of Odia-speaking tracts into a separate province.
Rationale: The Simon Commission's report of 1930 supported the formation of a separate Odisha province.
13. Which of the following was a significant aspect of the 'linguistic identity' movement in Odisha?
a) Emphasis on religious revivalism.
b) Promotion of industrialization.
c) Safeguarding and promoting the Odia language through literature, education, and administration.
d) Advocating for a separate currency.
Answer: c) Safeguarding and promoting the Odia language through literature, education, and administration.
Rationale: The protection and promotion of the Odia language was central to the identity movement.
14. The First Round Table Conference (1930-31) in London was important for the Odisha movement because:
a) It rejected all demands for provincial reorganization.
b) Maharaja Krushna Chandra Gajapati strongly advocated for a separate Odisha province.
c) Mahatma Gandhi specifically endorsed the Odia demand.
d) It led to the immediate creation of the province.
Answer: b) Maharaja Krushna Chandra Gajapati strongly advocated for a separate Odisha province.
Rationale: His forceful presentation at the RTC brought the Odia demand to the forefront of British policy-making.
15. The capital of the newly formed province of Odisha in 1936 was:
a) Puri
b) Cuttack
c) Bhubaneswar
d) Berhampur
Answer: b) Cuttack
Rationale: Cuttack served as the capital of Odisha until Bhubaneswar became the new capital after independence.
Part B: Short Answer Questions
1. What was the primary demand of the Odia linguistic movement?
Answer: The primary demand was the unification of all scattered Odia-speaking tracts, which were then distributed under the administrative control of Bengal, Madras, and Central Provinces, into a single, separate province based on linguistic identity.
2. Who is known as 'Utkal Gourav' and why is he significant in the context of Odisha's formation?
Answer: Madhusudan Das is known as 'Utkal Gourav' (Pride of Utkal). He is significant as the pioneer and driving force behind the Odia linguistic movement, who founded the Utkal Sammilani and tirelessly championed the cause for a separate Odisha province.
3. When and where was the Utkal Sammilani founded?
Answer: The Utkal Sammilani (Utkal Union Conference) was founded in 1903 in Cuttack.
4. Mention two challenges faced by Odia-speaking people due to their fragmentation under different administrations.
Answer: Two challenges were: 1) Suppression and neglect of the Odia language in schools, courts, and government offices (e.g., introduction of Bengali in schools). 2) Economic backwardness and lack of development in Odia-speaking areas due to neglect by non-Odia administrations.
5. Which British committee was specifically formed to demarcate the boundaries of the proposed Odisha province in the early 1930s?
Answer: The O'Donnell Committee (formed in 1931-32) was specifically constituted for this purpose.
6. Who was Maharaja Krushna Chandra Gajapati, and what was his key contribution to the formation of Odisha?
Answer: Maharaja Krushna Chandra Gajapati was the ruler of Paralakhemundi princely state. His key contribution was his relentless advocacy for a separate Odisha province at the Round Table Conferences in London and his persuasive efforts that significantly influenced British policymakers. He later became the first Prime Minister of Odisha.
7. Briefly explain the 'Amalgamation Movement' in the context of Odisha's formation.
Answer: The 'Amalgamation Movement' refers to the efforts to consolidate all scattered Odia-speaking territories, which were then divided among Bengal, Madras, and Central Provinces, into a single administrative unit, thus forming a unified Odia-speaking province.
8. What was the role of print media in strengthening the Odia linguistic identity movement?
Answer: Print media (newspapers, magazines like 'Utkal Dipika', 'Mukura', 'Asha') played a crucial role by articulating Odia grievances, promoting Odia language and literature, publishing nationalist songs and poems, and disseminating information about the movement, thereby fostering a sense of shared identity and unity.
9. When was the separate province of Odisha formally created, and what was its significance for India?
Answer: The separate province of Odisha was formally created on April 1, 1936. It was significant as it was the first Indian province to be formed purely on a linguistic basis, setting a precedent for future state reorganizations in independent India.
10. Which political act of the British Parliament provided the legal basis for the creation of the Odisha province?
Answer: The Government of India Act, 1935, provided the legal framework and authorization for the creation of new provinces, including Odisha.
