By Devendra Kumar Budakoti
The recent outburst by Justice Rakesh Thapliyal of the Uttarakhand High Court in Nainital has once again brought the issue of Uttarakhand’s permanent capital back into the spotlight. His passionate remarks went viral on the internet, reigniting a long-standing debate over the state’s administrative seat in Gairsain.
Justice Thapliyal’s comments were in response to a report in the local vernacular press, where former Chief Minister and senior Congress leader Harish Rawat declared that, if voted to power, his party would make Gairsain the permanent capital of Uttarakhand. Expressing his frustration, Justice Thapliyal criticised political leaders for misleading the people of Uttarakhand on this emotionally charged issue. He argued that had Gairsain been developed as the capital from the outset, the state’s developmental trajectory would have been far more inclusive. Instead, the benefits have remained concentrated in Dehradun.
The idea of Gairsain as the capital dates back to the Uttarakhand statehood movement. Activists who spearheaded the campaign for separation from Uttar Pradesh envisioned Gairsain—a town located between the Kumaon and Garhwal regions—as the ideal capital, representing the aspirations of hill people.
However, when Uttarakhand was formed in November 2000, the lack of infrastructure in Gairsain led political and bureaucratic leadership to temporarily establish the capital in Dehradun. Since then, the issue of a permanent capital resurfaces during state and national elections but quickly fades afterward.
Even the Uttarakhand Kranti Dal (UKD), the regional party that played a pivotal role in the statehood movement, failed to keep the momentum. Despite forging alliances with both the BJP and Congress over the years, the UKD lost credibility by prioritising ministerial perks over its foundational promises.
To placate the growing demand, the Trivendra Singh Rawat-led government declared Gairsain as the summer capital of the state. But symbolic gestures have not been enough. In fact, during one winter session, several MLAs requested the Speaker to shift the Assembly sitting away from Gairsain citing harsh weather—an ironic excuse, considering the state was formed to represent the hill regions.
Now, with assembly elections scheduled for 2027, Harish Rawat has once again begun invoking the Gairsain issue—clearly aware of its emotional weight among hill residents. However, his credibility is in question. Despite having had the power to act in the past, he lacked the political will to make Gairsain the permanent capital.
Developing Gairsain as the capital would not only distribute administrative power more equitably but also drive infrastructure development, expand access to welfare facilities, and improve government outreach in hill areas. Ultimately, this would reflect in stronger social and economic indicators, better service delivery, and greater community participation in development efforts.
