Thursday, 28 March 2024 »  Login
in

Who Want Telangana .....and Why

Problems with inefficient/corrupt officers? Cheated by someone? Complaints about the administration? Get heard by the city here!

Moderator: The Moderator Team

Re: Who Want Telangana .....and Why

by indian » Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:13 pm

History of the Telangana movement
Monarchy to Democracy
When India became independent from the British Empire in 1947, the Nizam of Hyderabad, a Muslim king, wanted Hyderabad State to remain independent under the special provisions given to princely states. The Hindus of the Hyderabad State, who accounted for 93 per cent of its population, launched the `Join India' movement with the cooperation of a few patriotic Muslims for the integration of the State with the rest of the country. The State Congress leaders and Arya Samaj leaders invoked themselves whole-heartedly in the movement. The peasants of the state, influenced by Communist party, had also revolted against the Nizam, who tried to suppress their armed struggle against landlords. Qasim Razvi led Private Razakar Muslim army fighting for continuation of the Nizam's rule, did worst forms of atrocities on people. The Government of India liberated and assimilated the Hyderabad State on 17 September 1948, in an operation by the Indian Army called Operation Polo.
A Communist-led peasant revolt started in Telangana in 1946, which lasted until 1951. Hyderabad state included 9 Telugu speaking districts of Telangana, 4 Kannada districts in Gulbarga division & 4 Marathi speaking districts in Aurangabad division. Ranga reddy district was carved out of Hyderabad district of Telangana in 1978. Now Telangana has 10 districts. The Central Government appointed a civil servant, M. K. Vellodi, as First Chief Minister of Hyderabad state on 26 January 1950. He administered the state with the help of bureaucrats from Madras state and Bombay state. In 1952, Dr. Burgula Ramakrishna Rao was elected Chief Minister of Hyderabad State in the first democratic election. During this time there were violent agitations by some Telanganites to send back bureaucrats from Madras state, and to strictly implement 'Mulki-rules'(Local jobs for locals only), which was part of Hyderabad state law since 1919.
In 1952, Telugu-speaking people were distributed in about 22 districts, 9 of them in the former Nizam's dominions of the princely state of Hyderabad, 12 in the Madras Presidency (Andhra region), and one in French-controlled Yanam. Meanwhile, Telugu-speaking areas in the Andhra region were carved out of the erstwhile Madras state by leaders like Potti Sri Ramulu to create Andhra State in 1953, with Kurnool as its capital.

1952 Mulki agitation and Merger of Telangana and Andhra
In 1952, there was a student’s agitation against non Mulkis (mulki meaning locals). The agitation arose after many jobs were taken by people from coastal Andhra. The popular slogans were Non-Mulki go back and Idli Sambar go back. During the protests seven students were killed in police firing. In December 1953, the States Reorganization Commission was appointed to prepare for the creation of states on linguistic lines. The commission, due to public demand, recommended disintegration of Hyderabad state and to merge Marathi speaking region with Bombay state and Kannada speaking region with Mysore state.

Hyderabad state in 1956(in yellowish green)
After reorganization in 1956, Regions of the state west of Red and Blue lines merged with Bombayand Mysore states respectively and rest of the state(Telangana) was merged with Andhra state to form Andhra Pradesh state

