9 | Gujarat states

The post-Independence integration of India’s princely states was a monumental task that required diplomacy, administrative foresight, and political will. While the spotlight often falls on the larger states like Hyderabad or Baroda and on regional unions such as Kathiawar and PEPSU, the integration of numerous small princely states in northern and southern Gujarat—including those in the Rewa Kantha, Mahi Kantha, Palanpur Agency, and Surat Agency—offers a compelling example of how fragmented sovereignties were absorbed to create coherent provincial governance. These territories eventually became part of the Bombay State, laying the foundation for modern-day Gujarat’s administrative landscape (Zubrzycki, 2023; Menon, 1956).

Background: A Fragmented Political Landscape

Before Independence, the northern Gujarat region—covering what are today Ahmedabad, Mehsana, Banaskantha, Sabarkantha, Panchmahal, and Surat districts—was dotted with over a hundred princely states of varying sizes. These included well-known entities like Idar, Bansda, Bajana, Chhota Udaipur, Balasinor, Lunavada, Rajpipla, and Santrampur, as well as many minor talukdari estates and non-salute states. These states fell under various colonial political agencies, such as:

• Mahi Kantha Agency

• Rewa Kantha Agency

• Palanpur Agency

• Surat Agency

Unlike Kathiawar, where a centralized union was formed, the political strategy in northern Gujarat involved direct merger into Bombay Province, with no intermediary state unions. This route was pursued partly due to the manageable size of these states and their proximity to British-administered districts. Menon made it clear that merger with Bombay Province was the ‘only possible arrangement’ for these Gujarat States, arguing that the justification for this was far stronger than for the Eastern or Deccan States. Rulers initially sought to form their own union or a joint union with Baroda, but Baroda's Maharajah rejected this. Rulers complained about being rushed, so a concession was made to delay the actual transfer of administration until 5 June, giving them eleven weeks to adjust their affairs (Memoranda on the Indian States, 1935; Menon, 1956).

Accession and Merger Strategy

Following the lapse of British paramountcy in August 1947, most of these states signed the Instrument of Accession, ceding control over defense, external affairs, and communications to the Indian Dominion. However, the goal of full administrative integration required going beyond accession. In early 1948, the States Ministry—under Sardar Patel’s leadership and V.P. Menon’s direction—began the process of negotiating full merger agreements with these smaller states (White Paper, 1950).

V.P. Menon records that these mergers were largely voluntary and smooth, facilitated by sustained dialogue and reassurances regarding the status and privileges of the rulers. The Government of India offered privy purses, retention of titles, and protection of personal property as part of the agreement, encouraging rulers to relinquish sovereignty in favor of democratic governance under Bombay Province.

Administrative Absorption into Bombay Province

The strategy adopted by the States Ministry was to group these smaller states with adjacent British districts. For example:

• Bansda, Sachin, and Bardoli area states were merged with Surat District.

• Idar, Danta, and Vadgam became part of the Sabarkantha and Banaskantha districts.

• Chhota Udaipur, Santrampur, and Balasinor were integrated into the Panchmahal and Kheda regions.

• Rajpipla, one of the largest states in the region, was absorbed into the Bharuch administrative unit.

  
  

Other smaller states in the Rajputana region with Gujarati speaking population were also considered to be merged with Bombay. A small state in Western Rajputana, Danta was merged with Bombay in November 1948 after its Maharana agreed due to law and order problems posed by the predominantly Bhil population. Another small state on the border of Rajputana, Sirohi's future was disputed between Gujarat (Bombay) and Rajasthan. A portion (Abu Road and Dilwara tehsils) was merged with Bombay, and the remainder with Rajasthan, after considering the wishes of the people and geographical contiguity. It was initially administered centrally before its division (White Paper, 1950).

By mid-1949, nearly all these territories had been fully merged into the Bombay Province. Unlike the union models in Kathiawar or Saurashtra, these areas were administered directly by Bombay’s provincial government, with district collectors and administrative officers assuming charge from the princely establishments.

