The “Sahayak” — Vestige of the “British Raj”

Vestiges of the British Raj

This morning I read a news item that the 100 year old practice of providing bungalow peons to officers will continue in the railways albeit in a new avatar. (url: https://indianexpress.com/article/india/recruitment-stopped-railways-bungalow-peon-system-to-continue-with-changes-7078642/ ).

Bungalow Peons are akin to Sahayaks provided to Army Officers.

Though more than 73 years have passed since independence — and we profess to be a modern egalitarian democracy — we still continue some feudal colonial practices of the British Raj — like the practice of providing personal staff to work at home — to officers of various military, police and civil services — basically “sahayaks” albeit under different names.

This reminded me of an article I had written long ago on this subject…

___________

“Sahayak” — a fictional spoof by Vikram Karve

___________

PROLOGUE

Sometime ago — much before the COVID Lockdown — I was sitting in RSI Pune — and having a drink with an Army Veteran Friend — who I knew since 1981 — from my SP Marg Officers Mess Days.

(Those days SP Marg Officers Mess was an Army-Navy Mess)

We were sitting on the sofas in a corner of the lovely spacious bar.

A lady entered.

She seemed to be searching for a place to sit — and so — she panned her gaze all around.

Our eyes met.

She looked at me for that moment longer than necessary.

I looked back at her — and — since she was quite attractive — I gave her my quintessential look of admiration that is worth a thousand compliments.

I looked at her steadily and directly.

I thought she would avert her eyes and look away — but she held my gaze in a kind of challenge.

I thought that the passionate admiration and yearning radiating from my eyes would win a smile — but instead — her cheeks turned red and she started looking at me with anger in her eyes.

She started walking towards me.

I stood up.

“Are you “XXX”…?” she asked me — quoting my name.

“Yes, Ma’am…” I said, “please sit down and join us…”

I started introducing my army veteran friend — when the lady waved to a gentleman who had just entered the bar.

He walked towards us.

He apparently knew my army veteran friend and started addressing him in a deferential manner.

We were introduced to each other.

The newly arrived gentleman was a Colonel.

Everyone sat down.

The newly arrived gentleman (the Colonel) — he walked towards the bar to order drinks.

As her husband walked towards the bar — the attractive lady asked me: “Why do you write such horrible blogs…?”

I was dumbstruck by her sudden comment — so — I remained silent.

“The blog you wrote on “Sahayak” — it is all nonsense…” she said.

“Well — I just wrote what I observed…” I said.

“What you have written is all wrong. No one misuses “Sahayaks”…” she said.

“Well — Ma’am — maybe you don’t misuse your “Sahayak” — but I have seen…” I started to say.

“Hey — let’s change the topic…” my army veteran friend said — and — he started asking the lady where they were posted etc.

Her husband (the Colonel) was posted to Delhi — and — they had come to Pune on a month’s leave (Pune was their home station).

We talked about Delhi and Pune — comparing and contrasting the life in the two cities.

Soon — the Colonel joined us too.

After some time — the lady started talking about her pets — 3 dogs and 2 cats.

“You have 3 dogs and 2 cats…?” I asked, surprised.

“Yes — I have 3 dogs and 2 cats…” the Colonel’s wife said, “and they all stay together in the same house…” and she told us how much she loved and cared for all her 5 pets.

“Wow — you look after 5 pets — 3 dogs and 2 cats…” I said, “You must have a tough time bringing them to Pune — I remember taking my dog with me in train every time I went on leave — and those days there was First Class — where you could take dogs. Do they allow pets in Airconditioned Class…?”

“We travel by Air…” the lady said.

“Oh — you brought all your cats and dogs from Delhi to Pune in the aircraft…?” I said.

“We didn’t bring our cats and dogs to Pune…” she said, “ they are in Delhi…”

“Oh — you have good pet-sitters in Delhi…?” I said, “even for cats…?”

“No Pet-Sitters. All our pets are at home…” the Colonel’s wife said

“Who is looking after your pets…” I asked.

“Our “Sahayak” — he looks after our pets…” the Colonel’s wife said.

“Isn’t that misuse of your “Sahayak”…? Is it proper to ask your “Sahayak” to look after your pet dogs and cats…?” I wanted to ask her — but — in the circumstances — I felt that discretion was the better part of valour — so — I remained silent — and then — I changed the topic.

____________________

Dear Reader,

Here is my article on “Sahayak” which had angered the lady so much.

____________________

“SAHAYAK”

Before 1947 — the British ruled India.

Hence — British Officers — Civil, Police and Military — considered themselves are “Rulers” — and — British Officers treated the Indian Civilian Employees and Soldiers serving under them as their “Subjects”.