The States Reorganisation Commission (SRC) was not in favour of an immediate merger of Telugu speaking Telangana region with Andhra state, despite their common language. Paragraph 382 of the States Reorganisation Commission Report (SRC) said "opinion in Andhra is overwhelmingly in favour of the larger unit; public opinion in Telangana has still to crystallize itself. Important leaders of public opinion in Andhra themselves seem to appreciate that the unification of Telangana with Andhra, though desirable, should be based on a voluntary and willing association of the people and that it is primarily for the people of Telangana to take a decision about their future". The people of Telangana had several concerns. The region had a less-developed economy than Andhra, but with a larger revenue base (mostly because it taxed rather than prohibited alcoholic beverages), which people of Telangana feared might be diverted for use in Andhra. They feared that planned irrigation projects on the Krishna and Godavari rivers would not benefit Telangana proportionately, even though people of Telangana controlled the headwaters of the rivers. It was feared that the people of Andhra, who had access to higher standards of education under the British rule, would have an unfair advantage in seeking government and educational jobs.
The commission proposed that the Telangana region be constituted as a separate state with a provision for unification with Andhra state, after the 1961 general elections, if a resolution could be passed in the Telangana state assembly with a two-thirds majority. The Chief Minister of Hyderabad State, Burgula Ramakrishna Rao, expressed his view that a majority of Telangana people were against the merger. He supported the Congress party's central leadership decision to merge Telangana and Andhra despite opposition in Telangana. Andhra state assembly passed a resolution on 25 November 1955 to provide safeguards to Telangana. The resolution said, "Assembly would further like to assure the people in Telangana that the development of that area would be deemed to be special charge, and that certain priorities and special protection will be given for the improvement of that area, such as reservation in services and educational institutions on the basis of population and irrigational development." Telangana leaders did not believe the safeguards would work. With lobbying from Andhra Congress leaders and with pressure from the Central leadership of Congress party, an agreement was reached between Telangana leaders and Andhra leaders on 20 February 1956 to merge Telangana and Andhra with promises to safeguard Telangana's interests.
Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru initially was skeptical of merging Telangana with Andhra State, fearing a "tint of expansionist imperialism" in it. He compared the merger to a matrimonial alliance having "provisions for divorce" if the partners in the alliance cannot get on well. Following the Gentlemen's agreement, the central government established a unified Andhra Pradesh on November 1, 1956. The agreement provided reassurances to Telangana in terms of power-sharing as well as administrative domicile rules and distribution of expenses of various regions. Anti-Nehru politics emerged with the repression of the Telengana movement; many within the Congress Party extended their hands to leftist causes. Feroze Gandhi was among them.


Grievances of Telangana proponents
Telangana is the largest of the three regions of Andhra Pradesh state, covering 41.47% of its total area. It is inhabited by 40.54% of the state's population and contributes about 76% of the state's revenues, excluding the contribution of the central government. When the central government's contribution to revenue is included, Andhra Pradesh's revenue sources come from Telangana: 61.47% (including 37.17% from Hyderabad); from the central government: 19.86%; from Andhra: 14.71%; and from Rayalaseema: 3.90%. Proponents of a separate Telangana state cite perceived injustices in the distribution of water, budget allocations, and jobs. Within the state of Andhra Pradesh, 68.5% of the catchment area of the Krishna River and 69% of the catchment area of the Godavari River are in the plateau region of Telangana and flowing through the other parts of the state into Bay of Bengal. Telangana and non coastal parts of Karnataka and Maharashtra states form Deccan Plateau. Telangana supporters state that the benefits of irrigation through the canal system under major irrigation projects are accruing substantially, 74.25%, to the Coastal Andhra region, while the share to Telangana is 18.20%. The remaining 7.55% goes to the Rayalaseema region.
The share of education funding for Telangana ranges from 9.86% in government-aided primary schools to 37.85% in government degree colleges. The above numbers include the expenditure in Hyderabad. Budget allocations to Telangana are generally less than 1/3 of the total Andhra Pradesh budget. There are allegations that in most years, funds allocated to Telangana were never spent. According to Professor Jayashankar only 20% of the total Government employees, less than 10% of employees in the secretariat, and less than 5% of department heads in the Andhra Pradesh government are from Telangana; those from other regions make up the bulk of employment. He also alleged that the state was represented by Telangana chief ministers for only 6 1/2 years out of over five decades of its existence, with no chief minister from the region being in power continuously for more than 2 1/2 years. As per Srikrishna committee on Telangana, Telangana held the position of CM for 10.5 years while Seema-Andhra region held it for 42 years
. Proponents of a separate Telangana state feel that the agreements, plans, and assurances from the legislature and Lok Sabha over the last fifty years have not been honored, and as a consequence Telangana has remained neglected, exploited, and backward. They allege that the experiment to remain as one state has proven to be a futile exercise and that separation is the best solution.