Menon emphasizes that this absorption did not encounter significant resistance. Many rulers accepted the merger as inevitable, especially in the face of growing popular mobilization and the realization that independence was not a feasible option. Moreover, the decentralized nature of the region’s political geography—where many states were too small to sustain independent administration—made merger a pragmatic necessity (Menon, 1956).

The Role of the Political Agencies

The integration was facilitated by the legacy of colonial political structures. The Rewa Kantha and Mahi Kantha Agencies, for instance, had already introduced some uniformity in revenue and judicial administration among the states. Political Agents played a mediating role between the Indian States Ministry and the rulers. Their familiarity with local administrative challenges helped expedite the merger process and transition to provincial governance.

One notable administrative achievement was the early deployment of Indian Civil Service (ICS) officers into these newly merged areas. This ensured that the transition from princely rule to democratic governance was both orderly and aligned with the norms of the Indian Constitution being drafted at the time (Jeffrey, 1978; Menon, 1956).

From Merger to Reorganization: The Legacy

The integration of these small Gujarat states into Bombay laid the groundwork for the future linguistic reorganization of states. When the States Reorganization Commission (SRC) was constituted in 1953, it recognized that the Gujarat-speaking districts of Bombay, including the formerly princely areas of Mehsana, Sabarkantha, Panchmahal, Surat, and others, had distinct linguistic and cultural characteristics. The earlier integration of these princely territories into a composite administrative system had made it easier to realign them during the 1960 bifurcation of Bombay State into Maharashtra and Gujarat.

Importantly, many of the princely state capitals—such as Lunavada, Balasinor, Chhota Udaipur, and Rajpipla—retained local administrative relevance as taluka headquarters or municipal towns, preserving their historical importance within the new framework (White Paper, 1950; Menon, 1956).

Dangs and Vatrak Kantha Thana Estates integration

The Dangs territory was situated between the Surat and Nasik districts of Bombay. It was divided among fourteen chiefs, thirteen of whom were Bhils and one was a Kokani. Its population primarily consisted of Kokanis, Bhils, and Warlis. Before integration, the Dangs was under the administrative charge of a Deputy Political Agent, with headquarters at Ahwa. The Government of India determined that the future of this small territory lay with Bombay. On 19 January 1948, the Governor-General issued an order under section 290 of the Government of India Act of 1935, formally merging the Dangs with Bombay Province. Recognizing its Adivasi population, the merger order stipulated that the Dangs should form a separate district and be administered by a Collector, ensuring some safeguards upon its immediate inclusion into a province like Bombay (Menon, 1956).

The Vatrak Kantha Estates were part of the old Baroda Western India and Gujarat States Agency. The total area covered by the Dangs and these estates was 870 square miles, with a population of 48,498. Specific areas included Ged, Polajpur, Morvad, Koprupur, Mahisa, Porda, and Dana. The Vatrak Kantha Thana Estates were included in the territories of the Dominion of India and became part of the Bombay Province through the same Governor-General's Order (No. 127-P, dated 19 January 1948) that integrated the Dangs. After integration, the estates of Ged, Polajpur, and Morvad became part of the Ahmedabad district, while Koprupur, Mahisa, Porda, and Dana became part of the Kaira district (Menon, 1956).

References:

• Jeffrey, R. (Ed.). (1978). People, princes and paramount power: Society and politics in the Indian princely states. Oxford University Press.

  
  

• Memoranda on the Indian States. (1935). Manager of Publications.

  
  

• Menon, V. P. (1956). The Story of Integration of the Indian states. Orient Blackswan.

  
  

• Ministry of States. (1950). White Paper on Indian States. Government of India. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/White_Paper_on_Indian_States_(1950)

  
  

• Zubrzycki, J. (2023). Dethroned: Patel, Menon and the integration of Princely India. Juggernaut Books.