I read somewhere that British Officers were called “Laat Sahab”

(“Laat Sahab” is the Indianised Version of “Lord Officer”)

Since they were de facto “Lords” — the British Officers — Civil, Police and Military — these “Lords” were given subordinate staff for their personal use.

This personal staff (comprising Indian “subjects”) were called by various names in different civil services — “Orderly”, “Attendant”“Bungalow Peon” , “Telephone Attendant cum Dak Khalasis (TADK)” , “Household Staff” , Domestic Staff etc

A British Army Officer was provided a Soldier as a “Batman” .

Whatever the names given to the personal staff — they were basically personal servants of the civil, police and military officers.

(However — there was no such practice in the Navy and Air Force — probably because of their more egalitarian culture — though Admirals/Captains were provided Retinue/Stewards at Sea)

India became independent in 1947 — but these “imperialistic” colonial practices of the British Raj continued — some even till today.

The Indian Army derived most of its customs and traditions from the British Army.

I wonder whether the British Army still has the system of providing a “Batman” to an Officer.

By the way — it seems that the Railways too had a similar system continued from the days of the British Raj — because — a few years ago — I read news items about Army Structural Reforms and Chairman Railway Board ordering withdrawal of railwaymen engaged by officers as domestic staff at their residences.

Does the increasing tendency of VVIPs to have various types of “Attendants” at home (at government expense) even after retirement indicate that we are going back to the colonial days of feudalism rather than adopt egalitarianism which is more apt for a democracy…?

All this reminds me of a spoof I had written a few years ago…

_________

“SAHAYAK”
(aka “Batman” aka “Orderly” aka “Attendant” aka “Runner”)
RELIC OF THE RAJ
A Fictional Spoof
By
VIKRAM KARVE

__________

“SAHAYAK” (aka “Batman” aka “Orderly” aka “Attendant” aka “Runner”)

The CTC (Cost To Company) of an Army Officer is much higher than his equivalent Navy or Air Force Officer.

In addition to the pay and perks (which are roughly the same) — an Army Officer gets another “perk” called a “Sahayak” (aka “Batman” or “Orderly”).

Long back– I was posted as faculty in a tri-service training institution.

On the faculty — there were officers of the Army, Navy and Air Force — and all officers did exactly the same job.

We were all instructors — and — whether you were in the Army, Navy or Air Force — the job was identical — to teach.

But — only the Army Officers had “Sahayaks”.

The presence of “Sahayaks” was starkly evident in the evenings — when we all went for long walks.

I had a pet dog.

My neighbour was a senior Air Force Officer — a Group Captain — who also had a pet dog.

We used to personally take our dogs for a walk in the evenings (and in the mornings too).

A number of Army Officers had pet dogs too.

But very few Army Officers would take their dogs for a walk.

“Dogwalking” was the “duty” of the “Sahayak”.

Yes — walking the Sahib’s dog was the Sahayak’s job.

Maybe — it was “below the dignity” for an Army Officer to take his dog for a walk.

I noticed that the practice of “Sahayaks” walking Officers’ Dogs was quite a common sight in Army cantonments and tri-service institutions.

In fact — some of my Army friends used to leave their pet dogs with their Sahayaks when they went home on leave — or went outstation on courses.

One Army officer’s wife even commented that looking after their dog was the Sahayak’s job.

And — I observed that what she said was true — the “Sahayak” took full care of the dog — the dog’s food, the dog’s walks, the dog’s grooming, bath, everything…

In fact — the “Sahayak” was the de facto “Master” of the officer’s pet dog.

Every time a discussion on “sahayaks” comes up — most Army Officers are quick to defend this ancient practice saying that Sahayaks are required for Officers in the “field”.

Agreed.

Army Officers may require Soldiers as “Sahayaks” in the “Field”.

But — how can you justify Soldiers being deputed as “Sahayaks” in Peacetime Family Stations…?

Why must only Army Officers get “sahayaks” especially in inter-service establishments — where you have Navy and Air Force Officers doing exactly the same work as Army Officers…?

What rankles even more in inter-service training institutions is when some resourceful “student officers” from the Army manage to get their “Sahayaks” and flaunt them in front of senior Navy and Air Force Officers on the Staff.

Is there any need for providing “Sahayaks” to Army Officers working in Headquarters in New Delhi — when their Navy and Air Force counterparts are able to do the same work without the assistance of “Sahayaks”.

_________

WHY DOES ONLY THE ARMY OFFICER NEED A SAHAYAK (BATMAN)…?

What is the genesis of this practice…?

Why does an Army Officer need a “sahayak”…?

An old-timer Army Veteran once told me that a “sahayak” (batman) is not a private servant and he is not provided to an Army Officer to perform the duties of a domestic help.

The “sahayak” is not a domestic orderly.

The “sahayak” or batman is a combat soldier.

