The Republic Day of India commemorates the date on which the Constitution of India came into force replacing the Government of India Act 1935 as the governing document of India on 26 January 1950. The date 26 January was chosen to honour the memory of the declaration of independence of 1930. It is one of the three national holidays in India, and while the main parade, Republic Day Parade takes place at the Rajpath, in the national capital New Delhi, where the president views the parade, state capitals also have their state celebrations.
Although India obtained its independence on 15 August 1947, it did not yet have a permanent constitution; instead, its laws were based on the modified colonial Government of India Act 1935, and the country was a Dominion, with George VI as head of state and Earl Mountbatten as Governor General. On 28 August 1947, the Drafting Committee was appointed to draft a permanent constitution, with Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar as chairman. While India's Independence Day celebrates its freedom from British Rule, the Republic Day celebrates the coming into force of its constitution. (Source: Wikipedia)
S. Muralidharan, Executive Director, Knowledge Foundation & Campus Around the Corner
01 25 2011 15:24:15 +0000
Many people like you can't digest and tolerate the real facts of life and try to find solace in what they are made to accept by others may be only on paper, not in practice. It is irrelevant for me whether you accept my views or not. On the other hand, I have never requested or compelled you to accept my views. But, you cannot compel me not to post my views if some one invites me to offer my comments and I differ with views of any person. You have posted your views, not mine, and I have posted my own views, not yours. But your expectation from me, itself, is anti-sovereign, as you don't like me to express my views. I don't have two faces and don't hide my true feelings like others, irrespective of whether some one likes or not. I have been and am now also a frank person.
Of course, your own opinion seems to be contradictory in itself, and denotes as if you are not firm in your original opinion about sovereignty. Your two posts clearly indicate that you are confused about your own opinion, as at first you have supported the view on sovereignty as "Subjugated under External Pressure" and now you have posted your views in support of the "sovereign nation". BUT, I am still firm in my views. Naturally you had a compulsion to oppose your original opinion and post your opinion on the opposite side of your own original opinion also, may that be with the sole object of opposing my views. That indicates your own stand about anything. You should not have expected any FALSE appreciation for anything from my side. I believe in what is in practice, not merely on paper. Bu, your post has given me clear indication that you believe what is in paper, which even if not be in practice.
PS Dhingra, CEO & Vigilance & Transformation Management Consultant, Dhingra Group of Management & Educational Consultants
01 27 2011 07:34:25 +0000
Do you think everything on paper is fact? You very well know, facts and fallacies, both are on paper. There is a clear distinction between what is on paper and what is in practice. Here we have not been asked to issue a passport, or degree for qualification, or death certificate to any one on paper. Here we have been required to discuss, what is true and what is false about an issue. So what is false, I have stated. But you have first stated that as false and thereafter treated that as true. What is this strategy of yours?