The Seat That Wasn’t: How Deve Gowda’s Parliamentary Career May Be Nearing Its End | India News

Last Updated:June 08, 2026, 18:39 IST

The BJP’s choice of Prof. M. Nagaraj for Karnataka’s Rajya Sabha contest has left 94-year-old H.D. Deve Gowda staring at the end of his long parliamentary innings.

For nearly three decades after demitting office as Prime Minister, JD(S) supremo and India’s oldest-serving parliamentarian H.D. Deve Gowda remained a constant presence in Parliament and national politics. Even electoral defeats did little to keep him away from the legislature for long. Every setback was followed by a political comeback.

That run now appears set to end.

The BJP on Monday nominated senior party leader Prof. M. Nagaraj for the lone Rajya Sabha seat within the Opposition’s reach in Karnataka, effectively ruling out another term for the 94-year-old former Prime Minister and JD(S) patriarch. The move has come as a setback to the party, with workers disappointed by the decision of their alliance partner in the state and at the Centre.

Instead, the BJP chose to back one of its own leaders, signalling that the party is unwilling to sacrifice its limited parliamentary opportunities even for a former Prime Minister from an alliance partner.

The decision comes despite expectations within sections of the JD(S) that the BJP, its alliance partner in Karnataka, would accommodate Deve Gowda for one final term in the Upper House.

The 94-year-old Deve Gowda first entered Parliament as a member of the Lok Sabha in 1991, when he was elected from the Hassan constituency in Karnataka. Before that, he had served multiple terms as an MLA and later became Leader of the Opposition and Chief Minister of Karnataka. Interestingly, when he became Prime Minister in June 1996, he was not a member of either House of Parliament. He was subsequently elected to the Rajya Sabha in September 1996 while serving as Prime Minister.

The message was not limited to the Rajya Sabha. The BJP also announced Lingaraj Patil and OBC Morcha state president Raghu Kautilya as its candidates for the Legislative Council elections, leaving the JD(S) without a candidate assured of victory in either contest.

Senior political commentator Sandeep Shastri said he was yet to see a former Prime Minister sustain himself politically for such a long period — 29 years after relinquishing the office of Prime Minister — while remaining politically relevant.

“It is important to highlight the fact that we are talking about a political leader 29 years after he demitted the office of Prime Minister. He stepped down in 1997. Not only has he remained active, he has also played a critical role in shaping Indian politics. People may be critical of him for the strong family network he has built in politics, but let us remember that he is not the only one to have done so. That is not an excuse or a justification, but it is a reflection of the way politics operates in this country,” he told News18.

Shastri said there was considerable speculation over whether the BJP would accommodate Deve Gowda for another Rajya Sabha term. The BJP’s approach to coalition politics has generally been to gradually assert itself and emerge as the dominant partner, as seen in Maharashtra, Bihar and elsewhere.

“I think the same process is visible in Karnataka. In that sense, Deve Gowda not returning to the Rajya Sabha is a reflection of that. The BJP’s position appears to be: we have accommodated your party within the NDA, your son is a Union Minister, but we are not willing to concede our seat to accommodate you,” he told News18.

Independent journalist and political observer Sugata Srinivasaraju, who has authored the only biography on Deve Gowda, Furrows in a Field, said he felt the former Prime Minister should have made his move earlier and stepped down on his own terms. Had he done so at the end of the Parliament session in April, it would have held him in better stead.

Srinivasaraju said he had earlier suggested that Deve Gowda should have gracefully announced retirement rather than wait for such a move from the BJP.

“A statement like, ‘I have served the nation, but I am too advanced in age, and let me sort of step down.’ That moment would have created a celebration of his long years as a parliamentarian. That he would continue to guide the Modi administration and be a chief mentor of the NDA would have made all the difference. There were so many ways in which he could have spoken about mentorship. That would have saved this situation,” Srinivasaraju said.

Soon after the BJP announcement, the Congress was quick to seize on the decision, portraying it as yet another instance of the JD(S) being sidelined within the alliance.

