Page 56 - Leadership in the Indian Army

dictum of being seen but not heard. He had strong views, which he did not hesitate
to articulate. His antipathy towards the British and their ways could not remain
hidden, and this soon brought him into conflict with his superiors.
Nathu Singh’s first brush with authority was over the matter of dining in the
officers’ mess. He was a high-caste Hindu and initially refused to dine in the mess
with the other officers. He made it known that in his home at Dungarpur, his
parents would never have permitted him to share a table with an Englishman,
regardless of his station, and he found no reason to deviate from his religious
beliefs. This naturally created a huge commotion and he was hauled over the coals
for it. Though finally he did agree to dine in the mess, he did so with a great deal
of condescension. His CO, Lieutenant Colonel A.H. Macleverty, wrote on 1
February 1925:

Quick and intelligent at his work, and professionally upto the standard of his rank; good at games. Must
become more liberal in his views if he expects to come upto the standard of a British officer in all
respects…. I do not consider him well suited for regimental life…he has strong religious convictions,
which colour every question…. He finds mess irksome, and states that he cannot dine with Europeans
when at his home…. I do not think that his heart is in his profession, as he has more than once stated that
his ambition is service in his state…. His wife is and must remain in purdah, which will seriously affect
the social side of regimental life….
According to the custom then in vogue, for an officer to be retained in service it
was required that in addition to the CO two other senior officers of the battalion
also give their recommendations. On 3 February 1925, Major B.S.A.F. Greville
wrote:

I am of the opinion that the retention of 2nd Lieutenant Nathu Singh 1/7th Rajput Regiment in the Indian
Army is undesirable…. Owing to his high Hindu principles he conveys the impression that he is
conferring a great concession on his brother officers by dining with them…. He will find it difficult to
come into line with British officers and, in every respect, take their place…. On the other hand, I
consider he has an excellent knowledge of his profession and has good powers of imparting it to others.
He is keen on games and speaks good English.
This opinion was echoed by another officer of his battalion, Major E.M.C.
Brander, who wrote:

Considering that 2/Lieut Thakur Nathu Singh has been trained at Sandhurst, he is obviously very
backward in his ideas, which not only make things difficult for him but awkward for the other officers….
He has been dining in the mess, but on account of his strict religious principles it is obviously distasteful
to him…. He appears to be completely dominated by his religion…. I do not recommend his retention in
the Indian Army. This is to be regretted as professionally he is very competent. He is intelligent, picks up
things quickly and is also good at games.
The recommendations by Nathu Singh’s CO and the two officers were endorsed
by other senior officers in the chain. If anything, they used stronger words. Major
General A.L. Jacob, GOC Waziristan District, wrote:

This officer is entirely out of place in a regiment. The fact of his considering it a mark of condescension
on his part having his meals in the mess with the other officers speaks for itself. From enquiry it appears