The perspective this time was slightly different. The people would exercise the franchise on the basis of the performance of a shortlived government. It was not as if that we had achieved much but we had left a mark all the same. Despite attacks from all sides, the CPI(M) had emerged as a party which stood for firm policies and welfare measures. It had come to be known as a symbol of hope.

The Congress was having restless nights. They realised that the people were behind the CPI (M). Thus they started a disinformation campaign against us in right earnest. The bourgeoisie press started helped them to the hilt. Statements of Congress leaders and news related to them covered the front pages of these papers. There was a certain monotony about this relentless tirade which verged on gross falsehood and distortions.

The Congress and other non-Communist forces started campaigning that the CPI(M) did not believe in the Constitution and the democratic character of the nation. Apparently, any participation of the CPI (M) in the state government would harm the polity of India. They had no opposition to any non-Congress government without the CPI (M). The Congress had become desperate by then; they were intent on destroying the unity that the people had struggled to achieve against its non-democratic policies. The Congress had also realised that it would be unable to face the uncompromising challenges held forth by the CPI(M). The strategy was to split the United Front at any cost.

The law and order sector was also targetted in the disinformation campaign. The CPI(M) was singled out as the main party responsible for the deteriorating law and order situation. In the run-up to the elections, the bourgeoisie press went overboard and carried unimaginable stories of mythical proportions. But we were used to this. Mountains were made out of molehills and even minor incidents were exaggerated in such a fashion that there could possibly be no words to describe the enormity of the lies. The intention was clear; the people were being provoked to come out against us.

But it was not as if we were not expecting this. The former United Front government had faced such attacks. We had failed to understand that a ruse was being made in the name of "deteriorating law and order;" where these self-proclaimed protectors of the law were during the oppressive regimes of the Congress government during the 50s and 60s was hard to comprehend ! But despite the relentless attacks by our enemies and disinformation campaign on the law and order situation, the people of the state knew that it was the United Front which had provided them security and safety. This was something that nobody could deny. The press thus could not harm us in any major way. In an appeal timed with the elections, we said,

"We assure the people that we will not allow any attempt to curb their independence in the name of protecting law and order. But we are sad today that the state government does not have enough powers to work for the total welfare of the people and protect their democratic rights. We have joined the United Front because we want to meet the peoples' demand and give them permanent democratic rights. We also demand more powers for the state and pledge to work unitedly in the struggle against the government in Delhi. The importance of greater powers and federalism in the system becomes more apparent in the face of the Kerala example where the Centre misused the Constitution to corner the United Front Government because we had refused to clamp down on the agitation by Union Government employees there. We expect the wholehearted support of the people of West Bengal and appeal to others to ignore the devious plots by our opponents and the enemies of the people."

The Congress and its newspapers started saying that they could not understand why the CPI(M) was interested in power since we had said that the state governments had limited powers. This case was made out despite the fact that we had made our stand vis-à-vis participation in government absolutely clear. But the boring campaign to confuse the people continued as usual. The need for participation in government was simple; this was a clearly delineated policy by which more and more people could be drawn towards our struggle. The Congress continued to harp on this line only to confuse the people.

Some of our critics — the "Leftists" were among them too—questioned our policy about participation in government and dubbed us as opportunistic and unprincipled. Again, we had to issue a rejoinder with the state committee of the CPI (M) saying that we would form alliances with all democratic parties which were against the Congress. These alliances would be forged on the basis of a common minimum programme. While we could not possibly expect these parties to imbibe our philosophy, at the same time, we could not judge their democratic character by an unrealistic yardstick. We were only concerned about their anti-Congress antecedents and whether they were really politically inclined against the party and its policies and how far they were willing to go with us in our fight against the Congress. And finally, we had to be sure about their position and intention regarding the common minimum programme and its implementation. This was the only way that unity could be achieved among the democratic forces, given the current situation in the country. Also, this was the only practical solution to foil the plot by the Congress and other reactionary parties to alienate us from the mainstream. If we shirked this responsibility now, that would be escapism and defeatism in the face of reality. We had also realised that our search for the pure, democratic and fully socialistic party as an ally would be like hunting for the proverbial pin in the haystack.

