The years 1966-70 were a crucial period in our post - Independence history. The seventeen-year long Nehru ear, marked by internal stability and economic progess, and, except for the Chinese attack in 1962, by successful working of the policy of non-alignment, had come to an end. Lal Bahadur Shastri'e tenure had held high promise, but had ended sadly in just about a year and a half. The 1967 general elections to the Lok Sabha and the State Assemblies, led a unstable coalition Ministries, with phenomenal growth of defections in the Assemblies constituting a major factor in the instability of the Ministries. For the first time our federal or quasi-federal constitutional system too was put to a sever test, with non-Congress Ministries assuming office in many States, including Left From Ministries, in a combative mood in West Bengal and Kerala. Facing these challenges to democratic legitimacy and federalism was the Congress party with a drastically reduced majority in the Lok Sabha. With the incumbent Prime Minister having been in office for less than a year, Chavan as the new Home Minister had to face daunting tasks in Parliament and severe tests in the management of Central-State relations.
Nor was this the end of his problems. The cult of violence, including terrorism, with a revolutionary social ideology made its appearance in Naxalbari, and soon spread to the Calcutta metropolitan area, presenting the law and order authorities, and the Home Ministry with the unfamiliar problem of urban guerilla activity. The re-organisation of Punjab towards the end of 1966 had left behind unsettled problems including Punjab's claim to Chandigarh, which led to fasts and finally to the imminent self-immolation of Sant Fateh Singh, with dangerous potentialities.
Within the scope of a short article one can only mention Chavan's broad approach to all these problems, the values by which he was guided, and the style of his functionining. Chavan realised that if defections continued unchecked and legislators continued to change their loyalties from lure of office or other material gains, our democracy would come into bad odour, and eventually people's confidence might be shaken in the parliamentary system itself. So he took active interest in having an all-party committee on defections set up, with himself as its chairman. A paper on defections in the past years, with an analysis, which included the extent of rewards of defections, was prepared in the research Division of the Home Ministry and through it showed that the Congress party had been a major beneficiary of defections in the past, Chavan did not hesitate to have the paper placed on the table of Parliament, observing that the truth, however unpleasant, had to be faced. On the basis of the Committee's recommendations, a Bill was introduced in Parliament but notwithstanding Chavan's keenness to have it enacted, it lapsed on the dissolution of the Lok Sabha. A law on defections had to wait for fourteen years, and the assumption of office by the fourth Prime Minister, since the first legislative move had been made. The Lok Pal and Lokayukts Bill to check corruption and miscounduct in high places, sponsored by Chavan has had a similar fate, except that the legislation now before Parliament is yet to be enacted.
In dealing with federal relations, Chavan was anxious to follow meticulously the letter and spirit of the Constitution, taking legal advice, including that of the Attorney General, whenever there was any doubt. He never sought to influence a Governor in matters falling within the latter's constitutional discretion, or to have President's rule imposed except on the recommendation of the Governor, based on valid grounds. There was only one exception. Sampurnanand's recommendation for placing Rajasthan under President's rule did not appear to me to be justified, but for reasons not known to me the recommendation was not turned down by the Centre. Dharma Vira's action in replacing the Ajoy Kumar Mukerji Ministry by P.C. Ghose Ministry was entirely within the Governor's constitutional discretion (as was confirmed by the Calcutta High Court) and I have reason to believe that Dharma Vira had acted entirely on his own judgement.