URL: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_ ... a_movement

Pre-2004 Telangana protests
The Pre-2004 Telangana protests refers to the movements and agitations related to the Telangana movement that took place before the year 2004. Andhra state and Telangana was merged to form Andhra Pradesh state on 1 November 1956 after providing safeguards to Telangana in the form of Gentlemen's agreement. Soon after the formation of Andhra Pradesh, people of Telangana expressed dissatisfaction over how the agreements and guarantees were implemented. Protests initially led by student’s latet under the leadership of newly formed political party Telangana Praja Samithi, led by M. Chenna Reddy and Konda Lakshman Bapuji, a minister who resigned from the cabinet led by then Chief Minister Kasu Brahmananda Reddy, demanding the formation of a separate state of Telangana. More than three hundred people died in police firing. Under the Mulki rules in force at the time, anyone who had lived in Hyderabad for 15 years was considered a local, and was thus eligible for certain government posts. When the Supreme Court upheld the Mulki rules at the end of 1972, the Jai Andhra movement, with the aim of re-forming a separate state of Andhra, was started in Coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema regions.

1969 Telangana Agitation
In the years after the formation of Andhra Pradesh state, people of Telangana expressed dissatisfaction over how the agreements and guarantees were implemented. Discontent intensified in January 1969, when the guarantees that had been agreed on were supposed to lapse. All the Andhra employees who migrated to capital city in 1956 will be considered 'local' in 1969 after 12 years of residence per mulki rules. Student agitation for the continuation of the agreement began at Khammam and spread to other parts of the region. One section of students (which appeared dominant) wanted a separate state of Telangana while the other wanted implementation of safeguards. On 19 January, all party accord was reached to ensure the proper implementation of Telangana safeguards. Accord's main points were 1) All non-Telangana employees holding posts reserved for Telangana locals will be transferred immediately. 2) Telangana surpluses will be used for Telangana development. 3) Appleal to Telangana students to call off agitation.
On January 23, protests turned violent when a crowd of about 1000 agitators tried to set fire to a Sub-Inspector's residence. This resulted in police firing in which 17 people were injured who were admitted to various hospitals. Meanwhile certain Andhra employees challenged the transfer orders promised by the all party accord, by filing a petition in the AP high court. On January 29, Army was called in by the government to maintain law & order as the Agitation quickly turned violent. In February, Mulki rules (local jobs for local people), as promised in Gentleman's agreement, were declared by high court as void but this judgment was stayed by divisional bench of high court. Quoting statistics of development in Telangana area over the last 12 years, the chief minister maintained the state of the Andhra Pradesh was "irreversible" and made an appeal to people to help maintain unity & integrity. Protests continued in March, and a bundh turned violent when protestors burnt buses.
In April, protestors tried to disrupt a meeting of CPI (which was opposed to the division of the state) by indulging in stone-pelting. Police had to resort to live firing after their attempts to control the crowd by lathi-charge & firing in the air didn't yield results. In the ensuing firing, 3 people were killed and several injured. Around 354 arrests were made related to various arson incidents during the agitation. Then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi called for a high-level meeting to discuss the issue while ruling out the division of the state. After several days of talks with leaders of both regions, on 12 April 1969, Prime minister came up with Eight point plan.
Eight point plan: This plan includes appointment of Five committees;
1. High-powered committee would be set up to determine financial surpluses to Telangana.
2. Telangana development committee
3. Plan implementation committee
4. Committee of jurists to be consulted on safeguards
5. Committees to look into grievances of public servants.

Telangana leaders were not satisfied with the accord. Protests continued under the leadership of newly formed political party Telangana Praja Samithi asking for the formation of Telangana and people continued to get killed in police firing.
Justice Bhargava committee which looked into Telangana surpluses found that 283 million rupees was diverted from Telangana to Andhra region between 1956 and 1968. Economist C H Hanumanth Rao further analyzed the data from the committee report and concluded that for Telangana, cumulative surplus with interest during that period was 1.174 Billion rupees. During this period, the revenue budget of the state grew from 586 million rupees in 1957 to 2.04 billion rupees in 1968.