(The word “batman” is short form of “battle-man”)

The batman is actually a “runner” who always accompanies the officer in battle — and his primary duty in combat operations is to convey the orders of the officer to his subordinates — particularly when the wireless is not functioning.

Besides his primary task as a “runner” — the “sahayak” or batman is supposed to look after the officer’s needs, maintain his equipment and uniform, act as a bodyguard and protect the officer — and generally be his “buddy” — while the officer is engaged in combat operations.

Thus — the “batman” was the officer’s “battle-man” — his buddy in combat — and — there was no question of a batman being employed on any nature of domestic work — especially in peacetime family stations and in the homes of officers.

This is what the old-timer told me.

Unfortunately — the perception created in the minds of people is quite different.

It may not be entirely correct — but unfortunately — the general impression today is that — the “sahayak” or batman is a personal servant of the Army Officer and his Family.

Again I would like to say — this may not be a correct picture.

But then — what will be the perception created in the minds of people when they observe Army Officers using their sahayaks to take their dogs for walks — or send them to the market for shopping — and to perform various types of domestic work, menial jobs and household chores…?

This is visible to everyone in peacetime stations and cantonments — sometimes even in civilian areas where Army Officers live.

A recently Retired Army Officer’s Wife told me that the one thing she misses the most is her “sahayak”.

Long back — I heard a bizarre story which may be apocryphal.

A “resourceful” Army Officer who was posted to a non-family field area “managed” to arrange a “sahayak” for his wife who was living in separated married quarters in a peace station.

The irony was that the smart “sahayak” turned out to be even more “resourceful” and was having a rolicking love affair with the officer’s wife — “stealing her affections” — while the officer was slogging it out in the field.

The story may be apocryphal — but — it imparts a lesson — that — it can be hazardous to let a “sahayak” get too intimate with families — especially wives and daughters.

With the advent of Women Officers in the Army — I wonder if they too are provided male sahayaks.

Or — are Lady Army Officers provided female attendants…?

Do some resourceful Senior Army Officers “manage” to get uniformed “sahayaks” even after they retire from the Army…?

I do not think it is permitted — but someone once mentioned that some resourceful senior Army Officers do “manage” to get sahayaks even after retirement.

Another argument Army Officers use to justify the institution of “sahayak” is that even other Civilian Officers (IAS, IPS, Railways, PSUs, etc) have various government employees deputed as “attendants” in their homes for similar domestic duties.

“Two wrongs don’t make one right…”

Does citing examples of Police/Civilian Officers misusing “attendants” justify Army Officers misusing “sahayaks”…?

I wonder whether other modern Armies still provide “sahayaks” (batmen) to Officers…?

Do Civil-Service Officers, Diplomatic Officers and Police Officers of modern nations get “attendants” for their domestic work…?

Is it true that even Diplomats and IFS Officers are entitled to take “attendants” and servants on postings abroad…?

Well — it seems that we still remain a feudal society with the same old colonial culture — and — these “Relics of the Raj” are not going to go away in a hurry.

Is it possible to get rid of this colonial feudal practice of sahayaks in the Army and attendants in the Civil/Police Services…?

Or — in the name of “jointmanship” — will this facility of “sahayaks” be extended to Navy and Air Force Officers too…?

One can argue that when almost everyone at Officer Level — most Army Officers — and most Civilian/Police Officers — when all of them get “sahayaks” or “attendants” — why leave out only Navy and Air Force Officers…?

Yes — if the “powers-that-be” want to continue providing Sahayaks/Attendants to Army/Police/Civilian Officers — then — will they consider providing “sahayaks” to Navy and Air Force Officers too…?

________

VIKRAM KARVE
Copyright © Vikram Karve
1. If you share this post, please give due credit to the author Vikram Karve
2. Please DO NOT PLAGIARIZE. Please DO NOT Cut/Copy/Paste this post
© vikram karve., all rights reserved.

Disclaimer:
1. This story is a fictional humorous spoof, satire, pure fiction, just for fun and humor, no offence is meant to anyone, so take it with a pinch of salt and have a laugh.
2. All stories in this blog are a work of fiction. Events, Places, Settings and Incidents narrated in the stories are a figment of my imagination. The characters do not exist and are purely imaginary. Any resemblance to persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental.

Copyright Notice:
No part of this Blog may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the Blog Author Vikram Karve who holds the copyright.
Copyright © Vikram Karve (All Rights Reserved)

Link to my source blog posts in my Blog Academic and Creative Writing Journal Vikram Karve: http://karvediat.blogspot.com/2017/08/sahayak-colonial-relic-of-raj.html and Writing Blog: https://karve.wordpress.com/2020/12/03/sahayak-in-and-out-of-uniform/

© vikram karve., all rights reserved.