Saurashtra Patidars ditch BJP, but Patels in cities remain loyal to Modi

Patidars have left a strong imprint on the Gujarat assembly elections and even though they may not have prevented BJP from winning for the sixth consecutive time, many would be happy that the ruling party’s tally has been reduced to double digits.

Out of 52 seats where Patidar component is 20% and more, BJP won 28 and Congress

23. An independent candidate won the Lunawada seat. The figure in 2012 was 36 for BJP, 14 for Congress and two for Gujarat Parivartan Party (GPP). Quite clearly, this is a distinct improvement for Congress.


The strong performance by Congress in Saurashtra (Congress 30, BJP 23, NCP 1) is also being attributed to Patidar support though agrarian issues may have played a bigger role. Analysts are also pointing at reverse consolidation of other castes which helped BJP in the other three regions. At the village level, other castes are at odds with the Patidars who are envied for their political clout, wealth, large land holdings, enterprise and remittances from abroad.

At the root of the success of the Congress formula of KHAM (Kshatriya-Harijan-Adivasi-Muslim) in 1985 was this caste conflict. The formula alienated the Patidars and many of them developed a deep dislike for the party. This disconnect was finally bridged in 2017 with Hardik Patel’s Patidar Anamat Andolan Samiti (PAAS) extending full support to Congress.

The aggression of Patidars may have alienated other communities resulting in a lower number of Patidar MLAs — from 47 in 2012 to 44 in 2017. These include 25 Leuva Patidars and 19 Kadva Patidars.

Two PAAS conveners — Lalit Vasoya from Saurashtra and Kirit Patel from Patan — won from Dhoraji and Patan seats, respectively. However, other PAAS-backed candidates, including Dhiru Gajera from Varachha, Ashok Jirawala from Kamrej, and B M Mangukia from Thakkarbapanagar, were defeated. Besides, BJP wins in Patidar strongholds of Surat and Mehsana indicate that Hardik may have had a limited impact on the elections.

Hardik, the biggest crowd puller after Modi, cut an isolated picture as he addressed media with a handful of his supporters as he blamed EVM tampering for BJP’s win. “I have been warning for three days now that a software company aligned with BJP has been tampering EVMs. There were many seats in Surat, Rajkot and Ahmedabad where BJP has won with a margin of 500 to 1,000 votes. This was made possible due to EVM tampering,” said Hardik.

C K Patel, president of Patidar Organisation Committee (POC), a consortium of six Patel organisations, claimed that the quota agitation did not make any impact in Surat or Saurashtra. “BJP has been wiped out in Saurashtra due to local issues like problems faced by farmers and small industries but Surat did not have any big issues against the government.”

Girish Patel, senior lawyer and activist, said that the Patidar anger was not converted into votes in Surat unlike some regions in Saurashtra. “Patidars in Surat, including those who have migrated from Saurashtra, are more affluent. The Patels from Saurashtra who migrated to Surat, are cut off from their roots… they are insensitive towards the issue of farmers and unemployed youths.”