Shashikala Kakodkar (7 January 1935[1] – 28 October 2016), popularly known as Tai (ताई- Elder sister in Marathi), was a prominent leader of the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party (MGP).[2] She served as the Chief Minister of Goa, Daman and Diu on two occasions, and also was the President of the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party. She is the first (and as of 2017, the only) woman to serve as the Chief Minister of Goa, Daman and Diu.[3][4][5]

Early life and background
Shashikala Kakodkar was born on 7 January 1935 at Pernem, Goa,[1] Portuguese India, to Dayanand and Sunandabai Bandodkar as their eldest child. Her younger siblings were Usha Vengurlekar, Kranti Rao, Jyoti Bandekar and Siddharth Bandodkar.[6][7]
Kakodkar completed her elementary education from the Mushtifund School and completed her matriculation from the People's High School in Panaji. At age 11, she participated in Goa's liberation movement by shouting patriotic slogans, and was beaten by Portuguese police officers for doing so. She graduated from Karnatak University, Dharwad,[8] with a Bachelor of Arts degree, where she studied anthropology, sociology and history. She completed her postgraduate M.A. degree from Mumbai's Elphinstone College.[6]
In 1963, the first democratically held elections to the Legislative Assembly of Goa, Daman and Diu led to her father Dayanand Bandodkar's election as the first chief minister. That year, she married Gurudatt Kakodkar, and was appointed as the general manager of the Bandodkar Group of Companies in 1968. She was also a member of the Youth Red Cross Society, All India Women's Conference and the Central Social Welfare Board.[6] She built her power base around the Government Primary Teachers' Association.[9]
Entry into politics
Shashikala Kakodkar was engaged in social work ever since her return from Mumbai after obtaining her postgraduate education.[6] She contested the Goa, Daman & Diu Legislative Assembly election, 1967 from the Ponda constituency as a candidate of the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party and won by a huge majority, making her the second woman member of the Goa, Daman & Diu Legislative Assembly.[10] In the Goa, Daman & Diu Legislative Assembly election, 1972, Kakodkar successfully contested as a Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party candidate from the Bicholim constituency.[6]
Minister of State
Following her victory in the 1972 Assembly elections, she was appointed as a Minister of State in the government led by her father, Chief Minister Dayanand Bandodkar. She held the portfolios of Education, Public Health, Social Welfare, Public Assistance, Provedoria and Small Savings.[11] On 12 August 1973, her father died in office, and the legislators of the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party unanimously selected her as the next Chief Minister.[12]
Tenure as Chief Minister
First Shashikala Kakodkar Ministry
Shashikala Kakodkar was sworn in as the Chief Minister of Goa, Daman and Diu on 13 August 1973 at 11:20p.m. by the then-Lieutenant governor of Goa, Daman and Diu Sisirkumar Banerjee at the Raj Bhavan. Along with Kakodkar, Pratapsingh Rane and A. K. S. Usgaonkar were sworn in as Cabinet Ministers. Her own post of Minister of State was kept vacant till the end of the term.[9] Kakodkar also succeeded Bandodkar as the President of the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party and held the charge of both these posts until the Goa Legislative Assembly election, 1977.[5][12][13][14]
Kakodkar took over the 11 portfolios held over by her father Dayanand Bandodkar, and created four more.[9][15] They included General Administration, Secretariat Administration, Home, Finance, Confidential & Vigilance Department, Industry, Public Works Department, Education, Information & Tourism, Public Health, Small Savings, Public Assistance, Provedoria, Social Welfare, and Goa Archives.[9][15]
The portfolios of A. K. S. Usgaonkar and Pratapsingh Rane were left untouched. Usgaonkar who was a freedom fighter and a businessman had five portfolios of Planning, Development, Irrigation & Power, Agriculture and Animal Husbandry.[15] Rane who was a political novice[15] had eight portfolios of Law & Judiciary, Labour, Legislative Affairs, Revenue, Local Self Government, Housing & Junta, Civil Supplies and Food.
As Kakodkar took over the reins of the government, she accepted the mistakes and shortfalls of the Dayanand Bandodkar regime in a bid to win the support of his critics. She vowed to carry forward the unfinished task of her father, in order to retain Bandodkar's supporters. Aureliano Fernandes states that unlike Bandodkar, Shashikala emerged as an efficient administrator. Fernandes further states that Kakodkar was less of an extrovert than her father, and consequently was far less accessible.[9] She was initially seen as "Bandodkar's daughter", but soon emerged as a leader in her own right. This was evident from the victory of Ramakant Khalap, who was the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party's candidate in the Mandrem constituency by-election which was vacant following the demise of Dayanand Bandodkar.[9] Kakodkar also scripted history when the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party candidate Luta Ferrao defeated Dr. Wilfred de Souza in the historic by-election in the Benaulim constituency in 1974.[9][16] In a marked departure from the earlier stand taken by her party, Kakodkar declared that the question of Goa's merger with Maharashtra was a dead issue, and that both Marathi and Konkani were the official languages of Goa.[9][16] Kakodkar established the Economic Development Corporation of Goa, Daman & Diu (now the Economic Development Corporation – EDC, Goa) in March 1975.[17][18] She also established the Goa Board of Secondary & Higher Secondary Education in 1975.[19]
Shashikala Kakodkar's government also took steps towards land reforms. Her government enacted the Goa, Daman and Diu Mundkars (Protection from Eviction) Act, 1975[20] and the Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy (5th Amendment) Act, 1976. The Supreme Court of India upheld the constitutional validity of the Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy (5th Amendment) Act, 1976 in Union Territory of Goa, Daman and Diu v. Lakshmibai Narayan Patil.[21][22]
Some of the other important legislation enacted by the first Shashikala Kakodkar Ministry include the Goa, Daman & Diu Irrigation Act, 1973; Goa, Daman & Diu Chit Funds Act, 1973; Goa, Daman & Diu Barge tax Act, 1973; Goa, Daman & Diu Highways Act, 1974; Goa, Daman & Diu Town and Country Planning Act, 1974; Goa, Daman & Diu Motor Vehicles Act, 1974; Goa, Daman & Diu Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Board Act, 1975; Goa, Daman & Diu Public Gambling, Act 1976 and the Goa, Daman & Diu Habitual Offenders Act, 1976.
Shashikala Kakodkar was criticised by the opposition for alleged favouritism towards her husband Gurudatt Kakodkar in granting transport and cement licenses and tyre dealerships. The opposition had also alleged that the structural design of the Kala Academy was given to her brother-in-law Sharad Vengurlekar. However, none of these charges could be proved.[9] Kakodkar was also accused of giving maximum government advertisements to the Marathi fortnightly Sameer, of which her husband was the editor.[9]
Kakodkar's tenure say a more accommodating approach towards Konkani and a gradual shift from the pro-Marathi stance which was earlier adhered to by the MGP.[9] Fernandes argues that this shift was a result of political exigency, given the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party's victory in the 1974 by-election in Benaulim constituency.[9] In January 1974, Kakodkar's cabinet made Marathi compulsory in all English medium primary schools to the exclusion of Konkani. This move was criticised by the Konkani Bhasha Mandal as a back-door policy to impose Marathi.[9]
Kakodkar's style of decision making basically centred around the Chief Minister and she heavily relied on a coterie for advise which included her husband Gurudatt Kakodkar.[9] Two MLAs of the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party, Jaisingrao Rane and Punaji Achrekar resigned, protesting against Kakodkar's decision-making style without consulting the party rank and file.[9] Pratapsingh Rane also resigned from the government and the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party, prior to the Goa Legislative Assembly election, 1977. He joined the Indian National Congress.[6][23]
It was in these circumstances that Shashikala Kakodkar led the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party in the Goa Legislative Assembly election, 1977.
Second Shashikala Kakodkar ministry
In the Assembly elections of 1977 which were held after the Emergency, Kakodkar faced a challenge leading the party. The resignation of her cabinet Minister Pratapsingh Rane and MLAs Jaisingrao Rane and Punaji Achrekar; allegations of corruption and favouritism were the major challenges faced by Kakodkar. In her manifesto, Kakodkar spoke against the Emergency and the demand for full-fledged statehood to Goa. Her manifesto contained the issue of developing Konkani language (while continuing support to Marathi as an important state language). She also promised an efficient administration, rapid socio-economic development, rise in standard of living, balanced regional development, a High Court for Goa and extension of education, health and agricultural productivity.[9]
Shashikala Kakodkar battled against the odds and the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party once again managed to come back to power, winning 15 seats out of the total 30.[24]  Sarto Esteves cites Kakodkar's leadership capacities as the reason for the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party forming the government in 1977.[6][25] Minister A. K. S. Usgaonkar faced a shock defeat in his Pale, Goa constituency.[24] However, those who had rebelled and deserted the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party on issues of merger and Marathi, were soundly defeated.[24] They included Jaisingrao Rane, Punaji Achrekar, Krishnanath Baburao Naik, Pandurang Purushottam Shirodkar and Janardan Jagannath Shinkre.[9]
Shashikala Kakodkar successfully retained her Bicholim seat and formed the government with the backing of two independent candidates, Makanbhai Morarji Bhatela of Daman and Narayan Fugro of Diu.[1] Kakodkar was sworn in as the Chief Minister of Goa, Daman and Diu for the second time on 7 June 1977.[26] Kakodkar's cabinet included Shankar Laad and Vinayak Dharma Chodankar as Cabinet Ministers, while Raul Hilario Fernandes was appointed as a Minister of State.[27] Narayan Fugro was appointed as the Speaker[28] and Makanbhai Morarji Bhatela the Deputy Speaker.[28]
In her second Ministry too, Kakodkar held the majority of portfolios including Home, Finance (including Small Savings), Personnel & Administrative Reforms, Industries (including Weights and Measures), Planning, Development (including Rural Development
& Cooperation), Education (including Archives), Social Welfare, Public Assistance & Provedoria, Information & Tourism, Public Works Department (including Water Supply), Inland Waterways and Town & Country Planning.  Shankar Vishveshwar Laad was allocated the portfolios of Law & Judiciary, Legislative Affairs, Labour, Revenue (including Forests) and Urban Development (including Municipalities and excluding Town and Country Planning). Vinayak Dharma Chodankar was given the portfolios of Agriculture (including Animal Husbandry and Fisheries), Irrigation (Major, Medium & Minor), Power and also Food, Civil Supplies & Price Control.[28] Minister of State Raul Hilario Fernandes held the portfolios of Education (including Archives), Information & Tourism, Social Welfare and also the portfolio of Public Assistance & Provedoria.[28] After being sworn in, Kakodkar informed the media that her immediate task was to pursue the statehood issue with the Government of India.[29]
To curb unemployment in Goa, Kakodkar established 11 industrial estates during her second term as the Chief Minister. In 1977, Kakodkar's government beautified the Ponda Fort at Farmagudi, Goa and installed an equestrian statue of Chhatrapati Shivaji there.[30][6]

