Politics in Maharashtra, nowadays, is dominated by unexpected happenings. The latest to test this phenomenon is Shiv Sena leader Uddhav Thackeray and his spokesman Sanjay Raut. The incident concerned is an INDIA bloc meet in New Delhi on Thursday.  Attended by about a hundred top opposition personalities, Uddhav, his son Aaditya and Raut were seen sitting in the last row at the venue, which was Rahul Gandhi’s residence. As soon as the clips of the meet were flashed by TV channels, detractors of Uddhav and his Sena were overjoyed. Seizing the opportunity to throw barbs at the adversary, they demeaned Uddhav for gulping such ‘an insult to Maharashtra’ by agreeing to sit in such an insignificant place. A silent protest was held in Mumbai to ‘apologise’ to Sena founder Balasaheb Thackeray in front of his statue for his son’s meek acceptance of this humiliation. Significantly, just a few hours ago, Uddhav had declared in the national capital that no third party would be involved in his Sena’s alliance with cousin Raj Thackeray’s Maharashtra Navnirman Sena for the coming local body elections. Uddhav’s announcement is interpreted as a signal to the Congress party that it should not depend on the Sena (UBT) for the show of strength. Given the way politics in Delhi is played, deputy chief minister Eknath Shinde’s Sena has lost no time in capitalising on the incident. A retaliation by Uddhav is on the cards.

Bungalow No 5, Sunehri Bagh Road, is the Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi’s new official address. With voter fraud as the main menu of the house warming, Rahul played the host at his new residence on August 7 evening. His mother Sonia and Priyanka let him have all the spotlight and attention. He was seen interacting with all guests. Congress allies like Dr Farooq Abdullah of the National Conference and UBT Sena leader Uddhav Thackeray and his wife Rashmi were among the guests.   He made a PowerPoint presentation to top opposition leaders on the “vote theft” in Karnataka — the one that he had done for the press earlier. Rahul claimed that internal surveys conducted by the Congress had projected wins in 16 of Karnataka’s 28 Lok Sabha seats, but the party ended up winning only 9. He used this discrepancy to allege “definite voter fraud,” once again pointing fingers at the Election Commission. Experts feel this line of reasoning is deeply flawed. Internal polls are neither transparent nor independently verified, and often reflect the optimism of campaign teams more than ground realities. If internal polls were a foolproof benchmark for electoral outcomes, then by that logic, the BJP should have cried foul for not crossing the 400-seat mark it had projected. He questioned how the BJP, despite completing two terms at the Centre, managed to secure a third consecutive win. “Anti-incumbency hits every party in every democracy,” he said, suggesting that the absence of such sentiment pointed to manipulation. The absence of anti-incumbency is not proof of fraud. Voters re-elect governments when they perceive stability, delivery, and leadership, particularly in the absence of a compelling alternative. India has seen this before under leaders like Nehru and Indira Gandhi, just as Germany did under Angela Merkel.

Telangana CM Revanth Reddy’s controversial remarks about eliminating anyone whether rich or in any position,” if he comes against Rahul Gandhi’s command or rule”, Telangana is going to write his death order. His remarks had gone viral as he was seen to be taking on PM Narendra Modi on behalf of Rahul Gandhi. Telangana Congress leaders are however now convinced that Reddy, who had initially been in BJP, was perhaps indulging only in a mock fight or noora kushti to please the Gandhis and earn their trust. Apparently, Union Minister Prahlad Joshi conveyed to Telangana Congress leaders visiting him that Revanth Reddy speaking strongly against PM Modi and attacking him served a purpose. Perhaps, he was doing it with PM Modi’s blessings. “Unless you attack me, the Congress leadership will not trust you,” Modi had advised CM sometime back. It may be noted that CM Reddy’s remarks were made at a Congress protest rally held to push for President’s assent to the bill passed by the Telangana government to ensure 42% reservation for OBCs in local governance. It was seen as a strong message being sent across to PM Modi. However, within hours after Revanth Reddy’s warning, Telangana CMO clarified that the CM had used only a figurative political expression such as — mithi mein mila denge — to emphasise state’s strong resolve to defeat “anti-democratic forces” through “democratic means”.

In a significant political shake-up, West Bengal chief minister and Trinamool Congress (TMC) supremo Mamata Banerjee has appointed her nephew and party’s national general secretary, Abhishek Banerjee, as the leader of the TMC Parliamentary Committee. He replaces veteran leader Sudip Bandyopadhyay who has been ailing for some time now. The move comes as Mamata appears to brace for anti-incumbency ahead of the upcoming state assembly elections after three terms in office. Simultaneously, Mamata replaced senior advocate and Sreerampore MP Kalyan Banerjee as Chief Whip with Barasat MP Dr Kakoli Ghosh Dastidar. Birbhum MP Shatabdi Roy has been promoted as Deputy Leader of the party in Parliament. The reshuffle underscores the TMC’s need for stability and strategic leadership at the national level as Parliament becomes a key platform for the Opposition to confront the BJP. Sources say Kalyan’s removal stems from his inability to contain a prolonged feud with Krishnanagar MP Mahua Moitra. At a recent internal meeting, Mamata expressed anger over some MPs damaging the party’s image, sharply criticising Kalyan for poor coordination and for not stepping up during the absence of leaders like Sudip Bandyopadhyay and Saugata Roy. An incensed Kalyan tendered his resignation and questioned Mamata’s understanding of Parliament’s workings. Despite Abhishek urging him to remain quiet until the INDIA bloc dinner hosted by Rahul Gandhi on August 7, Kalyan continued to attack both Mamata and Mahua publicly. While Mamata initially resisted accepting his resignation, persistent defiance left her and Abhishek with no choice. The overhaul also signals Abhishek’s growing influence and a generational shift within the TMC, long marked by tension between the old and new guards.