These formulae made it clear that there would be no infringement on the philosophy and political position of the various partners; even organizationally, there would be no curbs on their functioning. This yet again indicated that while we could differ on party policies and theory, there could be a common platform from where we could fight the monopolistic Congress regime unitedly.

The Congress had by that time realized that it was losing its base and the CPI (M) was coming up sharply. The United Front platform was also turning into a symbol of the growing mass movements and the reaction could be felt throughout the country. Since the middle of the 60s, the labour, farmer and the middleclass had issued direct challenges to the upper bourgeoisie segments in Kerala and West Bengal and were vying for power. While the final goal of attaining political power was a longdrawn struggle, it was apparent that the first steps had been taken. The bourgeoisie — zamindars as well as other vested interests, epitomised by the Congress, were shaken.

The United Front announced its election programme. The 18-point plan which had been adopted by the Front in 1967, was relevant this time too. But this time, given the past experience, the programme was modified according to the new priorities. The food crisis, land, education, irrigation and agriculture were crying for immediate steps and needed to be tackled immediately. On the food policy, the Front said that it would ensure greater controls in monopoly business.

The Front stressed that

1. All big landlords would have to part with their excess crop output and that they would have to provide levy on irrigationable area of more than seven acres and non-irrigationable area of more than 10 acres;
2. There would be a ban on buying of crop from the open market;
3. Part of the crops collected would have to be sent back to the area from where they were produced (amounting to 30 per cent in surplus area and the entire amount in the low-yield areas); and
4. A regular food distribution system would be introduced in the low-yield area and later spread to other zones.

The United Front was to take up a major land reforms programme focussing on amendments to the land owning rights in favour of farmers, marginal farmers owning less than three acres of land would be spared taxes, ceiling on land would be fixed keeping in mind the size of the farmer's family, all non-registered land would be identified and distributed, the landless and poor farmers would be given permanent rights on land recovered from big landlords, sharecropers would get recognition of their rights on bargas and their would be no eviction of bargas for at least three years.

On the education front, we said that the prevalent disorder and anarchy would have to be rooted out and that it would be free and compulsory till the Fourth Standard. Primary schools would be set up in places where there were none.

Minimum wages, employment doles and reforms in the laws relating to the payment of bonus would be implemented to help the employees and labourers.

The United Front emphasized the need for greater industrialization and assured the people that it would take all possible steps to ensure the development of the cottage and small industries. Pressure would also be created on the Centre so that all hindrance to the development of industries was removed, old age pension would be introduced and municipalities and panchayats would be further democratized.

The elections were held on February 9, 1969 and more than 70 per cent of the electorate turned out. This overwhelming response was even more significant given the boycott call by the Left opportunists. Obviously the people had rejected them. The elections had a festive air around them.

Polling was held in 280 seats. The Front got 214 while the Congress won 55 seats. The CPI (M) individually fielded candidates in 101 seats (four of them were Independents supported by us). We won 83 of these (three of the Independents backed by us went to the Assembly). The Bangla Congress won 133 seats, the CPI 30, the Forward Bloc 21 and the RSP got 12 seats.

Not only did the people rise behind the United Front, it also gave a clear signal that the CPI (M) was the undisputed leader of the Front. This was the first time that the CPI (M) had emerged as the singlelargest party after any election.

This time too, I contested from Baranagar. My rival was Amarendu Bhattacharya of the Congress who had fought against me in 1967 also. The previous time, I had won by 3,500 votes; on this occasion, while my rival got 27,669 votes, I polled 45,261 votes thus winning by more than 17,500 votes.