In her second tenure, Kakodkar faced rebellion within her party after an initially peaceful tenure of about one year. First-time MLAs Dilkush Desai and Dayanand Narvekar initiated a rebellion within the M. G. Party demanding that the party's Executive Body be scrapped and fresh elections be held to the body. Subsequently, they demanded the resignation of Chief Minister Kakodkar.[31] As a result of their anti-party activities, the M. G. Party's Executive Body served a show-cause notice upon MLAs Desai and Narvekar. When the M. G. Party's Executive met on 21 January 1979, Chief Minister Kakodkar stated how both the MLAs had engaged in anti-party activities since June 1978. Kakodkar also spoke about the manner in which MLAs Dilkush Desai and Dayanand Narvekar made irresponsible remarks, took an anti-government stance in the Legislative Assembly and engaged in attempts to destabilise the government.[31]
On 26 January 1978, a meeting was organised in Dilkush Desai's Rivona constituency to inform the people about their MLA's anti-party activities. Shashikala Kakodkar stated in the meeting that if need be, she was ready to sit in the opposition but would never concede before selfish politics.[31] In the same meeting, Kakodkar's Law Minister Shankar Vishveshwar Laad also condemned the actions of MLAs Dilkush Desai and Dayanand Narvekar. Laad further stated that the manner in which the pro-poor Communidades (Amendment) Bill was opposed by the duo along with the opposition MLAs, was unfortunate. Subsequently, Laad too joined ranks with the rebels.[31]
The subsequent Assembly Session saw a series of defeats and humiliations for the government led by Kakodkar. On 16 March 1979, Opposition MLA Ananta Narcinva (Babu) Naik tabled a private member's resolution before the House that the prices of cinema tickets be reduced by 30%. MLAs Dilkush Desai and Dayanand Narvekar supported the resolution as a result of which there was a tie (14 votes each, in favour and against the resolution). Speaker Narayan Fugro used his casting vote in favour of the government (i.e., against the resolution) as a result of which the resolution was defeated. MLAs Dilkush Desai and Dayanand Narvekar voted in favour of the government while four Bills were passed by the Assembly on 21 March 1979.[31]
On 23 March 1979, opposition MLA[24] Francisco Sardinha sought leave of the House to introduce an amendment to the Goa, Daman & Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964. MLAs Dilkush Desai and Dayanand Narvekar voted in favour the leave being granted to introduce the Bill, as a consequence of which the government was defeated in the Assembly over this question. On 30 March 1979, a resolution tabled by Opposition MLA[24] Leo Velho was supported by MLAs Dilkush Desai and Dayanand Narvekar, resulting in a tie (14 votes each, in favour and against the resolution). Speaker Narayan Fugro used his casting vote in favour of the resolution (i.e., against the government). Belekar states that although Speaker Narayan Fugro did use his casting vote in favour of the government on a few subsequent occasions, the process of Fugro's rebellion against Kakodkar may have started on 30 March 1979.[31]
On 17 April 1979, the Assembly witnessed a tie (14 votes each, in favour and against) during voting on demands for grants. But by using his casting vote, Speaker Narayan Fugro saved the government. A defeat of the demands for grants would have led to an exit of the Kakodkar government. The same episode was repeated on 18 April 1979 and Speaker Narayan Fugro's casting vote led to the demands for grants being passed.[31]
Exit of Shashikala Kakodkar's Ministry
The tribulations of Shashikala Kakodkar's second Ministry went on in the Assembly Session. The rebellion by MLAs Dilkush Desai and Dayanand Narvekar had reached its last stage and it was almost certain that the duo would join ranks with the Opposition to cause the exit of Shashikala Kakodkar's government. Even if a single additional MLA of the M. G. Party would have joined ranks with the rebels, the government led by Kakodkar would have been in danger. Hence, attempts were rife to obtain the support of another MLA in favour of the rebels.[31]
On 19 April 1979, the discussion was held as regards the demands for grants for three departments: Administration of Justice; Land Revenue, Stamps & Registration; and Legislature Secretariat of the Union Territory. Seven MLAs participated in the discussion but the discussion could not be concluded. The House was adjourned to meet again on 20 April 1979. When the House met on Friday, 20 April 1979 at 2:30p.m., there was a lot of chaos in the House. The Speaker adjourned the House for 14 minutes at 2:40p.m. When the House met again pursuant to the adjournment, the chaos continued. Subsequently, the Speaker adjourned the House to meet again on Monday, 23 April at 2:30p.m.[31]
The reason behind the din on 20 April 1979 was that Kakodkar's Law Minister Shankar Vishveshwar Laad had joined ranks with the rebels after resigning as a Minister. He along with MLAs Dilkush Desai and Dayanand Narvekar had withdrawn support from the Kakodkar government. MLAs Laad, Desai and Narvekar joined the Opposition and staked a claim to form the government under Laad's leadership.[9] Speaker Narayan Fugro too supported the majority faction and personally met the Lieutenant Governor to intimate the same. As a consequence, the House witnessed an Opposition which had the majority of 17 members (including Speaker Fugro) while the Chief Minister Kakodkar had the support of only 13 MLAs. Hence, the government lost the majority in the House. But Kakodkar did not resign and as a result, chaos happened in the Assembly on 20 April 1979.[31] Chief Minister Kakodkar called on the Lieutenant Governor but refused to resign and both agreed that the Assembly was the appropriate place to hold a trial of strength on 23 April 1979.[9] Kakodkar was desperately in need of one MLA to tilt the balance in her favour and pass the Appropriation Bill and thus save the government.[9]
It was under these circumstances that the House met next on Monday, 23 April 1979. As the House met, there was utter chaos in the House. Speaker Fugro was prevented from proceeding towards the Speaker's chair by four Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party MLAs[9] amid loud slogans. The House then had turned into a battleground of sorts. Paperweights, chairs, the Constitution and microphones were hurled at each other. The Speaker's chair was vandalised and even Mahatma Gandhi's bust in the House was not spared. The newspapers then described the incident as a blot on the democratic tradition of the Assembly and also published photographs of the vandalism which occurred in the House.[31]
There was much confusion in the House and it was under these circumstances that Speaker Fugro put the cut motion on demands for grants no. 3- Administration of Justice, to vote. The cut motion was accepted and the division of votes was 15–13. The success of the cut motion meant an exit of the Kakodkar government. Subsequently, Speaker Narayan Fugro stood on the podium and amid the din, declared the defeat of the government on the cut motion and adjourned the House sine die. After Speaker Fugro left the House, the Deputy Speaker Makanbhai Morarji Bhatela[9] occupied the Speaker's chair and announced that the House was adjourned to meet again at 2:30p.m. on 24 April 1979. Subsequently, Speaker Fugro again entered the House and adjourned the House sine die.[31]
Kakodkar sat quietly and it was only later that she castigated the behaviour of her MLAs. In a bid to safeguard her position, she is supposed to have declared that she would not accept the Speaker's ruling because it was not made from the Speaker's chair but from the corner of the dais. The Lieutenant Governor P. S. Gill who received the Speaker's report stated that a defeat on the cut motion to budgetary demands was tantamount to a no-confidence motion in the ministry and that he was convinced that Shankar Laad enjoyed the majority. It was not left to the Union Government to take a decision regarding whether Laad should be allowed to form the ministry or whether President's rule should be imposed.[9]
Shashikala Kakodkar subsequently rushed to New Delhi with the Deputy Speaker Bhatela, which was seen as an attempt to apparently make the transfer of power in favour of Laad as difficult as possible. She called on the President of India Neelam Sanjiva Reddy, Prime Minister of India Morarji Desai and the Union Home Minister Hirubhai M. Patel probably urging them to dissolve the Assembly and impose President's rule.[9] Nine of Kakodkar's supporters (loyal M. G. Party MLAs) dispatched telegrams to New Delhi to this effect to bolster her case.[9]
Shashikala Kakodkar resigned as the Chief Minister on 26 April 1979.[31][32] On 28 April 1979, President's rule was imposed in Goa, Daman and Diu for six months with a provision for its extension. The then Prime Minister of India Morarji Desai rationalised that political horse trading should not take place in pursuance of forming a new government. The Prime Minister's opinion was criticised by some as being against the established parliamentary tradition of the person commanding the largest majority (Shankar Laad in the present case) being invited to form the government. The Leader of the Opposition in the Assembly, Ananta Narcinva (Babu) Naik, criticised the imposition of President's Rule by accusing Prime Minister of India Morarji Desai of having "squarely slaughtered" democracy by not allowing the Shankar Laad group of 17 legislators to form the new government.  Shashikala Kakodkar's supporters welcomed the imposition of the President's Rule.[9]
Wilfred de Souza, the President of the Goa Pradesh Congress Committee, disclosed that the Indian National Congress was parting ways with the Janata Party in Goa for the latter's failure to prevail on the Union Government led by Janata Party's Morarji Desai to allow an alternate government despite Laad's majority. Wilfred de Souza held the General Secretary of the Janata Party G. Y. Bhandare and the Prime Minister's son Kanti Desai responsible for the imposition of President's Rule.[9]
In the Indian general election, 1980, Kakodkar played an active role in ensuring the victory of the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party candidate Sanyogita Rane Sardesai[33] from the North Goa (Lok Sabha constituency).[34] Rane Sardesai remains the only woman ever elected to the Parliament of India from Goa.[35]
Praise and criticism
Political commentators like Sarto Esteves have lavished praise on Kakodkar for her victory in the Goa Legislative Assembly election, 1977 and for her contribution to education, agriculture, industries and social and medical services. Esteves praises her abilities and behaviour which depicted that "Goans could ensure political stability and run the administration of the Territory without constant and continual overseeing by the Centre [New Delhi]."[25]