Government employees and opposition members of the state legislative assembly threatened "direct action" in support of the students. Purushotham Rao was for outright separation, and he supported the student views. He unveiled a map of Telangana in the state assembly. A memorial called Gun Park was built near Public Gardens, Hyderabad to commemorate students who lost their lives in the struggles of 1969.
Although the Congress faced some dissension within its ranks, its leadership stood against additional linguistic states. As a result, defectors from the Congress, led by M. Chenna Reddy, founded theTelangana Praja Samithi political party in 1969. In the May 1971 parliamentary elections, Telangana Praja Samithi won 10 out the 14 Parliament seats in Telangana. Despite these electoral successes, some of the new party leaders gave up their agitation in September 1971 after realizing that the Prime Minister was not inclined to towards a separate state of Telangana, and rejoined the safer political haven of the Congress ranks.
During this period, the Government promised to correct what critics saw as a violation of the promises of the Gentleman's agreement in the areas of jobs, budget allocations, and educational facilities. Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was strongly against the division of the state, but on her recommendation, P. V. Narasimha Rao became the first Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh from Telangana on 30 September 1971.
In 1972, candidates of the Telangana Praja Samithi party contested all the available seats for the assembly elections. However, only Thakkalapalli Purushothama Rao got elected, from Wardhannapet constituency in Warangal District.

Six-Point Formula of 1973
On 21 September 1973, a political settlement was reached with the Government of India with a Six-Point Formula. It was agreed upon by the leaders of the two regions to prevent any recurrence of such agitations in the future.
1. Accelerated development of the backward areas of the State, and planned development of the State capital, with specific resources earmarked for these purposes; and appropriate representation of such backward areas in the State legislature, along with other experts, should formulate and monitor development schemes for the areas. The formation at the State level of a Planning Board as well as Sub-Committees for different backward areas should be the appropriate instrument for achieving this objective.
2. Institution of uniform arrangements throughout the State enabling adequate preference being given to local candidates in the matter of admission to educational institutions, and establishment of a new Central University at Hyderabad to argument the exiting educational facilities should be the basis of the educational policy of the State.
3. Subject to the requirements of the State as a whole, local candidates should be given preference to specified extent in the matter of direct recruitment to (i) non-gazetted posts (other than in the Secretariat. Offices of Heads of Department, other State level offices and institutions and the Hyderabad City Police) (ii) corresponding posts under the local bodies and (iii) the posts of Tahsildars, Junior Engineers and Civil Assistant Surgeons. In order to improve their promotion prospects, service cadres should be organised to the extent possible on appropriate local basis up to specified gazetted level, first or second, as may be administratively convenient.
4. A high-power administrative tribunal should be constituted to deal with the grievances of services regarding appointments, seniority, promotion and other allied matters. The decisions of the Tribunal should ordinarily be binding on the State Government. The constitution of such a tribunal would justify limits on recourse to judiciary in such matters.
5. In order that implementation of measures based on the above principles does not give rise to litigation and consequent uncertainty, the Constitution should be suitably amended to the extent necessary conferring on the President enabling powers in this behalf.
6. The above approach would render the continuance of Mulki Rules and Regional Committee unnecessary.
To avoid legal problems, constitution was amended (32nd amendment) to give the legal sanctity to the Six-point formula.
In 1985, when Telangana employees complained about the violations to six point formula, government enacted government order 610 (GO 610) to correct the violations in recruitment. As Telangana people complained about non implementation of GO 610, in 2001, government constituted Girglani commission to look into violations.
URL: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-2004 ... la_of_1973

1972 Jai Andhra movement
Jai Andhra movement is a 1972 political movement in support for the creation of Andhra state. In the police firing eight people were killed. It was starred after the failure to implement non local rule for government jobs. Prominent leaders from Coastal Andhra like Gouthu Latchanna, B. V. Subba Reddy, Kakani Venkataratnam, Vasantha Nageshwar Rao etc. participated in the agitation. It was a sequel to the 1969 Telangana movement.

