My 2004 article on the Telangana issue

1. This is my 2004 article:

For a United Andhra-Telangana-Seema
- I. Mallikarjuna Sharma.
Though not in the subcontinent as a whole but at least in what remains its major part, i.e. Indian Union as of now, the Telugu people can claim to be the second largest linguistic community after the Hindi speaking people. That not only because they are now united in one large state of Andhra Pradesh but also because their diaspora in the neighbouring states is quite considerable in numbers, which amounts to not less than 10% of the total Telugu speaking population in the country. All of us know that the present State of Andhra Pradesh consists of 3 distinct regions - (Coastal) Andhra, Rayalaseema and Telangana and the unity of the people of the three regions was achieved after much effort, persuasion, agitation, convulsions and disturbances in 1956 but within 15-20 years again faced great dangers in the form of Separate Telangana and Jai Andhra movements. Even after those dangers were somehow averted and a six-point formula was evolved to moderate and gradually eliminate the differences and animosities, the ship of unity has not been sailing smoothly and we know recently it has again struck the rock of another Separate Telangana movement. In such circumstances, while there is a powerful section of unity mongers who want to preserve the unity of the Telugu people and the existence of United Andhra Pradesh at any cost {e.g. the entire CPI (Marxist) as also the Telugu Desam party, especially its leader - Chandrababu Naidu, the present Chief Minister and the elder son-in-law of N.T.R.}, there is also another powerful section of skeptics, not only in Telangana, who view with a suspicious eye any over-enthusiasm for unity. They promptly point out that in the thousands of years history, all Telugus were never united for any considerable period of time, and Daggubati Venkateswara Rao (another son-in-law of N.T.R.) has gone on record stating that perhaps any such unity of the Telugu people could be traced to utmost 250 years cumulatively of all the various such 'united' periods over the span of history. In the background of these conflicting opinions it would be instructive here to go through a brief summary of the probable course of history, which our Andhra or Telugu race/tribe/linguistic group has taken.
Telugus in History:
The history of the Telugu speaking people is said to date back to the times before Christ but the actual emergence and development of the language as a viable lingua franca in the south eastern part of South India seems to have taken place only in times after Christ and the written literature in the language to have developed only since 7th century A.D. or so. The famous Satavahanas were referred to as Andhras, or to be more precise Andhrabhrityas (servants of Andhras), but the language they conversed or transacted was Prakrit and it seems the Telugu language has not sufficiently developed to any extent by that time; if at all present, it could have been confined to the domestic arena of kings and the people. The term Andhras then should be considered as denoting a race/tribe name and there is a tradition that Andhras were one of some tribes, which originally hailed from Central Asia near the banks of River Oxus. They must have migrated, as so many tribes did in those times, to the Indian Subcontinent, perhaps earlier than the Aryans did and must have been driven to the South by the later Aryan invasions. All these are but rational conjectures, rebuttable presumptions in the legal language, formed out of the existing scanty evidence of some ancient records, inscriptions and vague and wild histories written by ill-equipped, and generally sycophant, historians of the olden days. There are scanty references to Andhras in Vayu Purana, Mahabharata and Bhagavatha but interestingly no mention of this tribe occurs in the Ramayana proper. Andhras are mentioned as one of the 56 States dating back to pre-historic (means pre-written history) times - the famous anga vanga kalinga, etc. chappanna (56) rajyams. Megasthanese wrote that 30 fortified Andhra Towns were there in his days and Pliny later made those into 30 Andhra States in the South. Be that as it may, it gives us some hope and pride that - if at all we could be traced back in ancestry to those Andhra towns or states and the later Satavahanas - we Andhras or Telugus also possess some thousands of years old legacy. If we notice that the first capital of a Satavahana Ruler was in the Telangana area and the later more famous capital Paithan is in Maharashtra and it was only in the later days that they spread to the coastal Andhra region, it should give some pride to the Telangana people now who can claim to be the real or original 'Andhras' in contradistinction to the coastal Andhra people who are now better known as 'Andhras'.