Part C: Long Answer Questions (5-10 Marks Each)
1. Discuss the factors that led to the emergence of the movement for a separate Odia-speaking province. Trace its evolution from early associations to the formation of the Utkal Sammilani. (Approx. 10 marks)
Answer:
The movement for a separate Odia-speaking province was a unique and protracted struggle that emerged from a complex interplay of linguistic, cultural, economic, and political factors. It stands as a pioneering example of linguistic nationalism in India.
I. Factors Leading to the Emergence of the Movement:
Linguistic and Cultural Fragmentation: The primary and most significant cause was the arbitrary fragmentation of Odia-speaking territories under different administrative units after British conquests. Following the British acquisition of Odisha in 1803, Odia-speaking tracts were tagged with:
Bengal Presidency (main Odisha division - Cuttack, Puri, Balasore)
Madras Presidency (Ganjam, Koraput, Agency Tracts)
Central Provinces (Sambalpur, Phulbani)
This administrative division led to the neglect and even suppression of the Odia language and culture in schools, courts, and government offices in these regions, threatening the linguistic identity of the Odia people.
Threat to Odia Language and Identity: In non-Odia provinces, attempts were made to replace Odia with the dominant provincial languages (e.g., Bengali in Bengal Presidency, Telugu in Madras, Hindi in Central Provinces). This sparked intense resentment and a fear of linguistic extinction, galvanizing the intellectual elite to defend their mother tongue.
Economic Backwardness and Neglect: The fragmented Odia areas suffered from severe economic neglect and underdevelopment. Investments in infrastructure, education, and industry were minimal compared to the core areas of the respective provinces. This fueled a sense of marginalization and deprivation, strengthening the demand for a separate administration that would prioritize Odia interests.
Administrative Inefficiency: The administration of diverse linguistic groups under one province often led to inefficiency and a lack of understanding of local needs and customs, further alienating the Odia population.
Rise of Odia Middle Class and Intellectuals: The emergence of an educated Odia middle class, lawyers, journalists, and government employees, who were acutely aware of their cultural heritage and the plight of their people, played a crucial role in articulating and organizing the demand. They used print media and public platforms to voice grievances.
II. Evolution of the Movement (Early Associations to Utkal Sammilani):
The movement evolved in stages, beginning with localized efforts and gradually consolidating into a more organized provincial movement:
Early Local Associations (Late 19th Century):
Initially, various local associations sprang up in different Odia-speaking tracts to address specific grievances. Examples include the Utkal Sabha (Cuttack, 1882), Ganjam Utkal Hitabadini Sabha (Berhampur), and National Conference (Ganjam). These bodies submitted petitions to the government, highlighting the problems caused by fragmentation and advocating for unification.
Newspapers and periodicals like 'Utkal Dipika' (1866), 'Sambad Bahika', and 'Utkal Sahitya' played a vital role in creating awareness and fostering a sense of common Odia identity and language.
The Language Controversy: A major catalyst was the attempt to abolish Odia as the official language and medium of instruction in schools in Sambalpur (Central Provinces) in the late 19th century. This sparked a fierce linguistic agitation, mobilizing Odia intellectuals and public opinion.
Formation of the Utkal Sammilani (1903): The need for a unified platform to represent the diverse Odia-speaking areas led to the formation of the Utkal Sammilani (Utkal Union Conference) in 1903 at Cuttack.
Leadership: Madhusudan Das, regarded as the architect of modern Odisha, played the central role in its formation and leadership. Other prominent figures like Fakir Mohan Senapati, Gopabandhu Das, and Krushna Chandra Gajapati were also associated.
Objectives: The Sammilani's primary objective was the unification of all Odia-speaking tracts under a single administration. It also aimed at promoting the overall social, economic, and cultural development of the Odia people.
Activities: The Sammilani held annual sessions, passed resolutions, sent delegations to the British authorities in India and England, and mobilized public opinion through meetings and publications. It acted as a powerful voice for Odia aspirations.
Impact of Utkal Sammilani: The Utkal Sammilani successfully transformed a fragmented linguistic demand into a coherent political movement. It brought together various social strata, from princely rulers to common people, under a common banner, providing a unified and consistent voice for the Odia cause on the national stage.