Demands of the activists
The activists demanded that the safeguards for Telangana region be removed for continuation of Andhra Pradesh. The demands were
1. Mulki rules (Local quota) be removed
2. Supreme Court order in favour of locals repealed
3. Telangana Regional committee dissolved
4. Replace two budgets, one for Telangana region and one for Andhra region into one state budget


The movement
Under the Mulki rules in force at the time, anyone who had lived in Hyderabad for 15 years was considered a local, and was thus eligible for certain government posts. When the Supreme Court upheld the Mulki rules at the end of 1972, the Jai Andhra movement, with the aim of re-forming a separate state of Andhra, was started in Coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema regions.
In 1972, Latchanna took a leading role in the Jai Andhra movement started by students of Andhra University demanding the division of Andhra Pradesh into old Andhra state and Telangana state on the issue of "Mulki" rules. He was imprisoned in Mushirabad Central Jail and released in 1973.

Police firing
In the police firing eight people were killed. Kakani Venkataratnam, a former minister, died of shock at the height of separate Andhra agitation on December 25, 1972 when eight people were killed in police firing.

Aftermath
Removal of Mulki rules and all other demands were met and a six-point formula was put in place.
After nine ministers from Andhra region in the P. V. Narasimha Rao cabinet resigned, he had to resign as Chief minister of Andhra Pradesh on 10 January 1973, and President's rule was imposed in the state.

URL: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1972_Jai_Andhra_movement

Srikrishna Committee Report:
History of Belied Promises
The SKC does recognise that the States Reorganisation Commission (SRC) headed by Justice Fazal Ali had observed in its report that “One of the principal causes of opposition to Vishalandhra also seems to be the apprehension felt by the educationally-backward people of Telangana that they may be swamped and exploited by the more advanced people of the coastal area. In the Telangana district outside the city of Hyderabad education is woefully backward……the real fear of the people of Telangana is that if they join Andhra they will be unequally placed in relation to the people of Andhra and in this partnership the major partner will derive all the advantages immediately while Telangana itself may be converted into a colony by the enterprising coastal Andhra....”
The SRC had accordingly recommended that “After taking all these factors into consideration we have come to the conclusions that it will be in the interests of Andhra as well as Telangana, if for the present, the Telangana area is to be constituted into a separate State, which may be known as the Hyderabad State” and ““the residuary state of Hyderabad might unite with Andhra after the general elections likely to be held in about 1961, if by a two-thirds majority the legislature of Hyderabad state expresses itself in favour of such a unification.”

Disregarding this recommendation, the Nehru Government had gone ahead with the merger and formation of the state of Andhra. The SKC has however disregarded the fact that no less than India’s first Prime Minister had repeatedly indicated that this merger could be dissolved if the people of Telangana felt a sense of discrimination. On 5th March, 1956, announcing the decision to merge Telangana with Andhra Pradesh, Nehru had reportedly said “ek masoom bholi bhali bachchi ka ek natkhat ke saath shadi ho raha hai. Bad me ittefaq nahi hone par talaq de sakte hain”. (An innocent girl (Telangana) is being married off to a naughty boy (Andhra). Later if they fail to remain in agreement, they can seek a divorce.) Again, at the inauguration of the state of Andhra Pradesh, Nehru declared: “From this day Andhra is on trial regarding treatment of the Telangana people. If the people of Telangana are ill-treated then they will have the right to seek separation”.