Problems surfaced during the constitution of the ministry. The Bangla Congress was stubborn in its demand that its leader Ajoy Mukherjee be made the chief minister. A couple of our partners supported this. They said that the CPI(M) should not be allowed to get the post of the chief minister. The Bangla Congress, never for once, gave a thought that its stand was going against the verdict of the people. The partywise influence and strength had changed a lot since the last elections and it was pertinent that this should have a reflection during ministry-making. The CPI(M) was obviously the leader of the Front but Ajoy Mukherjee said that he would not join the ministry unless he was made the chief minister. In the event, he made a personal issue of a political one.

In the larger interests of Front unity and the state’s welfare, the CPI(M) conceded the chief minister's post to the Bangla Congress. We then proposed that the CPI(M) be given the portfolio of general administration and the home department including police affairs but the CPI wanted a share in the home portfolio. Matters became very complicated. After a lot of discussions, a solution was reached and Ajoy Mukherjee was named the chief minister. I had already been unanimously chosen as the leader of the CPI (M) legislative party. By that token, I became the deputy leader of the United Front Legislative Party. I was to become deputy chief minister with the charge of general administration and the home departments including police affairs. The other CPI (M) leaders who become ministers were Harekrishna Konar (Land and Land Revenue), Niranjan Sengupta (Refugee Relief and Rehabilitation, and Prisons), Satyapriya Rai (Education), Krishnapada Ghosh (Labour), Abdullah Rasul (Transport-Home), Provas Roy (Fisheries), Krishna Chandra Haldar (Excise) and Golam Yazdani (Passport and Civil Defence-Home)

The other ministers of the United Front were Sushil Dhara, Charu Sirkar, Bhabhatosh Saren (Bangla Congress); Somnath Lahiri, Bishwanath Mukherjee, Renu Chakraborty, Abdur Rejjack Khan (CPI); Kanailal Bhattacharya, Sambhu Ghosh, Bhaktibhusan Mondal (Forward Bloc); Nani Bhattacharya, Jatin Chakraborty (RSP); Nani Bhattacharya, Jatin Chakraborty (RSP); Subodh Banerjee, Pratibha Mukherjee (SUC); Jyoti Bhattacharya (Worker's Party); Sudin Kumar (RCPI); Deoprakash Rai (Gorkha League); Bibhuti Dasgupta (Lok Sevak Sangha); Ram Chatterjee (Forward Bloc - Marxist) and Barda Mukutmani (Bolshevik Party). On February 25, 1969, the second United Front ministry took oath. Another opportunity had arrived to carry out our programmes with greater enthusiasm.

The first priority was land reforms. Wider participation was sought to identify land, stop eviction and all units of the provincials Krishak Sabha joined in this effort. A wide movement was witnessed in the countryside revolving around the recovery of land and their distribution. During the tenure of the United Front government, eviction was almost totally stopped. But this was just a beginning and we felt optimistic despite the fact that some landowners had successfully put a spanner in our works by obtaining court orders.

The West Bengal Land Reform (Second amendment) Bill 1969 was placed in the Assembly. West Bengal was the first state where such a Bill had been introduced. It stipulated that there would be no taxes up to a ceiling of three acres of land per family. A total of 60 lakh farmer families became the beneficiaries. The loss in revenue would be made up from the taxes to be levied on landowners with more than three acres in their possession.

Lakhs of labourers had organised movements and agitations against the wrong policies and tactics of deprivation of the owners; not for once did the United Front Government send the police to break even one of their strikes. The labourers had by then won many a battle on the issues of bonus, retrenchment and wages. The spontaneity evident during the tenure of the first United Front Government had by now transformed itself into a more organised effort. A total of 2.5 lakh jute mill workers of the state had launched a sustained movement which had helped raise their wages by Rs 30 a month while similar agitations had been pursued by more than two lakh tea garden employees, 50,000 thread factory staffers and workers of small and medium industries with some success. The state government had always given a helping hand to them instead of trying to crush their movements. One of the significant steps taken during this time was the introduction and acceptance of the Trade Union (West Bengal Amendment) Bill. This Bill gave the worker the right to elect his own trade union through secret ballot which the owner had to accept as legally tenable. Unfortunately, this Bill still awaits the Presidential assent.