Other less-generous critics of Kakodkar indict her of running a corruption-prone government, which was particularly dominated by Goa's then-strong transport lobby, and which saw a lot of her fellow Gomantak Maratha Samaj caste members gain predominance in government postings. Towards the end of her tenure, Kakodkar's government was hit by two major agitations—one led by traditional fishermen protesting against a policy which saw mechanised fishing eating majorly into their interests, and another campaign by students demanding a 50% bus fare concession for all bona fide students. The latter was largely successful.[36] Kakodkar's government also faced a major embarrassment after the annual financial budget was leaked in the Marathi daily Gomantak, even before it was placed before the Assembly.[9]
Ramponkar agitation
The Ramponkar agitation by tradition fishermen protested against the mechanisation of fishing. The transition in Goa from traditional to mechanised fishing led to the woes of the ramponkar</i>s (traditional fishermen) being unheard. The ramponkar</i>s had several complaints against mechanised fishing. Mechanised fishing through fishing trawlers posed a serious threat to the livelihood of ramponkar</i>s.[37]
In December 1975, the Goemchya Ramponkarancho Ekvott (G. R. E.) was formally established at the Institute Menezes Braganza. In 1976, the Goemchya Ramponkarancho Ekvott (G. R. E.) forwarded the first memorandum to Chief Minister Kakodkar. However, the response of the government failed to respond favourably and accused the G. R. E. of misleading the traditional fishermen.[31][38] Around this time, the Union Government started various schemes to develop the fishing industry. These schemes were supplemented by government aid and the fishermen were encouraged to seek loans from the banks. The big fishing trawler-owners invested in large-scale fishing for huge profits. The livelihood of the Ramponkar</i>s was threatened but the government failed to respond to their woes.[37]
In 1976, the ramponkar</i>s went on a chain hunger strike for 380 days. The ramponkar</i>s were supported by the Opposition Indian National Congress and Janata Party leaders such as Ananta Narcinva (Babu) Naik, Ferdino Rebello, Victoria Fernandes, Evagrio George. Freedom fighter Mohan Ranade also lent his support to the agitation.[9] A citizens' committee was formed and the issue was debated for the first time in the Legislative Assembly. However, no constitutional action could be taken as the Union Government had declared an Emergency. The ramponkar</i>s held a 40-day dharna at the chief minister's residence and a demonstration in Panaji. In 1978, the second general body meeting of the Goemchya Ramponkarancho Ekvott (G. R. E.) was held and the organisation undertook several local agitations across Goa against the use of mechanised fishing trawlers. It held a protest march meeting in Panaji demanding a 5-kilometre zone that would be free from trawlers and purseiners. A ban on fishing during monsoons was also demanded.[39] By 1978, the fishing sector in Goa had been highly mechanised and most trawler owners had political connections.  A morcha by ramponkar</i>s to the Secretariat in Panaji turned violent resulting in stone pelting.[9] When on 27 January 1978, 85 ramponkar</i>s were arrested and the stalemate continued, two M. G. Party MLAs Dilkush Desai and Dayanand Narvekar, backed what they called the "just demands" of the ramponkar</i>s and criticised the Central Government as well as the local fisheries Minister.[9]
The trawler owners tried to maximise their profits and embarked on a legal battle.[37] In May 1978, they challenged the Portuguese Act of 1897 in the Judicial Commissioner's Court. In his judgment, Justice Tito Menezes was bad as the act was bad as the state government could not follow an ambivalent policy. He opined that night trawling and fishing during monsoons should stop. Following this, there were sporadic protests, agitations, morchas and arrests. The trawlers continued to dredge the bed of the shore as it was 'legal' from their point of view. The trawlers were interested in fishing in fishing within a 2-kilometre zone primarily because this zone was the breeding ground and habitat of most of the species that were demand in the international markets.[37]
The Goemchya Ramponkarancho Ekvott (G. R. E.) realised that a local struggle would not yield the desired results and hence decided to associate with the national leaders. In 1978, they formed they formed the National Forum for Catamaran and Country Boat Fishermen Rights and Marine Life (N. F. F.). The G. R. E. was affiliated to it. The state government patronised the trawlers and developed fish-landing jetties. In July 1978, Matanhy Saldanha  was appointed the Chairman of the N. F. F.[40] Memorandums were submitted to the Prime Minister of India, Union Fisheries Minister and all Members of the Parliament. For the first time, the issue was debated in the Parliament of India and a representative of the N. F. F. was sent to New Delhi to demand a Central Marine Bill. In September 1978,a delegation of the N. F. F. was informed that a model bill would be circulated in all the fishing states to introduce a legislation in their respective Vidhan Sabhas.[37]
In 1979, Matanhy Saldanha was jailed on false charges and later acquitted by the Additional Sessions Judge. By 1980, the ramponkar</i>s had renewed their agitation against non-fishing vessels and mechanised trawlers that caught juvenile mackerels and sardines against Order No. 21-8-81-FSH/6. This was one of the provisions incorporated in the Goa, Daman and Diu Marine Fishing Regulation Act, 1980.[41][37] In 1980, the Union Government led by Indira Gandhi circulated to all the States a draft of the Marine Regulation Bill which was to be enacted in the respective Vidhan Sabhas, because fisheries was a subject in the State List.[38] Meanwhile, clashes between the ramponkar</i>s and trawler owners worsened as the latter demanded the implementation of the Bill. There was clashes and the rampon</i>s were burnt in Velsao, Cansaulim, Benaulim and Betalbatim. The failure of the Kakodkar government to handle the agitation was one of the reasons for the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party's defeat in the Goa Legislative Assembly election, 1980.[37]
50% bus fare concession movement
The other major movement faced by the Shashikala Kakodkar Ministry was the movement by students demanding a 50% bus fare concession for all bona fide students.[42] In 1978, the All Goa Students' Union and the All India Students' Organization, Goa unit, launched a movement demanding concession in bus fares for all bona fide students. The student community in Goa felt that all students should get a 50% concession in bus fares like fellow students in other states of India. The private bus owner's lobby led by the All Goa Bus Owners' Association was very powerful then and also had the backing of the Kakodkar-led government. The student bodies demanded that the government should provide a concession of 50% for all bona fide students in Goa.[43][44]
On 29 December 1978, the students issued a press note announcing their decision to pay only concessional fare from January 1979 should the government delay their demand. They fixed the concessional fare table and set up a committee to deal with any complaints of resistance from bus operators. Student commuters were told to immediately report any resistance to student representatives. The agitation spread across Goa like wildfire.[45] Buses were burnt[43] as violence erupted.[45] Bandhs were observed and students held protest marches.[46] The students braved lathi charges and tear gas.[45] Student leaders such as Desmond D'Costa were detained too.[43] But after hectic parleys, the Kakodkar government finally conceded to the demand of the students on 12 January 1979.[45]
Many leaders of the 50% bus fare concession movement subsequently became towering figures in Goa's public life. These include journalist Sandesh Prabhudesai;[43] lawyers such Aires Rodrigues and Satish Sonak;[45][46] District & Sessions Judge Desmond D'Costa,[47][43] etc.
Budget leak incident
The Marathi daily Gomantak had always stook soldily behind the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party in its propaganda for merger with Maharashtra. The generally very cordial relations with Gomantak however soured during the last years of the Kakodkar government. Fernandes states that during Kakodkar's last years in regime, there is a reason to believe that the editor of Gomantak tried to influence the functioning of the government. When Chief Minister Kakodkar refused to give in, the Gomantak attempted to embarrass Kakodkar by publishing the entire budget of 1978–79 in the newspaper even before it was presented before the Assembly. The Opposition criticised the government and stated that the leakage of the budget had proved the government's inefficiency as it was unable to guard the most important secret document of the administration. The Opposition demanded the resignation of the government led by Kakodkar.[9]
Shashikala Kakodkar alleged that the budget leak was a conspiracy against her government and demanded that it the culprits be severely punished. The accreditation of the reporters were withdrawn and some employees of the Government Printing Press were suspended after an enquiry. This budget leak deteriorated the image of the government.[9]
Post-1980 politics
After the exit of the Kakodkar Ministry in 1979, President's rule was imposed on 28 April 1979.[9] Fresh elections to Legislative Assembly would decide the next Chief Minister of Goa. Prior to the Goa Legislative Assembly election, 1980, many changes took place in Goa's political arena.[31]
The two M. G. Party MLAs who had played a pivotal role in the ouster of the Kakodkar government were Dayanand Narvekar and Dilkush Desai. Narvekar joined the Indian National Congress in December 1979 and was soon followed by Desai. At that time, the Indian National Congress in Goa was known as the Indian National Congress (Urs) faction because after the Indian National Congress split of 1978, the Congress Legislature Party in the Goa, Daman and Diu Legislative Assembly identified itself with the Indian National Congress (Urs). The Indian National Congress (Urs) as a political party in Goa was led by its President Wilfred de Souza, who was not a MLA. The Indian National Congress led by Indira Gandhi (Indira Congress) also had its presence in Goa and was led by Purushottam Kakodkar.[31] But as far as the Goa Legislative Assembly election, 1980 were concerned, the Indian National Congress (Urs) (Urs Congress) as well as the Indira Congress had an understanding between themselves. The Indian National Congress (Urs) led by Wilfred de Souza had a seat sharing agreement with the Indira Congress and the latter was given 6 constituencies. The Indian National Congress (Urs) contested in 22 constituencies while 1 constituency was left for an independent candidate.[31] Indira Gandhi addressed a public meeting on 12 December 1979 at Panaji's Azad Maidan grounds where she apologised to the people for imposing a state of Emergency in 1975. She expressed the need for developing Goa without harming its natural beauty.[31]
