Talk:List of chief ministers of Maharashtra

India: Maharashtra / Politics High‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Maharashtra (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by the Indian politics workgroup (assessed as High-importance).

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

President rule

I believe that has had presedint rule a few times. It is not even mentioned in the list. It should have some place in it.

Also Balasaheb Gangadhar Kher is not mentioned anywhere. He was the first chief minister of Bombay state before formation of maharashtra. Ganesh Dhamodkar (Talk) 07:47, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This list only includes chief ministers of Maharashtra after its formation n 1962. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 14:28, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Irregularities in tenures of CMs

On multiple occasions there is a gap of few days after the end of previous tenure of the sitting CM for eg: Abdul Rehman Antulay's term ends on 12 January 1982 and Babasaheb Bhosale's term commences on 21 January 1982 and there is no explanation for 9 days between them. As per basic rule either President's rule should be in force or a care taker CM should be functioning which is not mentioned. Similarly this problem persists in the change of assembly as well. The previous term of Vasantdada Patil ends on 2 March 1978 but his next term after the assembly elections resumes on 7 March 1978 completely omitting the 5 days in between. I believe the missing days should be added in the previous CM's tenure if he was still the care taker or there should be President's rule during this period.Amal biyani (talk) 14:16, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Chief ministers of Bombay state

What is the relevance of adding Chief ministers from Bombay state.If you are going to add that then you should include chief ministers of Central provinces /Madhya pradesh too before Marathi speaking areas were added to Bombay state in 1956.ThanksJonathansammy (talk) 19:31, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jonathansammy. I understand what you are trying to say. However, those areas were brought under the Bombay State assembly. I think the logic here is that the last CM of Bombay State, i.e. Yashwantrao Chavan who was serving since 1957 (relevant term for 1960) became the CM of the newly formed Maharashtra. Gujarat got a new CM altogether. There were no new elections in any of the successor states. While, the CM of Madhya Pradesh, Kailash Nath Katju remained the CM of Madhya Pradesh until 1962. As to why that list does not include the chief ministers of Central Provinces until 1956 is beyond me. So, we either need to make a new list of CMs of Bombay State or forget the role of Kher and Desai as Chief Ministers. Apart from that there's no reason whatsover. Berlindian (talk) 17:36, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would say get rid of Kher and Desai.The Bombay state they ruled was much smaller than the 1956 creation, and did not include Marathwada and Vidarbha.Thanks.Jonathansammy (talk) 19:43, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that the size of the state is important here. Mysore state was much smaller, and the CMs of Mysore still find a place on the Karnataka CM list. Some of the present day states are much smaller and some have become smaller after formation of new states between 1956 and 2014! If anything, the Madhya Pradesh list should include the CMs of CP&Berar whose governor also governed the Marathi-speaking areas of Hyderabad. Unless there's a better reason, I say we keep it as it is. Another solution could be to put Yashwantrao Chavan in a separate section then we'll have three sections: 1. Bombay state 1947-56, 2.Bombay state 1956-60, 3. Maharashtra. Berlindian (talk) 21:36, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Caretaker Chief minister