AICC general secretary in charge of Karnataka, Randeep Singh Surjewala, accused the BJP of denying former Prime Minister H.D. Deve Gowda a Rajya Sabha berth despite his stature and long political career. Surjewala pointed out that although Deve Gowda lost the 2019 Lok Sabha election, the Congress had backed his election to the Rajya Sabha in 2020 despite sharp political differences between the two parties.

Srinivasaraju called it “a bit rich for the Congress to say anything”.

“It’s a bit too rich for the Congress to say anything. If they were so concerned, they had three seats. They should have, in the interest of whatever cause they were advancing, offered one to Deve Gowda themselves. They never offered it. They could have embarrassed the BJP by saying, ‘If the BJP doesn’t give it to you, we will give it to you. You are a former Prime Minister,’” he said.

In a post on X, Surjewala said the BJP had chosen to nominate a party functionary over a former Prime Minister, calling the decision an insult not just to Deve Gowda but also to the JD(S).

He also targeted Union Minister H.D. Kumaraswamy, alleging that the JD(S) leadership had repeatedly accepted humiliation at the hands of the BJP in order to remain in power.

Recalling Deve Gowda’s earlier opposition to the BJP, Surjewala noted that the former Prime Minister had once publicly stated that he would “disown” Kumaraswamy if he aligned with the BJP. Yet, he said, the JD(S) entered into an alliance with the BJP in 2023, following which Kumaraswamy joined the Narendra Modi government as a Union Minister.

According to Surjewala, this development exposed what he described as the JD(S)’s willingness to pursue “power at any cost”, arguing that the party’s continued acceptance of such decisions reflected its political priorities.

For the JD(S), the development is politically significant. The party had hoped to retain a presence in the Rajya Sabha through the alliance arrangement. With the BJP fielding its own nominee, Deve Gowda’s parliamentary innings, stretching across decades and multiple political eras, is likely drawing to a close.

The move is also being viewed in political circles as an indication of how the BJP sees the future of its relationship with the JD(S). While the alliance served both parties during the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, the BJP appears keen to assert its own organisational and political priorities rather than reserve positions for its junior alliance partner.

Party leaders publicly insist that the alliance remains intact and that Union Minister H.D. Kumaraswamy continues to enjoy the BJP leadership’s confidence. Yet, the denial of a Rajya Sabha berth to Deve Gowda has inevitably triggered questions within the JD(S) over the party’s space and leverage within the arrangement.

The BJP’s calculation is also shaped by numbers. Of the four Rajya Sabha seats from Karnataka going to the polls, the Congress, with its strength in the Assembly, is expected to comfortably secure three. That leaves only one realistic seat for the Opposition. Rather than use that opportunity to accommodate its ally, the BJP has chosen to invest in its own organisation.

Privately, BJP leaders point to Deve Gowda’s age and health as factors behind the decision. By the completion of another Rajya Sabha term, the former Prime Minister would be nearing 100. Supporters of the move argue that the BJP has applied the same age principle to its own veterans and could not make an exception for an ally.

For many in the JD(S), however, the issue is less about arithmetic and more about symbolism. Deve Gowda is not merely another senior leader seeking renomination. He remains the party’s tallest figure and the architect of its political legacy.

His exclusion marks more than the end of a Rajya Sabha term. It closes a chapter in a political career that saw him rise from the Karnataka Assembly to the Prime Minister’s Office and remain relevant long after most contemporaries had exited public life.

Whether the BJP finds another way to honour that legacy, or whether the decision becomes a lingering point of discomfort within the alliance, remains to be seen.

For now, the announcement has ensured that one of Karnataka’s most enduring political figures may be preparing for life outside Parliament for the first time in decades.

Shastri recalled how, during Deve Gowda’s career, there were a few occasions when he lost direct elections. One was when he lost from Holenarasipura in the Assembly election. The second was when he lost from what was then the Kanakapura Lok Sabha seat to Tejaswi Gowda. The third was when he lost the Tumakuru Lok Sabha election.