The 1980 Assembly Elections, the Indian National Congress (Urs) emerged victorious in 20 out of the 22 constituencies in which it contested. While the Indira Congress won no seats, the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party secured victory in only 7 constituencies. The independents won 3 seats and Shashikala Kakodkar was defeated in the Bicholim constituency by Harish Narayan Prabhu Zantye, an independent candidate.[48] Pratapsingh Rane became the Chief Minister of Goa and Dayanand Narvekar secured a berth in his Ministry.[31] In a subsequent cabinet expansion, Harish Zantye was also included as a Minister.[9]
The Indian general election, 1980 resulted in the Indira Congress emerging victorious. Indira Gandhi became the Prime Minister of India and many members of the Indian National Congress (Urs) attempted to rejoin the Indira Congress. The Indian National Congress (Urs) government in Goa too started negotiations for rejoining the Indian National Congress led by Indira Gandhi. The Goa Pradesh Executive of the Indian National Congress (Urs) passed a resolution deciding to merge with the Indian National Congress. The merger occurred in the second week of February 1980. On 12 February 1980, Chief Minister Pratapsingh Rane announced that the government in Goa was that of the Indira Congress.[31]
Entry into the Indian National Congress
When the Indian National Congress (Urs) faction in Goa merged itself with the Indian National Congress led by Indira Gandhi, 5 MLAs of the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party (Vishnu Rama Naik, Deu Mandrekar, Narsinhbai Tandel, Vinayak Chodankar and Somjibhai Solanki) also joined the Indian National Congress in 1980.[31] On 20 March 1980, A. R. Antulay announced in New Delhi that Shashikala Kakodkar, the President of the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party, had joined the Indian National Congress along with her followers. On 22 March 1980, Kakodkar stated that the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party's Executive had agreed for the merger of the party within the Indian National Congress.[31] This would mean the demise of the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party. Kakodkar stated that the reason behind her joining the Indian National Congress was that she wanted to be in the mainstream.[9]
Kakodkar's announcement was opposed by many senior leaders of the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party. On 23 March 1980, a meeting was held under the leadership of Mukund Shinkre (former Lok Sabha Member of Parliament) where the party workers and leaders including M. S. Prabhu decided not to permit the merger of the party. A temporary committee was established under the Presidency of Mukund Shinkre.[31] The two MLAs of the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party (who had not joined the Indian National Congress) opposed Kakodkar's stance and made every attempt to ensure that the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party survived. These two MLAs were Ramakant Khalap and Babuso Gaonkar.[49] Ramakant Khalap was appointed as the Opposition leader in the Assembly.[50]
Belekar points out[31] that if the merger of the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party had occurred in 1980, the Legislative Assembly would virtually have no Opposition members at all. The Assembly then had 20 MLAs of the Indian National Congress and 7 MLAs of the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party, while the remaining 3 were Independents. If Khalap and Gaonkar would have joined the Indian National Congress along with the rest 5 MLAs of the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party, there would exist no Opposition at all in the Assembly.[31]
Kakodkar aimed to secure positions within the Goa Pradesh Congress Committee organisation for herself and her supporters. But Wilfred de Souza threatened to resign if he was deprived of the position of the Goa Pradesh Congress Committee's President.[9] Kakodkar was not comfortable in the Indian National Congress and she quit the party.[51]
Formation of the Bhausaheb Bandodkar Gomantak Party and return to the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party
Kakodkar decided to return to the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party. The party was then led by Mukund Shinkre. A historic meeting to facilitate Kakodkar's return to the party was organised by the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party's stalwarts such as Dr. Wilfred Menezes Mesquita, J. J. Rodrigues and Shankar Bandekar. But the talks failed[52] and Kakodkar established a new political party called the Bhausaheb Bandodkar Gomantak Party of which she became the President.[51] Kakodkar contested the 1984 Assembly elections from both Canacona and Marcaim constituencies as an independent candidate but lost the elections.[53]
Kakodkar rejoined the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party by merging the Bhausaheb Bandodkar Gomantak Party into the Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party.[52]
The 1989 elections and formation of the Progressive Democratic Front Government
The 1989 elections to the first Goa State Legislative Assembly were held for 40 constituencies on 22 November 1989. Since the Indian National Congress managed to achieve a wafer-thin majoriy with 21 seats, Pratapsingh Rane was elected as the Chief Minister of Goa by the Congress Legislature Party. Rane was sworn in as the first Chief Minister of the newly established State of Goa on 11 January 1990. Rane faced a dilemma as there were too many aspirants for ministerial posts.[9] Dr. Luis Proto Barbosa reluctantly accepted the Speaker's post.[9] Rane decided to expand his cabinet in two phases and assured his legislators that he would soon expand the Cabinet after the Budget Session.[9]
But Rane' strategy did not succeed and his promise of expanding the Cabinet after the Budget Session in March 1990 was shattered as a group of seven MLAs led by Speaker Barbosa split from the Indian National Congress to christen itself as the Goa People's Party (GPP). The GPP staked claim to form a new Ministry with the support of the 18 Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party MLAs and Independent MLA Ananta Narcinva (Babu) Naik.[9]
The GPP consisted of MLAs dissatisfied due to their exclusion from the Cabinet and included Dr. Luis Proto Barbosa (Speaker), Churchill Alemao, Farrel Furtado, Mauvin Godinho, Somnath Zuwarkar, Luis Alex (Mama) Cardozo and John Baptist Gonsalves.[9] The coalition government of the GPP, Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party and an Independent was named as the Progressive Democratic Front (PDF) Government. After a hectic political transition by making Churchill Alemao the interim Chief Minister of Goa on 27 March 1980 for a period of just 17 days (Alemao was the Chief Minister from 27 March 1980 to 13 April 1990) and appointing Ramakant Khalap as the Deputy Chief Minister, Speaker Barbosa was made the Chief Minister of Goa. Union Minister George Fernandes played an instrumental role in the formation of the PDF Government. Dr. Luis Proto Barbosa resigned as the Speaker and was sworn in as the Chief Minister of Goa on 13 April 1990.[9]
Shashikala Kakodkar was sworn in as a Minister in the cabinet headed by Dr. Barbosa.[54] Kakodkar was allotted the portfolios of Education, Art & Culture, Transport and Fisheries.[9]
Contribution as Education Minister
Kakodkar's tenure as Education Minister is widely noted for her policy on the medium of instruction for primary level schools across Goa.[55] Kakodkar's policy of providing government grants to primary (Class I to IV) schools in Goa mandated that grants would be allotted only to schools imparting primary level education in Konkani or Marathi. The policy would be implemented from June 1990. Kakodkar managed to convince the then Chief Minister of Goa Dr. Luis Proto Barbosa and the Official Language Minister Churchill Alemao who too supported the decision.[9] As a consequence of Kakodkar's policy, many primary schools changed their medium of instruction to Konkani or Marathi from English. 130 primary schools operated by the Church's Diocesan Society of Education overnight changed their medium of instruction from English to Konkani.[56] Kakodkar also decided not to permit the establishment of any new primary schools imparting education in English, but this policy was not adhered to by the subsequent governments.[57]
On 4 December 1990, Shashikala Kakodkar along with the Deputy Chief Minister Ramakant Khalap and three other Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party Ministers from the PDF Government resigned after differences within Goa's first coalition government.[9] Chief Minister Dr. Luis Proto Barbosa finally resigned on 10 December 1990, before the voting on the no-confidence motion could take place.[58]
Post 1990 politics
Shashikala Kakodkar was elected to the Goa Legislative Assembly in the 1994 elections from the Maem constituency as a Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party candidate.[59] In 1999, Kakodkar contested the Goa Legislative Assembly as from the Maem constituency as a Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party candidate but was defeated by Prakash Fadte of the Bharatiya Janata Party.[60] Kakodkar contested her last election unsuccessfully as a Maharashtrawadi Gomantak Party candidate from the Maem constituency and was defeated by Harish Zantye of the Indian National Congress.[61] After the defeat in the 2002 elections, Kakodkar did not contest any subsequent election.
Other positions held
Shashikala Kakodkar served as the Chairperson of the Kala Academy.[62] She was the Chairperson, Goa, Daman and Diu Industrial Development Corporation; Chairperson, Goa, Daman and Diu State Sports Council; Chairperson, Goa Cancer Society; President, Red Cross Committee (Goa Branch)[62] and the Working President of the Marathi Bhavan Nirman Committee.[63] In October 1998, Kakodkar was appointed the Chairperson of the Goa Bal Bhavan.[64]
From 1991 to 1992, Kakodkar also served as the Chairperson of the Committee on Petitions and a member of the Committee on Public Undertakings in the Goa Legislative Assembly.[62]
Kakodkar served as the President of the Panjim Gymkhana Club, Panaji.[65]
Social activism and philanthropy
Shashikala Kakodkar also assisted the Goa Football Association in reviving the Bandodkar Gold Trophy.[66][67] Kakodkar was a patron of many social[68] and religious organisations.[69]
In 2006, she participated in the Marathi Bachao Aandolan movement during the tenure of Luizinho Faleiro as Goa's Education Minister against making English a compulsory language at the primary level.[36] Kakodkar was also the convener of the Bharatiya Bhasha Suraksha Manch which subsequently became the Goa Suraksha Manch.[70][71]
Awards and honours
Shashikala Kakodkar received an honorary doctorate by her alma mater, the Karnatak University of Dharwad, in 2014.[72]
Death
Kakodkar died on 28 October 2016 at the Bandodkar House[73] in Altinho, Panaji after a prolonged illness.[74] The Government of Goa declared a 2-day state mourning in her honour.[75] She was cremated with on 29 October 2016 at the St. Inez crematorium in Panaji with full state honours.[76][73]