Trade unionism seems to have lost focus in India. It has failed to reform itself to keep pace with economic reforms and globalisation, and changing job scenarios. It is also facing the biggest leadership crisis. The poor public and industry response to the nationwide strike call by 10 central trade unions on July 9, 2025 once again exposed the irrelevance of such an action in a country where the informal sector employs nearly 44 crore workers today, representing 85% of the total workforce. The informal sector encompasses a wide range of activities and workers, including those in agriculture, construction, small factories, domestic work, and various other self-employed and micro-enterprise roles. Workers in this sector don’t enjoy job or wage protection. As a result, the old-style trade unionism has become irrelevant in the present-day scenario. The so-called central trade unions exist mostly in the public sector where they play some constructive role in the collective bargaining, especially for periodical wage settlement. The shrinking public sector is a matter of concern to them. However, they could do little when the government decided to hand over the control of IPCL, a highly profit-making public sector enterprise to the Ambani group’s Reliance Industries. Trade unions also made no attempt to prevent total privatisation of BALCO in favour of Anil Agarwal-promoted Sterlite Industries (now Vedanta) . Of course, the prestigious VSNL to the Tata Group. Between 2014 and 2024, the government disinvested from as many as 179 central PSEs without any resistance from the trade unions. This explains why workers do not trust trade unions. Today’s trade unions lack the leadership of those in the 1970s such as Sripad Dange, BT Ranadive, Satish Loomba, George Fernandes, Mahesh Desai. Few will disagree that currently, the trade union movement in India lacks proper leadership and focus, particularly in the face of economic reforms and globalization.

The release of Son of Sardaar 2 was notably overshadowed by a fierce competition with Dhadak 2, as both films contended for screen space during the ongoing box office success of Saiyaara. Despite the latter’s impressive performance, which left exhibitors reluctant to allocate screens to Son of Sardaar 2, the film ultimately managed to secure a substantial release. The makers had hoped that by postponing their film by a week, they would allow Saiyaara to run its course, thus creating a safer release window. However, to their dismay, Saiyaara continued to dominate the box office, raking in significant revenue even in its second weekend. Opening with a disappointing collection of Rs 7.25 crore on Day one, Son of Sardaar 2 fell short of expectations, particularly given its substantial production budget of approximately Rs 70 crore. It experienced a modest increase on Day two at Rs 8.25 crore and Rs 9.25 crore on Day three (Sunday), bringing its weekend collection to around Rs 25 crore. This figure is considered inadequate for a film of its scale, as even the prequel was just an average fare released in 2012. Critics and audiences alike were quick to point out the film’s outdated humor and weak character development, particularly in Ajay Devgn’s portrayal of the titular “Innocent Sardar.” The casting of Devgn in a role that required a more innocent and naïve demeanor felt misaligned, leading to a perception of the character as a caricature rather than a relatable figure. The writing and overall execution suffered from a lack of freshness, which significantly diminished the film’s appeal. Ultimately, the failure of Son of Sardaar 2 can be attributed to a combination of poor script choices by Ajay Devgn , drawing unfavourable comparisons to his past disasters like Bhola and Auro Me Kaha Dum Tha.

Controversial film ‘Khalid ka Shivaji’ will be removed from the Cannes listings through legal and administrative action following a public outcry, which had alleged that the movie distorts history and hurts public sentiments. Maharashtra cultural affairs minister Ashish Shelar said that it will be investigated how the film was submitted to the Cannes Film Festival by the state machinery in his department. The principal objection is that the film wrongly portrays the legacy of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj. The state government has requested the Centre to revoke the film’s censor certification and halt its screenings. As a result, Central authorities have issued urgent notices to the film’s producers and director Raju More. There are half a dozen objections cited by the film’s critics but the main pertains to a depiction that Shivaji Maharaj had constructed a mosque at his capital, Raigad. Clarifying his side, More has claimed that there are mentions of such a construction in several references. For instance, the Kulaba Gazetteer published by the Union government in 1964 says on page 928 about the mosque and even gives its measurements. Similar mentions are found, he said, pleading that it is the job of the historians to write history and film makers create their works based on that information. In a retort, Hindu Mahasangh leader Anand Dave has appealed to all cinema hall owners in Pune not to screen the movie, alleging that history was tampered with due to such depictions. Dave has taken a strong objection to the film’s title itself.

“The best brains of the nation may be found on the last benches of the classroom”. This was former President of India, Dr A P J Abdul Kalam’s take on students dubbed as backbenchers for lagging behind in academic and co-curricular activities. Kerala, which has made advanced strides in the education and health sector, however has a different take on the backbencher concept. General Education Minister, V Sivankutty has pointed out that being branded a ‘backbencher’ could impact a student’s confidence level. The state government is considering a proposal to change the seating arrangement in classrooms from the conventional row system to U-shaped model.  A committee of experts is being constituted to suggest the best seating pattern for the state’s education system. Interestingly, the Minister has derived his inspiration from a Malayalam movie Sthanarthi Sreekuttan  in which a school student proposes a change in the conventional seating pattern after being humiliated for being a backbencher. A section of academics has welcomed the proposal as it would enable the teacher to give equal attention to all students. According to J Prasad, former director of the State Council for Educational Research and Training, the semi-circular seating arrangement has been informally implemented in schools where classrooms have been built according to latest infrastructure standards. The general take is that such seating arrangements will ensure that teachers have direct eye contact, proximity towards students and two-way engagement, making the classroom sessions more vibrant. However, there is a contrarian view too. Some academicians are asking how superficial changes to classroom seating could improve the teaching-learning process? There is no scientific study to establish the efficacy of a semi-circular seating arrangement, says Prof Amruth G Kumar, Department of Education, Central University of Kerala.