The sustained efforts of these organizations and leaders, rooted in the urgent need to protect Odia linguistic identity and secure political and economic justice, laid the crucial groundwork for the eventual formation of the separate province of Odisha.
2. Detail the major events and the roles of various committees (e.g., O'Donnell Committee, Simon Commission) that contributed to the administrative recognition of the demand for a separate Odisha province. (Approx. 8-10 marks)
Answer:
The administrative recognition of the demand for a separate Odisha province was a protracted process, involving various committees, commissions, and political negotiations that gradually convinced the British authorities of the legitimacy and necessity of the Odia cause.
I. Early Demands and Proposals:
Utkal Sammilani (1903 onwards): After its formation, the Utkal Sammilani systematically presented memoranda and resolutions to the British government, articulating the demand for the unification of Odia-speaking areas.
Risley Circular (1903): The Government of India, following the recommendations of the Curzon administration, issued the Risley Circular proposing the amalgamation of Odia tracts of Central Provinces with Odisha Division under Bengal. This was a significant early step, though incomplete.
Partition of Bengal (1905): While the partition aimed at administrative convenience, it led to the transfer of Sambalpur and some princely states from the Central Provinces to the newly created province of Eastern Bengal and Assam, which included Odia-speaking parts. This partial unification, though controversial, kept the demand alive.
Bihar-Odisha Province (1912): When Bengal was reunited, a separate province of Bihar and Odisha was created. While it brought some Odia areas together, the Odias felt marginalized under the dominant Bihari leadership, intensifying the demand for a separate province.
II. Major Committees and Commissions:
Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms (1919) & Odisha: During the discussions for constitutional reforms, the Odia leaders pressed their case. The Montagu-Chelmsford Report acknowledged the principle of linguistic provinces in a limited way but did not immediately recommend the formation of Odisha. However, the subsequent Southborough Committee (1919) on Franchise recommended the creation of a sub-province of Orissa.
Orissa Committee (1921): The British Government formed the Orissa Committee under the chairmanship of A.C. Brett to inquire into the amalgamation of Odia-speaking areas. It conducted detailed surveys and hearings, further legitimizing the demand for a separate province.
Simon Commission (Indian Statutory Commission, 1927):
The Utkal Sammilani prepared a strong memorandum and presented it to the Simon Commission when it visited India.
The Commission's report, published in 1930, explicitly recognized the legitimacy of the Odia demand. It recommended the amalgamation of Odia-speaking tracts to form a separate province due to administrative convenience and distinct linguistic identity. This was a major breakthrough.
First Round Table Conference (1930-31):
Maharaja Krushna Chandra Gajapati of Paralakhemundi represented the Odia cause at the First Round Table Conference in London.
His eloquent and forceful presentation of the Odia case deeply impressed British policymakers, including Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald. He emphasized the distinct identity, economic backwardness, and administrative difficulties faced by the fragmented Odia people.
O'Donnell Committee (1931-32):
Following the recommendations of the Simon Commission and the deliberations at the Round Table Conference, the British Government appointed the O'Donnell Committee (also known as the Boundary Committee) under Sir Samuel O'Donnell.
Mandate: Its specific task was to determine the precise boundaries of the proposed new province of Odisha and to assess its financial viability.
Recommendation: The Committee's report, submitted in 1932, recommended the formation of a separate province of Orissa, comprising the existing Orissa Division, Angul, Khariar, and the greater part of the Ganjam Agency and Vizagapatam Agency. It also addressed the financial implications.
III. The Culmination:
The recommendations of the O'Donnell Committee, combined with the continued pressure from Odia leaders and the British government's policy shift towards provincial autonomy, paved the way.
The Government of India Act, 1935, incorporated provisions for the creation of new provinces, explicitly enabling the formation of Odisha (and Sindh).
Finally, by an Order-in-Council issued on March 3, 1936, the separate province of Odisha was formally constituted on April 1, 1936.
The journey to provincial formation was thus a meticulous process involving decades of persistent political lobbying, detailed administrative inquiries, and the eventual recognition by various British commissions and the highest levels of government that the Odia demand was legitimate and administratively feasible.