Further, the formation of AP was preceded by a “Gentlemen’s Agreement (1956)” was signed between Telangana and Andhra leaders, intended to provide various safeguards to allay the apprehensions of the people of Telangana regarding power sharing, domicile rules for reservation in employment, education etc. The SKC’s recommendations today, of a Telangana Regional Council in its ‘best option scenario’ to address the grievances and desire for empowerment of the people of Telangana, seems out of date and out of step with reality, given that the 1956 Gentlemen’s Agreement had an identical provision. The TRC experiment began in 1958 and ended with its removal in 1974. Supporters of Telangana point out that while the failure of the TRC model in the case of Punjab resulted in separate statehood for Punjab, the same did not follow for Telangana.
Time and again, notably in 1969 but many times since, protests by the Telangana people against broken promises has resulted in fresh promises of more equitable sharing of resources, employment and democratic participation – but these promises have been broken repeatedly. The SKC’s proposals this time around, far from addressing the apprehensions and aspirations of Telangana’s people, only revive memories of the similar promises belied in the past.

Conceding the Merit of Telangana
The Srikrishna Committee at many places recognises the validity of the feeling of “discrimination and domination” experienced by the people of Telangana, and concedes that the demand for separate statehood has “some merit.”
The SKC admits that “Overall, in spite of 50 plus years of policy protected planning and execution, one finds regional variations in the economic development of AP” and notes that the Planning Commission notified as backward nine of the ten Telengana districts (containing 87% of the population of Telengana) – with the exception of Hyderabad and resources have been allocated under its Backward Region Grant Fund (BRGF). On the question whether “Telangana has low per capita income, lower access to employment, lower business opportunities and low access to education and so on”, the SKC indicates, “At the outset, some or all such allegations appear true when absolute amounts, numbers and percentages are reviewed”.

The SKC notes that in Telangana the “net irrigation by canals has increased only slightly from about 1 lakh hectare to around 2.5 lakh hectares. Tank irrigation has reduced from 4 lakh hectares in 1955-56 to around 2 lakh hectares at present.” It admits that “the implementation of G.O. 610 (regarding a share in government jobs – ed.) during 1985 to 2005 was, at best, tardy, which remains a grievance of Telangana employees. This issue continues to be highly contentious even today.”

It also observes that “the data received from the State Government shows that the combined amount released to government and aided colleges together is Rs. 93 crores in Telangana while it is 224 crores in coastal Andhra (with college going population similar to that in Telangana) and 91 crores in Rayalaseema (with population share being less than half that in Telangana).”

Further, “analysis of income change in rural areas over a period of one decade suggests that, in Telangana, the relative income growth has occurred only amongst the richest; whereas the poorer and the most deprived have experienced considerably large declines in relative income...The real income of the agricultural wage labourers has declined considerably in Telangana whereas it has increased considerably in coastal Andhra region. Similarly, the SCs, STs and minorities in Telangana region have suffered a decline in income during the past about decade or more, whereas these communities have gained substantially in coastal Andhra”.

Acknowledging the economic, political and social divide in the state, the SKC observes that “The upper castes in Rayalaseema and coastal Andhra are vehemently against the idea of dividing the state; their greatest fear being the loss of Hyderabad. The accommodation between these two regions has been in terms of political domination by Rayalaseema and economic domination by coastal Andhra. Together the two regions have ruled the state through Congress and TDP political formations. Telangana feels dominated by the upper castes of these regions and its struggle is primarily to shake off their yoke....Large scale involvement of students including those from Dalits and Backward Castes in the current movement for Telangana seems to testify to this...
The SKC further suggests that the Madiga caste, predominant in Telangana and more numerous on the whole, which has hitherto had less access to reservation benefits than the Malas who predominate in coastal Andhra, would “certainly benefit from a separate Telangana” and that possibly “the ST community and the Muslims in AP may get a relatively better say in governance on separation in the state of Telangana”.

The SKC states that “The Telangana movement can be interpreted as a desire for greater democracy and empowerment within a political unit....sub-regionalism is ...not necessarily primordial but is essentially modern – in the direction of a balanced and equitable modernization. Our analysis shows that cutting across caste, religion, gender and other divisions, the Telangana movement brings a focus on the development of the region as a whole, a focus on rights and access to regional resources and further, it pitches for a rights-based development perspective whereby groups and communities put forth their agendas within a larger vision of equitable development”.
The SKC concedes that “the grievances of the people of Telangana, such as non-implementation of some of the key decisions included in the Gentleman’s Agreement (1956), certain amount of neglect in implementation of water and irrigation schemes, inadequate provision for education infrastructure (excluding Hyderabad), and the undue delay in the implementation of the Presidential order on public employment etc., have contributed to the felt psyche of discrimination and domination, with the issue attaining an emotional pitch. The continuing demand, therefore, for a separate Telangana, the Committee felt, has some merit and is not entirely unjustified.”