A  parachute is a device used to slow the motion of an object through an atmosphere by creating drag (or in the case of ram-air parachutes, aerodynamic lift). Parachutes are usually made out of light, strong fabric, originally silk, now most commonly nylon.  They are typically dome-shaped, but vary, with rectangles, inverted domes, and others found. A variety of loads are attached to parachutes, including people, food, equipment, space capsules, and bombs.
A drogue chute is used to aid horizontal deceleration of a vehicle including fixed-wing aircraft and drag racers, provide stability, as to assist certain types of light aircraft in distress,[1][2] tandem free-fall; and as a pilot triggering deployment of a larger parachute.
History
Invention

The earliest fictional account of a parachute type of device was made some 4,000 years ago when the Chinese noticed that air resistance would slow a person's fall from a height. The Western Han Dynasty writer Sima Qian in his book Historical Records recounts the story of Shun, a legendary Chinese emperor who ran away from his murderous father by climbing onto the top of a high granary. As there was nowhere to go, Shun grabbed two bamboo hats and leaped off and glided downward to safety.[3][4]
The earliest evidence for the modern parachute dates back to the Renaissance period.[5] The oldest parachute design appears in an anonymous manuscript from 1470s Renaissance Italy (British Museum Add. MSS 34,113, fol. 200v), showing a free-hanging man clutching a crossbar frame attached to a conical canopy.[6] As a safety measure, four straps ran from the ends of the rods to a waist belt, marked improvement over another folio (189v), which depicts a man trying to break the force of his fall by the means of two long cloth streamers fastened to two bars which he grips with his hands.[7] Although the surface area of the first design appears to be too small to be effective and the wooden frame is superfluous and potentially harmful, the basic concept of a working parachute is apparent.[7]
Shortly after, a more sophisticated parachute was sketched by the polymath Leonardo da Vinci in his Codex Atlanticus (fol. 381v) dated to ca. 1485.[6] Here, the scale of the parachute is in a more favorable proportion to the weight of the jumper. Leonardo's canopy was held open by a square wooden frame, which alters the shape of the parachute from conical to pyramidal.[7] It is not known whether the Italian inventor was influenced by the earlier design, but he may have learned about the idea through the intensive oral communication among artist-engineers of the time.[8] The feasibility of Leonardo's pyramidal design was successfully tested in 2000 by Briton Adrian Nicholas and again in 2008 by the Swiss skydiver Olivier Vietti-Teppa.[9] According to the historian of technology Lynn White, these conical and pyramidal designs, much more elaborate than early artistic jumps with rigid parasols in Asia, mark the origin of "the parachute as we know it."[5]