3. Analyze the long struggle that culminated in the formation of Odisha as the first linguistic state in India. Discuss its immediate and long-term significance for the people of Odisha and for the Indian nationalist movement. (Approx. 10 marks)
Answer:
The formation of Odisha as a separate province on April 1, 1936, was the culmination of a protracted and arduous struggle driven by linguistic and cultural identity. It holds immense significance, not just for the people of Odisha but also for setting a precedent in the broader Indian nationalist movement.
I. The Long Struggle for Formation:
The struggle for Odisha’s formation spanned over six decades, beginning in the late 19th century:
Initial Fragmentation (Post-1803): Following British conquest, Odia-speaking territories were arbitrarily fragmented and appended to Bengal, Madras, and the Central Provinces, leading to linguistic and cultural suppression, economic neglect, and administrative inconvenience.
Emergence of Linguistic Consciousness: This fragmentation spurred an intellectual awakening. Pioneers like Madhusudan Das, Fakir Mohan Senapati, and Gopabandhu Das began articulating Odia identity through literature, journalism, and public associations. The threat to the Odia language (e.g., in Sambalpur) acted as a powerful catalyst.
Early Associations and Petitions: Local bodies like Utkal Sabha, Ganjam Utkal Hitabadini Sabha, and National Conference (Ganjam) were formed to petition the British for unification.
The Utkal Sammilani (1903): This was the pivotal moment, unifying fragmented efforts into a coherent political movement under Madhusudan Das. It provided a powerful, organized voice for the Odia cause, holding annual sessions and submitting countless memoranda to the British authorities.
Political Lobbying and Committees:
The movement continuously lobbied during constitutional reforms (Montagu-Chelmsford).
The Simon Commission (1927) recommended the amalgamation of Odia tracts.
Maharaja Krushna Chandra Gajapati's powerful advocacy at the Round Table Conferences (1930-31) in London brought the issue to the imperial spotlight.
The O'Donnell Committee (1931-32) specifically recommended the creation of the province and demarcated its boundaries, addressing financial viability concerns.
Government of India Act, 1935: This Act provided the legal framework for the creation of new provinces, leading to the final notification on March 3, 1936, and the formal inauguration on April 1, 1936.
II. Immediate Significance for the People of Odisha:
Linguistic and Cultural Preservation: The greatest immediate gain was the safeguarding and promotion of the Odia language and culture. Odia became the official language of administration and education within the new province.
Unified Identity: For the first time in centuries, the Odia-speaking people were united under a single administration, fostering a stronger sense of collective identity and shared destiny.
Administrative Autonomy: The province now had its own legislative assembly and a responsible government, allowing Odia leaders to address the specific needs and developmental challenges of the region.
Economic Focus: The new administration could now prioritize the economic development of Odisha, addressing the long-standing issues of backwardness and neglect.
Political Empowerment: It provided a platform for Odia political leaders to emerge and exercise self-governance, preparing them for the challenges of independent India.
III. Long-Term Significance for the Indian Nationalist Movement:
First Linguistic State: Odisha became the first province in British India to be created purely on linguistic lines. This set a crucial precedent for the reorganization of states in independent India based on language.
Validation of Linguistic Nationalism: It demonstrated that linguistic identity was a legitimate and powerful basis for political and administrative reorganization within the colonial framework. This validated the demands of other linguistic groups across India.
Influence on Post-Independence Reorganization: The success of the Odia movement provided a strong impetus and model for the nationwide demand for linguistic states after independence, ultimately leading to the States Reorganisation Act of 1956.
Strengthening of Nationalist Aspirations: The sustained struggle, though focused on provincial autonomy, was intrinsically linked to the broader Indian nationalist movement. It showed that organized, peaceful agitation could yield results, inspiring other regions.
Contribution to Federal Structure: The creation of linguistic provinces contributed to the idea of a diverse yet unified India, where regional identities could be accommodated within a federal structure.
In conclusion, the formation of Odisha was not merely an administrative reshuffle but a landmark achievement born out of decades of relentless linguistic and political struggle. It secured the cultural identity and political future of the Odia people, while simultaneously shaping the trajectory of state formation and linguistic nationalism across the entire Indian subcontinent.