Artificial Arguments Against Telangana
The SKC disputes the plank of “backwardness” of the Telangana region – mainly by repeated assertions to show that Rayalaseema is “more backward” on many counts. This argument appears specious and unconvincing. Why create a contest between Rayalaseema and Telangana for “backwardness” in order to deny the latter its demand? The demand for separate statehood for Telangana, is after all not premised on economic arguments alone – it is a political demand pre-dating the very formation of AP and is strongly rooted in social and cultural discrimination as well. Would it have made sense to deny Uttarakhand statehood based on the logic that perhaps Bundelkhand or eastern UP was more backward on some economic indicators?
The SKC admits that “the demand is unlikely to go away permanently even if it is subdued temporarily,” and given this, it states that “consideration has to be given to this option.” However, it states this to be “the second best option,” concluding that “separation is recommended only in case it is unavoidable and if this decision can be reached amicably amongst all the three regions.” It also cites the possible reactions in the rest of the state and the fact that it may give “a fillip to other similar demands” of separate statehood to opine against bifurcation. Given such arguments and conditions, perhaps even Jharkhand nor Chhattisgarh would seem to have had no rationale.
The Congress-led UPA-II, having politically conceded Telangana, has now taken an ‘expert’ route to backtrack and prevent the formation of Telangana. A more honest approach would have been to recommend, in the first place itself, a Second States Reorganisation Commission for a holistic treatment of all statehood demands. The Srikrishna Committee’s ambivalent position on Telangana and playing with the regional/social divides in Andhra to manufacture such a long list of options betrays a non-serious approach in the guise of a rigorous academic exercise. The dishonesty in the tactics of the UPA-II and the Congress is bound to add to the sense of the betrayal and injustice felt by the people of Telangana.
URL: http://www.cpiml.org/liberation/year_20 ... tary3.html
Also look: http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p_ ... 887-14.php
indian
Registered User
 

Re: Who Want Telangana .....and Why

by Hi, everybody, I am a new friend. » Sat Sep 28, 2013 12:39 pm

Hi, everybody, I am a new friend. :D
Hi, everybody, I am a new friend.
Registered User
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 12:37 pm

Re: Who Want Telangana .....and Why

by Telugu Bidda » Thu Oct 10, 2013 7:37 am

Telugu Bidda
Registered User
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 7:32 am

Re: Who Want Telangana .....and Why

by telugu bidda » Thu Oct 10, 2013 7:38 am

telugu bidda
Registered User
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2013 7:32 am

Previous                

Return to Local Problems/Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests

cron
ADVERTISEMENT
SHOUTBOX!
{{todo.name}}
{{todo.date}}
[
]
{{ todo.summary }}... expand »
{{ todo.text }} « collapse
First  |  Prev  |   1   2  3  {{current_page-1}}  {{current_page}}  {{current_page+1}}  {{last_page-2}}  {{last_page-1}}  {{last_page}}   |  Next  |  Last
{{todos[0].name}}

{{todos[0].text}}

ADVERTISEMENT
This page was tagged for
telangana state devided movement classes telugu language youtube
Wikipedia Telangana guitar
www.telangaha.movise
telangaha vedeo.com
kcr encouraging velama caste leaders
Follow fullhyd.com on
Copyright © 2023 LRR Technologies (Hyderabad) Pvt Ltd. All rights reserved. fullhyd and fullhyderabad are registered trademarks of LRR Technologies (Hyderabad) Pvt Ltd. The textual, graphic, audio and audiovisual material in this site is protected by copyright law. You may not copy, distribute or use this material except as necessary for your personal, non-commercial use. Any trademarks are the properties of their respective owners.