Just want to inform that Currently Devendra Fadnavis is Caretaker CM as part of Caretaker government. Have a look at his tweet [1]. Technically he is CM until next Government is formed. Brown Chocolate (talk) 16:54, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, @Dey subrata:, I think we should have a talk. Can you explain me why caretaker CM is not counted? Honestly I am not getting it. Just look at Fadnavis last tenure, its 5 Years 12 days. After election result, its Caretaker government who manage, Right? So if the last 12 days were counted, so why not now? Please explain me if possible. Brown Chocolate (talk) 17:18, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Brown Chocolate He was elected after election and he resigned officially. So those days will not be counted as against his tenure. There are numerous example in the list, you will find, where the days are not counted (between one's resignation and one's election). Dey subrata (talk) 17:23, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But his last tenure ended on 9 November[2]. But as per list he ended on 12 November, what was he till 3 days? Should we change date till november 9. Brown Chocolate (talk) 17:32, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Brown Chocolate Yes it should be 9th november, as assembly dissolved on 9th and his tenure was ended. Dey subrata (talk) 17:38, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Dey subrata: I am changing the date from 9th November to 8th November as he resign on 8th[3]. By the way, Thanks for your explanation. Brown Chocolate (talk) 17:46, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Brown Chocolate Welcome ! I would ask you...there are several citations which are not properly included, if you can do it, adding date, publishers, author and all that and also remove personal websites, rather use reliable news site like The Hindu, NDTV, TOI, Indian Express whereever possible. Dey subrata (talk) 17:58, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I will do it in few days as time permits me. Cheers Brown Chocolate (talk) 18:09, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@TropicOfCancer06: You can discuss here, if you have any queries. Dey subrata (talk) 14:32, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well I have multiple queries not just relating to the topic at hand as a chunk of stuff was reverted. Firstly the wikipedia lists are not the correct standard of information for example in the PM list Charan Singh officially resigned after 14 days but continued as caretaker and hence his tenure is counted as 170 days similarly stated in multiple government websites and not any random publication but official government records, the cm tenures include caretaker tenure as well. I fail to understand how any other publication is more authentic than official government records.

I would be happy to include 12 instead of 8 if you add a note to it, that he was caretaking from 9-12, but do it only if, along with that you rewrite all above of those CMs who have been care taking during their tenure as you have to maintain consistency through out the list. Dey subrata (talk) 21:26, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Secondly, the article is about the cm and not about the events leading upto any person taking oath as cm. All the unnecessary details were added which were deleted by me and nowhere it says anything about the current incumbent which was the sole info required.

I don't think any misleading materials were added previously. By that logic nothing should be mentioned in the infobox as in future such information is ceased to exist. And infobox is for that only, to show current state. Dey subrata (talk) 21:26, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thirdly, the maha vikas aghadi is itself an alliance similar to the alliance during Sharad Pawar's tenure as an INC (Socialist) member which included the janata party and other factions and was called the progressive democratic front, the official alliance name so I don't see the need to add both the maha vikas aghadi as well as the constituent parties names together.

Well I agreed with that, and so that was not reverted. Only one of your edit was reverted I think, if it still exists I will remove. Dey subrata (talk) 21:26, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fourthly, the tenure of a cm is measured in days and not hours hence the mention of 80 hours against 2nd term of Fadnavis makes no sense.

Well sometimes history is made in unique way, he was in CM chair for 80 hours, as times are available, well I would suggest if not in bracket, can be added in notes too, its a historical statistic. Dey subrata (talk) 21:26, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lastly, there was no official alliance between the bjp and ncp and no such group or faction as the ajit pawar group existed formally, then how can the 2nd term of Fadnavis be called an alliance of bjp and ncp ajit pawar faction when there was no official announcement of any such alliance which eventually led to the downfall of the Fadnavis govt in 3 days.TropicOfCancer06 (talk) 20:43, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Governor can't give oath to anyone untill and unless he claims majority and as he was given oath, its evident he has shown majority (which his party don't have). So to prove majority he should have taken support or atleast shown the Governor the support of another party. Secondly, if he had no support then why Ajit Pawar was given oath and resign. So yes its BJP and NCP (Ajit Pawar faction). TropicOfCancer06, all your queries are addressed. Dey subrata (talk) 21:26, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And one thing I want to add, it will be utterly bogus to say "some random" sources, no random sources are used in the topic you are talking about. And govt. datas are subject to be scrutinised, as historically govt. have fabricated datas and wrongfully projected statistics and datas to the citizens whole over world. Thats why reliable media is important and far better appopriate for verification. A caretake CM is a care taker CM, he is not CM, its as simple as that as a true Govt. ceased to exist as assembly is dissolved by Governor. His tenure of those 3 days should only be counted against caretaker CM not as CM.

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:42, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Eknath Shinde in Cheif Minister Office.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:22, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:52, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Shikshan vishayak abhipray

Desription 106.211.122.176 (talk) 15:53, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shikshan vishayak abhipray

description 106.211.122.176 (talk) 15:54, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Spouse of Chief Minister of Maharashtra" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Spouse of Chief Minister of Maharashtra has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 21 § Spouse of Chief Minister of Maharashtra until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:44, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]