The Croatian polymath and inventor Fausto Veranzio (1551–1617) examined da Vinci's parachute sketch and kept the square frame but replaced the canopy with a bulging sail-like piece of cloth that he came to realize decelerates a fall more effectively.[7] A now-famous depiction of a parachute that he dubbed Homo Volans (Flying Man), showing a man parachuting from a tower, presumably St Mark's Campanile in Venice, appeared in his book on mechanics, Machinae Novae ("New Machines", published in 1615 or 1616), alongside a number of other devices and technical concepts.[10]
It was once widely believed that in 1617, Veranzio, then aged 65 and seriously ill, implemented his design and tested the parachute by jumping from St Mark's Campanile,[11] from a bridge nearby,[12] or from St Martin's Cathedral in Bratislava.[13][14] In various publications it was incorrectly  claimed the event was documented some thirty years later by John Wilkins, founder and secretary of the Royal Society in London, in his book Mathematical Magick or, the Wonders that may be Performed by Mechanical Geometry, published in London in 1648.[12]  However,  Wilkins wrote about flying, not parachutes, and does not mention Veranzio, a parachute jump, or any event in 1617.  Doubts about this test, which include a lack of written evidence, suggest it never occurred, and was instead a misreading of historical notes.[15]
18th and 19th centuries

The modern parachute was invented in the late 18th century by Louis-Sébastien Lenormand in France, who made the first recorded public jump in 1783. Lenormand also sketched his device beforehand.
Two years later, in 1785, Lenormand coined the word "parachute" by hybridizing an Italian prefix para, an imperative form of parare = to avert, defend, resist, guard, shield or shroud,  from paro = to parry, and chute, the French word for fall, to describe the aeronautical device's real function.
Also in 1785, Jean-Pierre Blanchard demonstrated it as a means of safely disembarking from a hot-air balloon. While Blanchard's first parachute demonstrations were conducted with a dog as the passenger, he later claimed to have had the opportunity to try it himself in 1793 when his hot air balloon ruptured and he used a parachute to descend (this event was not witnessed by others).
Subsequent development of the parachute focused on it becoming more compact. While the early parachutes were made of linen stretched over a wooden frame, in the late 1790s, Blanchard began making parachutes from folded silk, taking advantage of silk's strength and light weight. In 1797, André Garnerin made the first descent of a "frameless" parachute covered in silk.[16] In 1804 Jérôme Lalande introduced a vent in the canopy to eliminate violent oscillations.[16]
Eve of World War I

In 1907 Charles Broadwick demonstrated two key advances in the parachute he used to jump from hot air balloons at fairs: he folded his parachute into a pack he wore on his back and the parachute was pulled from the pack by a static line attached to the balloon. When Broadwick jumped from the balloon, the static line became taut, pulled the parachute from the pack, and then snapped.[18]
In 1911 a successful test took place with a dummy at the Eiffel tower in Paris. The puppet's weight was 75kg; the parachute's weight was 21kg. The cables between puppet and the parachute were 9m long.[17] On February 4, 1912, Franz Reichelt jumped to his death from the tower during initial testing of his wearable parachute.
Also in 1911, Grant Morton made the first parachute jump from an airplane, a Wright Model B piloted by Phil Parmalee, at Venice Beach, California. Morton's device was of the "throw-out" type where he held the parachute in his arms as he left the aircraft. In the same year, Russian Gleb Kotelnikov invented the first knapsack parachute,[19] although Hermann Lattemann and his wife Käthe Paulus had been jumping with bagged parachutes in the last decade of the 19th century.

In 1912, on a road near Tsarskoye Selo, years before it became part of St. Petersburg, Kotelnikov successfully demonstrated the braking effects of a parachute by accelerating a Russo-Balt automobile to its top speed and then opening a parachute attached to the back seat, thus also inventing the drogue parachute.[19]
On March 1, 1912, U.S. Army Captain Albert Berry made the first (attached-type) parachute jump in the United States from a fixed-wing aircraft, a Benoist pusher, while flying above Jefferson Barracks, St. Louis, Missouri. The jump utilized a knapsack style parachute stored or housed in a casing on the jumper's body.

Štefan Banič, an immigrant in the United States, from Slovakia patented an umbrella-like design in 1914[20] and sold (or donated) the patent to the United States military which later on modified his design, resulting in the first military parachute.[21][22] Stefan Banic had been the first person to patent the parachute.[23] Stefan Banic's  design was the first to properly function in the 20th century.[23]
On June 21, 1913, Georgia Broadwick became the first woman to parachute-jump from a moving aircraft, doing so over Los Angeles, California.[24]
In 1914, while doing demonstrations for the U.S. Army, Broadwick deployed her chute manually, thus becoming the first person to jump free-fall.

The first military use of the parachute was by artillery observers on tethered observation balloons in World War I. These were tempting targets for enemy fighter aircraft, though difficult to destroy, due to their heavy anti-aircraft defenses. Because it was difficult to escape from them, and dangerous when on fire due to their hydrogen inflation, observers would abandon them and descend by parachute as soon as enemy aircraft were seen. The ground crew would then attempt to retrieve and deflate the balloon as quickly as possible. The main part of the parachute was in a bag suspended from the balloon with the pilot wearing only a simple waist harness attached to the main parachute. When the balloon crew jumped the main part of the parachute was pulled from the bag by the crew's waist harness, first the shroud lines, followed by the main canopy. This type of parachute was first adopted on a large scale for their observation balloon crews by the Germans, and then later by the British and French. While this type of unit worked well from balloons, it had mixed results when used on fixed-wing aircraft by the Germans, where the bag was stored in a compartment directly behind the pilot. In many instances where it did not work the shroud lines became entangled with the spinning aircraft. Although a number of famous German fighter pilots were saved by this type of parachute, including Hermann Göring,[25] no parachutes were issued to Allied "heavier-than-air" aircrew, since it was thought at the time that if a pilot had a parachute he would jump from the plane when hit rather than trying to save the aircraft.[26]
Airplane cockpits at that time also were not large enough to accommodate a pilot and a parachute, since a seat that would fit a pilot wearing a parachute would be too large for a pilot not wearing one. This is why the German type was stowed in the fuselage, rather than being of the "backpack" type. Weight was – at the very beginning – also a consideration since planes had limited load capacity. Carrying a parachute impeded performance and reduced the useful offensive and fuel load.
In the U.K., Everard Calthrop, a railway engineer and breeder of Arab horses, invented and marketed through his Aerial Patents Company a "British Parachute" and the "Guardian Angel" parachute. Thomas Orde-Lees, known as the "Mad Major," demonstrated that parachutes could be used successfully from a low height (he jumped from Tower Bridge in London)[27][28] which led to parachutes being used by the balloonists of the Royal Flying Corps, though they were not available for aircraft.
In 1911, Solomon Lee Van Meter, Jr. of Lexington Kentucky, submitted for and in July 1916 received a patent for a backpack style parachute – the Aviatory Life Buoy.[29] His self-contained device featured a revolutionary quick-release mechanism – the ripcord – that allowed a falling aviator to expand the canopy only when safely away from the disabled aircraft.[30]
Otto Heinecke, a German airship ground crewman, designed a parachute which the German air service introduced in 1918, becoming the world's first air service to introduce a standard parachute. Although many pilots were saved by these, their efficacy was relatively poor. Out of the first 70 German airmen to bail out, around a third died,[31] including aces such as Oberleutnant Erich Löwenhardt (who fell from 3,600 metres (11,800ft) after being accidentally rammed by another German aircraft) and Fritz Rumey who tested it in 1918, only to have it fail at a little over 900m (3,000ft). These fatalities were mostly due to the chute or ripcord becoming entangled in the airframe of their spinning aircraft or because of harness failure, a problem fixed in later versions.[31]
The French, British, American and Italian air services later based their first parachute designs on the Heinecke parachute to varying extents.[32]
In the UK Sir Frank Mears who was serving as a Major in the Royal Flying Corps in France (Kite Balloon section) registered a patent in July 1918 for a parachute with a quick release buckle, known as the "Mears parachute" which was in common use from then onwards.[33]
Post-World War I
The experience with parachutes during the war highlighted the need to develop a design that could be reliably used to exit a disabled airplane. For instance, tethered parachutes did not work well when the aircraft was spinning. After the war, Major Edward L. Hoffman of the United States Army led an effort to develop an improved parachute by bringing together the best elements of multiple parachute designs.  Participants in the effort included Leslie Irvin and James Floyd Smith. The team eventually created the Airplane Parachute Type-A. This incorporated three key elements.
storing the parachute in a soft pack worn on the back, as demonstrated by Charles Broadwick in 1906;
a ripcord for manually deploying the parachute at a safe distance from the airplane, from a design by Albert Leo Stevens; and
a pilot chute that draws the main canopy from the pack.
In 1919, Irvin successfully tested the parachute by jumping from an airplane. The Type-A parachute was put into production and over time saved a number of lives.[18]  The effort was recognized by the awarding of the Robert J. Collier Trophy to Major Edward L. Hoffman in 1926.[34]
Irvin became the first person to make a premeditated free-fall parachute jump from an airplane. An early brochure of the Irvin Air Chute Company credits William O'Connor as having become, on August 24, 1920, at McCook Field near Dayton, Ohio, the first person to be saved by an Irvin parachute.[35] Another life-saving jump was made at McCook Field by test pilot Lt. Harold H. Harris on October 20, 1922. Shortly after Harris' jump, two Dayton newspaper reporters suggested the creation of the Caterpillar Club for successful parachute jumps from disabled aircraft.
In July 4, 1924 (patent №1607) Gleb Kotelnikov of Russia became the first parachutist to apply the soft packing of a parachute instead of a hard casing.[36]
Beginning with Italy in 1927, several countries experimented with using parachutes to drop soldiers behind enemy lines. The regular Soviet Airborne Troops were established as early as 1931 after a number of experimental military mass jumps starting from August 2, 1930.[19] Earlier the same year, the first Soviet mass jumps led to the development of the parachuting sport in the Soviet Union.[19] By the time of World War II, large airborne forces were trained and used in surprise attacks, as in the battles for Fort Eben-Emael and The Hague, the first large-scale, opposed landings of paratroopers in military history, by the Germans.[37] This was followed later in the war by airborne assaults on a larger scale, such as the Battle of Crete and Operation Market Garden, the latter being the largest airborne military operation ever.[38] Aircraft crew were routinely equipped with parachutes for emergencies as well.
In 1937, drag chutes were used in aviation for the first time, by Soviet airplanes in the Arctic that were providing support for the polar expeditions of the era, such as the first manned drifting ice station North Pole-1. The drag chute allowed airplanes to land safely on smaller ice-floes.[19]
Types
Today's modern parachutes are classified into two categories – ascending and descending canopies.  All ascending canopies refer to paragliders, built specifically to ascend and stay aloft as long as possible.  Other parachutes, including ram-air non-elliptical, are classified as descending canopies by manufacturers.
Some modern parachutes are classified as semi-rigid wings, which are maneuverable and can make a controlled descent to collapse on impact with the ground.
Round