The state government decided that education would be free till Class Eight and that 6,000 primary schools would be opened. The government also took some steps to help the teaching community by way of new pension rules for secondary level teachers and job security for primary teachers.

While all these positive and pro-people initiatives were being taken by the government, a conspiracy was being hatched to dislodge the ministry.The first United Front Government had been dismissed without any valid reason and the people had made their verdict clear in the ensuing snap polls. The Congress now resorted to a different strategy. They were to play their game from behind the scenes and try and blunt the pro-people character of the government while not tampering with the Front constituents as such; the effort was solely to install a puppet regime of the Congress. The genesis of this conspiracy was simple; the CPI(M) would be kept out of any future government with the Congress playing kingmaker. Apart from the Congress and the Union Government, those who were to play a major part in this plot were the Leftist ``opportunists’’ and some partners of the Front itself. Such a conspiracy had been witnessed earlier in Kerala. In Bengal, similar slogans and disinformation campaigns centred around the so-called "big-brotherly’’ attitude of the CPI(M) and the ``misuse’’ of the administration for party gains. It was almost a reenaction of what Goebbels had done in pre-War Germany. The Bangla Congress played a leading role in this.

The plotters found an excuse in an unfortunate incident involving a soiree at the Rabindra Sarobar Stadium in the April of 1969. The home department was made the subject of a sustained attack, the only reason being the fact that the portfolio was held by a CPI(M) representative. Significantly, there were no reports of any atrocities on women during the fracas in the next day’s newspapers. But after a day or two, all hell broke loose and the media started front-paging imaginary stories of people being killed and how bodies of women had been floating in the Lakes. The witchhunt had begun and ``news’’ about the ``total breakdown’’ of law and order in the state spread like wildfire. As home minister, I ordered a judicial inquiry into the incident. On December 16 the same year, the Ghosh Commission appointed to go into the probe placed its report which categorically stated that there had been no incident of atrocities on women during the soiree incident. Journalists had also been summoned as witnesses; only the representatives of the Statesman and the Hindusthan Standard came forward. They could not cite a single case of women being put to shame on that day.

It would be pertinent to cite the example of another case which will confirm the extent to which the plotters had gone to discredit the government. On July 29, a policeman was killed in a clash with SUCI supporters at Basanti and a procession was taken out with the body two days later. Taking this as a pretext, a group of policemen, under instructions from a section of top officers, entered the lobby of the state Assembly and indulged in unheard of hooliganism. Chairs were broken, tables upturned and photographs and statues of many great men were vandalised. Slogans like, ``Dismiss the Front Government’’ and ``Hang Jyoti Basu’’ rent the air. In an operation which took them only five minutes, the policemen also intruded into the Assembly chamber, uprooted microphones and even manhandled some legislators and ran riot inside the Speaker’s chamber.

One of the Congress legislators, who happened to be a woman, asked them to go to my chamber and ``avenge’’ the ``injustice.’’ Two of her colleagues identified my room. At that time, I was in my chamber. The group of frenzied policemen tried to force themselves in, ignoring the opposition of the guards. From inside, I asked them to be allowed in: ``Let us see what they want…to what extent they can go.’’ The frenzied group barged in and one of them immediately picked up a flower stand and threw it against the wall.It broke into pieces. I remained still, rooted to my chair. May be, they were sort of thrown off balance by my composure. I said,``Is this any way to show respect to the dead? What is the meaning of such hooliganism? Why have you barged inside ? What will you do if your arms are seized?…Get out of my chamber.’’ They left, taking position in the lobby.

An anti-imperialist rally was on at Esplanade in the heart of the city. As soon as news of the police hooliganism reached the venue, thousands of people started moving towards the Assembly House. At this, the policemen sensed danger and left the premises. During the next Assembly session, I announced that those officers who had fuelled the incident would be severely dealt with. I gave sack orders to 13 policemen for their two days later.

