Law and order has deteriorated in the state in the past six weeks. Trains and buses are stopped at will and students have lost heavily because of the agitation. Bandhs, relay hunger strikes and demonstrations for and against Telangana continue. All this should stop forthwith.
The agitation for and against the Telangana has also affected governance. Top IAS officers say in confidence that they are not releasing funds for any project. If funds are released for a certain project in a particular region even as a routine, those from the other regions impute motives and charge them with regional discrimination, they say.
One should not read too much in the resignation spree by MLAs on both sides of the divide. They have done so for tactical reasons — for protecting their respective constituencies. Significantly, ministers and MLAs from the Telangana region withdrew their resignations just before Mr Chidambaram’s meeting on January 5.
In a democracy, every problem can be resolved through debate and discussion in a spirit of quid pro quo. Certainly, resigning from the ministry or the Assembly and taking to the streets is no way to address the problem.
Indeed, the sine die adjournment of the State Assembly has helped Speaker N. Kiran Kumar Reddy to wriggle out of a difficult situation caused by the MLAs’ resignations. But facts speak for themselves. The 294-member House has 123 MLAs from coastal Andhra, 119 from Telangana and 52 from Rayalaseema. As 175 members are strongly opposed to the state’s bifurcation, the Andhra Assembly passing a resolution for a separate Telangana state is, apparently, out of the question.
Under the Constitution, Parliament is empowered to form a new state by separating territory from any state or by merging two or more states or parts of states. It can also reduce or increase the area or alter the boundary of any state or even change its name. However, before doing so, a Bill on the matter has to be referred by the President to the legislature of the affected state so that the legislature can express its views within a certain period.
Even if it would be difficult for one to expect the Assembly to pass a resolution on Telangana, the Centre would do well to continue the consultation process with all the stakeholders, including the political parties, students and social workers, to find the best possible and mutually acceptable solution and resolve the tangle.
It would be worthwhile for the Centre, the state and the stakeholders to explore all available options. These include the appointment of a high-power committee consisting of experts, intellectuals, jurists and independent-thinking personalities. The committee should be broadbased to inspire public confidence and trust.
Though the Fazal Ali Commission (1953) was initially opposed to the unification of Telangana with Andhra, it felt that the advantages of a larger Andhra State, including Telangana, were manifold. “It will bring into existence a State of about 32 million with a considerable hinterland with large water and power resources, adequate mineral wealth and valuable raw materials”, it said.
Nonetheless, in the context of the fresh demand for the Telangana state, the Centre could look into the possibility of setting up another States Reorganisation Commission. It could have wider terms of reference to include not just Telangana but the clamour for other states such as Poorvanchal, Bundelkhand and Harit Pradesh (Uttar Pradesh), Gorkhaland (West Bengal), Vidarbha (Maharashtra), Bodoland (Assam) and so on. The proposal for seeking a Presidential Reference to the Supreme Court on Telangana under Article 143 of the Constitution also merits attention.
Essentially, the root cause of the current malaise is Telangana’s continued neglect by successive governments in the past five decades. Andhra Pradesh, India’s fifth largest state, has 23 districts — 10 in Telangana, a semi-arid region that was under the Nizam of Hyderabad’s dictatorial rule; nine in Andhra along the state’s 1,000-km coastline; and four in the Rayalaseema region which were known as Ceded (to the English East India Company) districts.
Telangana may not have mineral resources or quality coal deposits but little has been done to help its people enjoy the benefits of two mega projects on the Telangana-Andhra border — the Srisailam and the Nagarjunasagar dams. Ironically, these projects only help the people of Andhra and Rayalaseema and not those of the Telangana region. Similarly, the Godavari cuts through the Telangana area, but irrigation experts have done little to funnel water from the river to the fields. As a result, this region has witnessed suicides by many farmers. Landholdings are also concentrated in the hands of a few and that is the reason why the Naxalite movement has strong roots here.
It is increasingly felt that even if Telangana is granted statehood, it would not be able to stand on its own feet. Funds from the Centre alone cannot bail out the region. For, it is said to have no “native entrepreneurs” but “carpetbaggers” from the coastal areas of the state. Moreover, while the fast growing and investment-rich Visakhapatnam and the Krishna-Godavari Basin will remain with Andhra, questions have arisen about the future of the 400-year-old Hyderabad city.
Hyderabad is a global brand and its contribution to the overall growth of Andhra Pradesh is immense. According to a study, the IT industry in Hyderabad alone contributes 33 per cent of the state’s GDP in terms of export revenues. Consequently, apprehensions of the image of Brand Hyderabad getting diluted in the event of the state’s bifurcation seem genuine. Proposals for making Hyderabad a Union Territory a la Chandigarh need a careful study.
A new state can be formed if it meets three principal parameters — geographical contiguity, economic viability and administrative convenience. The demand for separate statehood for Telangana may not stand the test of scrutiny. Clearly, statehood is no panacea for its problems. Its woes can be tackled effectively if concerted efforts are made by the Centre and the state to formulate a road map for removing regional imbalances.
There is a strong case for developing this region by deploying the combined water and power resources, mineral wealth and trained and skilled manpower of the entire state. Telangana’s future is inextricable as it is intertwined with a united and integrated state of Andhra Pradesh. Ultimately, its development will depend upon the collective growth of the entire state.
Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru reluctantly yielded to the demand for the formation of Andhra state on linguistic lines (by unifying the Telugu-speaking regions of Andhra in the Madras State of that time) following Potti Sriramulu’s indefinite fast and subsequent death in December 1952. While inaugurating the state of Andhra Pradesh in Hyderabad on November 1, 1956, he aptly said that the “Telangana people should have an important place in the newly formed state” and that the “leaders of Andhra would be on trial”.
No wonder, the onus for the Telangana’s continued backwardness is on the leaders themselves. The solution for the current problem lies in applying necessary course corrections in development and not in bifurcating Andhra Pradesh.
Source: The Tribune, Chandigarh, India.
If you are interested to read about India and its history, check the following:
No comments:
Post a Comment