During his entire career, these were the three most significant electoral defeats, and on two of those occasions, the setback was compensated for in some way, including through a Rajya Sabha seat.

Deve Gowda’s entry into national politics in 1996 was not by choice, but by circumstance. He always remained on the national horizon and did not directly focus on state politics, except for leading the party and promoting family members in politics.

He has also been extremely politically astute in the positions he has taken. When his son H.D. Kumaraswamy broke away and formed a coalition government in Karnataka with the BJP in 2006, it was a testing moment for him. Deve Gowda adopted a nuanced position, saying it had happened without his knowledge and that there was no option but to reconcile with the reality. It was a carefully calibrated, step-by-step political stance.

It was an astute political move that ensured his son became Chief Minister even though the JD(S) was the third-largest party in the legislature. A similar pattern was seen earlier when he aligned with the BJP and later when he aligned with the Congress.

The same thing happened when he aligned with the BJP again at the national level. Deve Gowda’s justification was that the Congress was the principal rival and that national politics required a relationship with the BJP’s national leadership.

That was the stance he took. However, critics pointed out that in those elections, he gave greater importance to members of his own family in terms of candidature.

Then there was the occasion when his son H.D. Kumaraswamy aligned with the BJP in 2006. Deve Gowda was quite upset and had even said he would disown his son for aligning with the BJP. He later compromised and allowed the tie-up to happen, as the JD(S) was coming to power with Kumaraswamy as Chief Minister.

Yet again, in 2018, when the JD(S) tied up with the Congress, Deve Gowda played a crucial role in the talks between the two parties that set the stage for an alliance and the formation of a government in Karnataka.

Sources close to the leader say that he has always had good relations with the high command across parties and enjoyed the same respect and camaraderie with Prime Minister Narendra Modi as well as senior Congress leader Sonia Gandhi. When the JD(S) tied up with the Congress in 2018, the explanation given was that the people of the state had delivered a fractured mandate. It was argued that the JD(S) had a responsibility to provide a government to the people and would work towards that.

Was this move by the BJP on the Rajya Sabha ticket an embarrassment for the JD(S)?

For the JD(S), this is certainly embarrassing in one sense. The BJP, however, would argue that the JD(S) does not have the numbers to justify a Rajya Sabha seat and that the BJP itself has only one winnable seat available.

Political commentator Chandan Gowda made a similar point.

“Deve Gowda has consistently raised policy issues relating to farmers’ welfare, irrigation, Bengaluru’s water needs, and Cauvery water sharing, among others, in Parliament. His views on these matters are likely to command public attention even when articulated outside Parliament.

“At the same time, symbolically, given that his party leaders had expressed an interest in continuing, it is definitely a setback in the relationship between the BJP and the JD(S),” he said.

Internal sources say that some indirect communication would have taken place. It may have been conveyed that the situation would be assessed and that a final decision would be taken later. Otherwise, one may think that Deve Gowda would not have accepted the decision so quietly.

Srinivasaraju feels this would not have much impact, but Shastri believes it could certainly affect JD(S) workers at the ground level in Karnataka.

This could also be a precursor to what the BJP is planning for the 2028 Assembly election and the 2029 Lok Sabha election, Shastri felt.

A BJP-JD(S) alliance is easier in a Lok Sabha election. The BJP gave up three seats in 2024, despite those seats being part of its previous winning tally of 25.

It did so because it believed the alliance was necessary to challenge the Congress government in Karnataka.

But Assembly elections are different. Three Lok Sabha seats translate into roughly 24 Assembly constituencies.

Will the JD(S) be satisfied with just 24 Assembly seats? And if the BJP gives up more seats, what happens to its ambition of securing a majority on its own? That is the question that needs to be answered.

While the BJP-JD(S) alliance delivered electoral dividends in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, the future of the partnership remains an open question. Deve Gowda, H.D. Kumaraswamy and other JD(S) leaders have repeatedly maintained that parliamentary alliances and Assembly politics are separate matters, leaving uncertainty over how the relationship between the two parties will evolve ahead of future state and local body elections.

Read More