The situation was becoming uncomfortable with the two constituents_the CPI(M) and the Bangla Congress_ taking totally polar positions. This was evident in the running of the government and was reflected in the working of the ministry. A minor incident sparked a row between Ajoy Mukherjee and myself; there was no personal animosity between the chief minister and the deputy chief minister though. I, in my capacity as home minister, had ordered the transfer of the officer-in-charge of Gajol outpost in Malda district. Ajoy-babu first stalled the transfer and subsequently revoked it altogether without even consulting me. I was aghast; this was not as important a matter or issue on which the chief minister had to use his special powers to overrule that of his deputy. I wrote to the chief minister, he replied. I wrote back again, he did the same. This was strangely turning into a debate on the basic nature of the government, the coalition, respective powers and the nitty-gritty of governance!

Ajoy-babu also did something which perhaps still remains unequalled by any chief minister; he went on a hungerstrike against the ``deterioration’’ of the law and order situation, calling his own government ``barbaric’’ in the process! He had never raised this issue or supplied any concrete documents on the matter at Cabinet meetings, neither had he ever suggested any administrative solution to the so-called problem even as his Congress friends cried hoarse from rooftops. The immediate fallout of his fast, which he started from December 1, 1969 at the Curzon Park, was a victory for that section of the bureaucracy which was against us; flouting of orders became routine and indifference to the work culture which we were trying to establish was the order of the day. Ajoy-babu’s party colleague and one of our ministers, Sushil Dhara, took his work as chief campaigner seriously; he seemed to be giving even Goebbels a run for his money. It was becoming impossible to keep track of the stories he was spinning every day about the ``non-functioning’’ of the home department.It was becoming largely apparent that our ``friends’’ wanted a change in the police policy ; that the police could not be used to break democratic movements and strikes was something which they could not accept. The allegation that the police was being ineffective was serious and significant. All these years, police effectiveness meant oppressing the common man in favour of the ruling class interests and the Congress and its allies were being deeply hurt by the Front decision to do away with ``effectiveness.’’ Unfortunately, the Bangla Congress was being a party to this plot but the CPI(M), with the police department under its control, was convinced that this would not be allowed to happen. The CPI(M) was the logical target.

The right-wing Communists also joined in to dislodge the government. And started saying publicly that it was quite possible to form a government without the support of the CPI(M). Behind-the-scenes activity began. We tried our best to keep the government intact and implement our pro-people policies. But the Bangla Congress working committee decided that Ajoy-babu would resign as chief minister by December 16, 1970. Our party’s state unit secretary, Pramode Dasgupta, wrote to the various constituents of the Front in which he said,

``As you are aware, we would like the United Front to stay together and continue to govern this state according to the wishes of the people. It is also necessary that the problems that keep on surfacing from time to time among the partners be sorted out across the table and to our mutual benefit.

``We condemn the move to foist a mini-Front government on this state with the direct or indirect support of the Congress. Because we believe that would be cheating the people and be an act of gross betrayal.

``The situation has become cause for concern because of the Bangla Congress decision to withdraw from the Front. We think that it is the duty of the Front constituents to sit together immediately and thrash matters out so that the interests of the people are protected.’’

Sheer arithmetic showed that the Front government could survive without the Bangla Congress; its leader Sukumar Roy wrote to the convenor of the Front decrying the activities of Ajoy-babu and Dhara and said that many Bangla Congress leaders and workers were still with the Front and wanted the government to survive. But the CPI, Forward Bloc and the SUCI had other ideas; they were dead against the CPI(M).

On March 16, Ajoy-babu resigned. In protest, the BPTUC and the July 12 Committee led many democratic and peoples’ organisations to a successful general strike the very next day. I met the Governor and requested him to allow the CPI(M), as the single largest party, to form the government on its own and that we would give proof of our strength on the floor of the Assembly. On the other hand, the Congress, Bangla Congress, CPI, Forward Bloc and SUCI met him and advised him not to give us that opportunity.