Round parachutes are purely a drag device (that is, unlike the ram-air types, they provide no lift) and are used in military, emergency and cargo applications.  Most have large dome-shaped canopies made from a single layer of triangular cloth gores.  Some skydivers call them "jellyfish 'chutes" because of the resemblance to the marine organisms. Modern sports parachutists rarely use this type.
The first round parachutes were simple, flat circulars. These early parachutes suffered from instability caused by oscillations.  A hole in the apex helped to vent some air and reduce the oscillations.  Many military applications adopted conical, i.e., cone-shaped, or parabolic (a flat circular canopy with an extended skirt) shapes, such as the United States Army T-10 static-line parachute. A round parachute with no holes in it is more prone to oscillate and is not considered to be steerable. Some parachutes have inverted dome-shaped canopies. These are primarily used for dropping non-human payloads due to their faster rate of descent.
Forward speed (5–13 km/h) and steering can be achieved by cuts in various sections (gores) across the back, or by cutting four lines in the back thereby modifying the canopy shape to allow air to escape from the back of the canopy, providing limited forward speed. Other modifications sometimes used are cuts in various sections (gores) to cause some of the skirt to bow out.  Turning is accomplished by forming the edges of the modifications, giving the parachute more speed from one side of the modification than the other. This gives the jumpers the ability to steer the parachute (such as the United States Army MC series parachutes), enabling them to avoid obstacles and to turn into the wind to minimize horizontal speed at landing.
Cruciform
The unique design characteristics of cruciform parachutes decrease oscillation (its user swinging back and forth) and violent turns during descent.  This technology will be used by the United States Army as it replaces its older T-10 parachutes with T-11 parachutes under a program called Advanced Tactical Parachute System (ATPS).  The ATPS canopy is a highly modified version of a cross/ cruciform platform and is square in appearance. The ATPS system will reduce the rate of descent by 30 percent from 21 feet per second (6.4m/s) to 15.75 feet per second (4.80m/s). The T-11 is designed to have an average rate of descent 14% slower than the T-10D, thus resulting in lower landing injury rates for jumpers. The decline in the rate of descent will reduce the impact energy by almost 25% to lessen the potential for injury.
Annular and pull down apex

A variation on the round parachute is the pull-down apex parachute.  Invented by a Frenchman named Pierre-Marcel Lemoigne,[39][40][41] it is called a Para-Commander canopy in some circles, after the first model of the type. It is a round parachute, but with suspension lines to the canopy apex that apply load there and pull the apex closer to the load, distorting the round shape into a somewhat flattened or lenticular shape.
Some designs have the fabric removed from the apex to open a hole through which air can exit, giving the canopy an annular geometry. They also have decreased horizontal drag due to their flatter shape and, when combined with rear-facing vents, can have considerable forward speed.
Rogallo wing
Sport parachuting has experimented with the Rogallo wing, among other shapes and forms.  These were usually an attempt to increase the forward speed and reduce the landing speed offered by the other options at the time.  The ram-air parachute's development and the subsequent introduction of the sail slider to slow deployment reduced the level of experimentation in the sport parachuting community. The parachutes are also hard to build.
Ribbon and Ring

Ribbon and ring parachutes have similarities to annular designs. They are frequently designed to deploy at supersonic speeds. A conventional parachute would instantly burst upon opening and be shredded at such speeds. Ribbon parachutes have a ring-shaped canopy, often with a large hole in the centre to release the pressure. Sometimes the ring is broken into ribbons connected by ropes to leak air even more. These large leaks lower the stress on the parachute so it does not burst or shred when it opens. Ribbon parachutes made of Kevlar are used on nuclear bombs, such as the B61 and B83.[42]
Ram-air
Ram-air parafoils are steerable, and have two layers of fabric—top and bottom—connected by airfoil-shaped fabric ribs to form "cells". The cells fill with higher-pressure air from vents that face forward on the leading edge of the airfoil. The fabric is shaped and the parachute lines trimmed under load such that the ballooning fabric inflates into an airfoil shape. This airfoil is sometimes maintained by use of fabric one-way valves called airlocks.  The first ram-air test jump was performed by United States Navy test jumper Joe Crotwell.
Varieties

Personal ram-air parachutes are loosely divided into two varieties – rectangular or tapered – commonly called "squares" or "ellipticals", respectively. Medium-performance canopies (reserve-, BASE-, canopy formation-, and accuracy-type) are usually rectangular. High-performance, ram-air parachutes have a slightly tapered shape to their leading and/or trailing edges when viewed in plan form, and are known as ellipticals. Sometimes all the taper is on the leading edge (front), and sometimes in the trailing edge (tail).
Ellipticals are usually used only by sport parachutists. They often have smaller, more numerous fabric cells and are shallower in profile. Their canopies can be anywhere from slightly elliptical to highly elliptical, indicating the amount of taper in the canopy design, which is often an indicator of the responsiveness of the canopy to control input for a given wing loading, and of the level of experience required to pilot the canopy safely.
The rectangular parachute designs tend to look like square, inflatable air mattresses with open front ends. They are generally safer to operate because they are less prone to dive rapidly with relatively small control inputs, they are usually flown with lower wing loadings per square foot of area, and they glide more slowly. They typically have a lower glide ratio.
Wing loading of parachutes is measured similarly to that of aircraft, comparing exit weight to area of parachute fabric. Typical wing loading for students, accuracy competitors, and BASE jumpers is less than 5 kg per square meter – often 0.3 kilograms per square meter or less. Most student skydivers fly with wing loading below 5 kg per square meter. Most sport jumpers fly with wing loading between 5 and 7 kg per square meter, but many interested in performance landings exceed this wing loading. Professional Canopy pilots compete with wing loading of 10 to over 15 kilograms per square meter. While ram-air parachutes with wing loading higher than 20 kilograms per square meter have been landed, this is strictly the realm of professional test jumpers.
Smaller parachutes tend to fly faster for the same load, and ellipticals respond faster to control input. Therefore, small, elliptical designs are often chosen by experienced canopy pilots for the thrilling flying they provide. Flying a fast elliptical requires much more skill and experience. Fast ellipticals are also considerably more dangerous to land. With high-performance elliptical canopies, nuisance malfunctions can be much more serious than with a square design, and may quickly escalate into emergencies. Flying highly loaded, elliptical canopies is a major contributing factor in many skydiving accidents, although advanced training programs are helping to reduce this danger.
High-speed, cross-braced parachutes, such as the Velocity, VX, XAOS, and Sensei, have given birth to a new branch of sport parachuting called "swooping." A race course is set up in the landing area for expert pilots to measure the distance they are able to fly past the 1.5-metre (4.9ft) tall entry gate. Current world records exceed 180 metres (590ft).
Aspect ratio is another way to measure ram-air parachutes. Aspect ratios of parachutes are measured the same way as aircraft wings, by comparing span with chord. Low aspect ratio parachutes, i.e., span 1.8 times the chord, are now limited to precision landing competitions. Popular precision landing parachutes include Jalbert (now NAA) Para-Foils and John Eiff's series of Challenger Classics. While low aspect ratio parachutes tend to be extremely stable, with gentle stall characteristics, they suffer from steep glide ratios and a small tolerance, or "sweet spot", for timing the landing flare.
Because of their predictable opening characteristics, parachutes with a medium aspect ratio around 2.1 are widely used for reserves, BASE, and canopy formation competition.  Most medium aspect ratio parachutes have seven cells.
High aspect ratio parachutes have the flattest glide and the largest tolerance for timing the landing flare, but the least predictable openings. An aspect ratio of 2.7 is about the upper limit for parachutes. High aspect ratio canopies typically have nine or more cells. All reserve ram-air parachutes are of the square variety, because of the greater reliability, and the less-demanding handling characteristics.
General characteristics

