MUMBAI: Ever since Kohinoor Mills No 3, one of the defunct textile units at Dadar here, was bought for Rs. 421 crores by Shiv Sena leader Manohar Joshi's son and others, questions have been raised how the party justified the purchase, given that it opposed the sale of mill land in the past, and how this will affect its image as a "sons of the soil" organisation.

Sena's trade union affiliates say the party's image among mill workers will not be affected as the Bharatiya Kamgar Sena (BKS) has only a marginal presence among them.

Suryakant Mahadik, president of the BKS, formed in 1969, said the union focussed on the services and manufacturing sector — in five star hotels, services industry, airlines, hospitals, engineering units, automobile industry, and schools and banks.

"Though the Girni Kamgar Sena, a Sena affiliate, has some presence among the mill workers, our role was independent as Balasaheb (Thackeray) did not support the 1982 strike. He wanted to solve problems through negotiations. At that time, his stand was unpopular but I feel he stands vindicated now. More recently, we did oppose the sale of land in the Dadar, Parel and Lalbaug pockets, but we also wanted to ensure justice to the workers. We are against the closure of industries and we believe in negotiations," he said.

The BKS has a presence in 2,000 units, 90 per cent of which are in Maharashtra, and has five lakh members. Mr. Mahadik said it was Maharashtra's largest union. The BKS was also entering the unorganised sector in a big way, he said.

On Kohinoor Mills, he said the sale was legal and Mr. Joshi promised justice to the workers.

G.B. Gawde, Director of the Ambedkar Institute for Labour Studies, sponsored by the Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh (RMMS), said the Sena had played a limited role in the mill workers' struggle and it was the RMMS, which covered nearly 90 per cent of the workers.

In the 1980s, the RMMS had a membership of 1.5 lakh workers but today it was down to 20,000-25,000. The few textile units still functioning employ 100-odd workers each, mostly on contract. There has been no fresh recruitment in the mill since 1990 and workers are idling away in many places.

"The Sena has not made any contribution to the struggle of mill workers," said Datta Iswalkar of the Girni Kamgar Sangharsh Samiti (GKSS). The Sena opposed Datta Samant, who led the Kamgar Aghadi during the 1982 textile strike, he said.

"This was an opportunity for them to create a base but they did not use it. They now favour the millowners," he said. Being a "sons of the soil" party, the Sena should have opposed the closure of the mills, said Mr. Gawde.

As the party controlling the Municipal Corporation, which gives permission for buildings and construction, the Sena should have opposed the development of mill land. When it came to land and real estate, there seemed to be little difference between the Congress and the Sena, he said.

The Sena's role in the mill struggle has always been anti-Left, according to Neera Adarkar, architect and co-author of a book on mill workers. Ms. Adarkar said the Congress used the Shiv Sena to combat the Left unions.

But the Sena had a strong base among tenants who lived on the mill premises and it raised the issue of housing for workers.

"We demanded workers' right to housing and the need to preserve the industrial character of central Mumbai. But the sale of mill land can change the character of a middle class locality like Dadar, for instance, a stronghold of the Sena, and displace the common people from there," says Ms. Adarkar.

© Copyright 2000 - 2009 The Hindu