Main parachutes used by skydivers today are designed to open softly. Overly rapid deployment was an early problem with ram-air designs. The primary innovation that slows the deployment of a ram-air canopy is the slider; a small rectangular piece of fabric with a grommet near each corner. Four collections of lines go through the grommets to the risers (risers are strips of webbing joining the harness and the rigging lines of a parachute). During deployment, the slider slides down from the canopy to just above the risers. The slider is slowed by air resistance as it descends and reduces the rate at which the lines can spread. This reduces the speed at which the canopy can open and inflate.
At the same time, the overall design of a parachute still has a significant influence on the deployment speed. Modern sport parachutes' deployment speeds vary considerably. Most modern parachutes open comfortably, but individual skydivers may prefer harsher deployment.
The deployment process is inherently chaotic. Rapid deployments can still occur even with well-behaved canopies. On rare occasions, deployment can even be so rapid that the jumper suffers bruising, injury, or death. Reducing the amount of fabric decreases the air resistance.  This can be done by making the slider smaller, inserting a mesh panel, or cutting a hole in the slider.
Deployment

Reserve parachutes usually have a ripcord deployment system, which was first designed by Theodore Moscicki, but most modern main parachutes used by sports parachutists use a form of hand-deployed pilot chute. A ripcord system pulls a closing pin (sometimes multiple pins), which releases a spring-loaded pilot chute, and opens the container; the pilot chute is then propelled into the air stream by its spring, then uses the force generated by passing air to extract a deployment bag containing the parachute canopy, to which it is attached via a bridle. A hand-deployed pilot chute, once thrown into the air stream, pulls a closing pin on the pilot chute bridle to open the container, then the same force extracts the deployment bag. There are variations on hand-deployed pilot chutes, but the system described is the more common throw-out system.
Only the hand-deployed pilot chute may be collapsed automatically after deployment—by a kill line reducing the in-flight drag of the pilot chute on the main canopy. Reserves, on the other hand, do not retain their pilot chutes after deployment. The reserve deployment bag and pilot chute are not connected to the canopy in a reserve system. This is known as a free-bag configuration, and the components are sometimes not recovered after a reserve deployment.
Occasionally, a pilot chute does not generate enough force either to pull the pin or to extract the bag. Causes may be that the pilot chute is caught in the turbulent wake of the jumper (the "burble"), the closing loop holding the pin is too tight, or the pilot chute is generating insufficient force. This effect is known as "pilot chute hesitation," and, if it does not clear, it can lead to a total malfunction, requiring reserve deployment.
Paratroopers' main parachutes are usually deployed by static lines that release the parachute, yet retain the deployment bag that contains the parachute—without relying on a pilot chute for deployment. In this configuration, the deployment bag is known as a direct-bag system, in which the deployment is rapid, consistent, and reliable.
Safety
A parachute is carefully folded, or "packed" to ensure that it will open reliably. If a parachute is not packed properly it can result in a malfunction where the main parachute fails to deploy correctly or fully. In the United States and many developed countries, emergency and reserve parachutes are packed by "riggers" who must be trained and certified according to legal standards. Sport skydivers are always trained to pack their own primary "main" parachutes.
Exact numbers are difficult to estimate because parachute design, maintenance, loading, packing technique and operator experience has a significant impact on malfunction rates. Approximately one in a thousand sport main parachute openings malfunctions, requiring the use of the reserve parachute, although some skydivers have many thousands of jumps and never needed to use their reserve parachute.
Reserve parachutes are packed and deployed somewhat differently. They are also designed more conservatively, favouring reliability over responsiveness and are built and tested to more exacting standards, making them more reliable than main parachutes. Regulated inspection intervals, coupled with significantly less use contributes to reliability as wear on some components can adversely affect reliability. The primary safety advantage of a reserve parachute comes from the probability of an unlikely main malfunction being multiplied by the even less likely probability of a reserve malfunction. This yields an even smaller probability of a double malfunction, although there is also a small possibility that a malfunctioning main parachute cannot be released and thus interfere with the reserve parachute. In the United States, the 2017 average fatality rate is recorded to be 1 in 133,571 jumps.[43]
Injuries and fatalities in sport skydiving are possible even under a fully functional main parachute, such as may occur if the skydiver makes an error in judgment while flying the canopy which results in a high-speed impact either with the ground or with a hazard on the ground, which might otherwise have been avoided, or results in collision with another skydiver under canopy.
Malfunctions

Below are listed the malfunctions specific to round parachutes.
A "Mae West" or "blown periphery" is a type of round parachute malfunction that contorts the shape of the canopy into the outward appearance of a large brassiere, named after the generous proportions of the late actress Mae West.  The column of nylon fabric, buffeted by the wind, rapidly heats from friction and opposite sides of the canopy can fuse together in a narrow region, removing any chance of it opening fully.
A "streamer" is the main chute which becomes entangled in its lines and fails to deploy, taking the shape of a paper streamer.  The parachutist cuts it away to provide space and clean air for deploying the reserve.[44]
An "inversion" occurs when one skirt of the canopy blows between the suspension lines on the opposite side of the parachute and then catches air. That portion then forms a secondary lobe with the canopy inverted. The secondary lobe grows until the canopy turns completely inside out.
A "barber's pole" describes having a tangle of lines behind the jumper's head, who cuts away the main and opens his reserve.[44]
The "horseshoe" is an out-of-sequence deployment, when the parachute lines and bag are released before the bag drogue and bridle. This can cause the lines to become tangled or a situation where the parachute drogue is not released from the container.[44]
"Jumper-In-Tow" involves a static line that does not disconnect, resulting in a jumper being towed behind the aircraft.[44]
Records

On August 16, 1960, Joseph Kittinger, in the Excelsior III test jump, set the previous world record for the highest parachute jump. He jumped from a balloon at an altitude of 102,800 feet (31,333m) (which was also a manned balloon altitude record at the time). A small stabilizer chute deployed successfully, and Kittinger fell for 4 minutes and 36 seconds,[45] also setting a still-standing world record for the longest parachute free-fall, if falling with a stabilizer chute is counted as free-fall. At an altitude of 17,500 feet (5,300m), Kittinger opened his main chute and landed safely in the New Mexico desert. The whole descent took 13 minutes and 45 seconds.[46] During the descent, Kittinger experienced temperatures as low as −94°F (−70°C). In the free-fall stage, he reached a top speed of 614mph (988km/h or 274m/s), or Mach 0.8.[47]
According to Guinness World Records, Yevgeni Nikolayevich Andreyev (Soviet Union) held the official FAI record for the longest free-fall parachute jump (without drogue chute) after falling for 24,500m (80,380ft) from an altitude of 25,457m (83,523ft) near the city of Saratov, Russia on November 1, 1962, until broken by Felix Baumgartner in 2012.
Felix Baumgartner broke Joseph Kittinger's record on October 14, 2012, with a jump from an altitude of 127,852 feet (38,969.3 m) and reaching speeds up to 833.9mph (1,342.0km/h or 372.8m/s), or nearly Mach1.1.  Kittinger was an advisor for Baumgartner's jump.[48]
Alan Eustace made a jump from the stratosphere on October 24, 2014, from an altitude of 135,889.108 feet (41,419 m). However, because Eustace's jump involved a drogue parachute while Baumgartner's did not, their vertical speed and free fall distance records remain in different record categories.
See also
Ballistic parachute
Free fall
Parachute landing fall
Ejection seat

Sources

 The Canadian Sport Parachuting Association—The governing body for sport skydiving in Canada
 – Scientific American, June 7, 1913

 The United States Parachute Association—The governing body for sport skydiving in the U.S.
 (text-searchable PDFs)
 June 1945, Popular Science James L. H. Peck – detailed article on parachutes
 First female parachutist