Well, since Satavahanas cannot be correctly identified as a Telugu speaking tribe and, moreover, they were also known as Andhrabhrityas, we cannot be too sure about this ancestry. However, the rare occurrence of certain Telugu words in the essentially Pali (Prakrit) inscriptions of Satavahanas could be taken as an indication regarding the formative stage of the Telugu language in those days though its real budding in inscriptions etc. only dates from the times after Satavahanas. It is declared in an inscription of the 11th Century during the rule of Velanati Rulers in the region that the land bounded by the Eastern Sea, Kalahasti, Srisailam and Mahendrachala is Andhradesa, which extent roughly corresponds to that of the present day Andhra Pradesh. But in reality this region was divided into 3-4 kingdoms all the times except for intermittent short periods in which there was a political unity under a single dynasty. At the time of Nannaya, the adikavi of Telugu literature, the Vengi Chalukyas ruled over the east coastal region while the rest of Andhra Desa was in the hands of various other dynasties. It was under the rule of Kakatiyas (1000-1325 AD), who themselves were non-Andhras naturalized in Telangana region, that the entire Andhra Desa or region of the Telugu speaking people was brought under a political unity for a considerable period of time. So we find Manumasiddhi of Nellore, the patron of Tikkana, the famous Somayaji of the poet trio who rendered Mahabharatam into Telugu, serving as a vassal under Ganapati Deva but after a period being defeated and killed in battle by the southern Pandyas. Ganapati Deva took revenge for this defeat by pooling up forces and sending generals on what turned out to be a victorious march onto the southern territories, which led to the occupation of Kanchi. After the Kakatiya Empire was destroyed by the Muslim invasions, the Golconda Muslim Nawabs held sway over Telangana and considerable portion of coastal Andhra too. The Vijayanagara Empire also held large tracts of Andhra territory in its sway and it is well known that the Vijayanagara Emperors patronised and promoted Telugu language in glorious terms and it was Krishnadeva Raya, a Vijayanagar Emperor, that coined the famous stanza, deshabhashalandu Telugu lessa (Telugu is the best among the native languages). But even under the Vijayanagar Empire the entire Telugus were not united and the Golconda kings continued to rule over most of Telangana and considerable parts of the coastal region. After the fall of the Vijyanagar Empire the political disunity of Andhra Desa continued, with the region breaking up into more number of small or big states. But it was the legacy of the Vijayanagara Empire that a diaspora of the Telugus spread up to the southernmost parts of the peninsula and the Tanjavur Nayaks greatly patronized Telugu language and literature.
The picture radically changed with the advent of the Nizamshahi dynasty to power in Hyderabad. At first when the first Nizam, Chin Qilich Khan (Mir Qamaruddin Khan), gained sovereignty (or suzerainty may be a better term) over Deccan in 1724 as the Subadar of the fast deteriorating Moghul Empire and as such was left almost fully autonomous to rule the region, he exercised sway over 6 subas - Hyderabad, Bijapur, Aurangabad, Bidar, Berar and Khandesh - covering almost the entire Deccan except the southernmost Malayali part and the westernmost Konkan. The Hyderabad Suba was the most expansive and important of all the six and covered the entire Telugu country and also its diaspora in Tamil Nadu. But unlike their predecessor Golconda Nawabs, who patronized Telugu language and literature as also relied on and promoted Telugu Jagirdars and bureaucrats, the Nizamshahis were, from the beginning, discriminatory and oppressive towards their subject populations of which Telugus were clearly in a majority. However, the Nizams themselves were under great trouble from Marathas and would have surely lost their kingdom to the more powerful and enterprising fighters- depredators from Maharashtra if first the French and later the English did not come to their rescue. As a necessary price for this alliance with the French and the English, the Nizams had leased out the Circars, that is roughly the present coastal Andhra region, first to the French and later to the English (in 1766). The British subsequently established their complete sway over Circars and absorbed the region into their Madras Presidency. In the wars against the rebellious and independence-loving Tipu Sultan of Mysore, the Nizam sided with the British and as a price of the alliance got, inter alia, the Rayalaseema region as his part of the spoils of war. Later in 1802 he ceded these Districts of Bellary (including the present Anantapur District), Kurnool and Cuddapah also to the British and ever since those came to be known as Ceded Districts under the Madras Presidency. During all this period, needless to say, the Nizams never lifted a finger for the development or welfare of the Telugu people and it was only under the British Rule that any relief or development of the region could become possible. The Circars and the Ceded Districts moved forward relatively fast and the Telugu language and literature received recognition and fillip under the British Rule compared to the fate of the Telugu people in Nizam's dominion who languished in all-rounded misery. Of course, the Andhras of the Circar Districts and Ceded Districts had their own grouse against the British Government too in that they were relatively backward in the United Madras Province as compared to Tamilians, who though numerically less than Andhras, were in a better developed condition and even as compared to Malayalees. This discontent and disenchantment had gradually given rise to a movement for a separate Andhra Province. However, the condition of the Telugus in Hyderabad State was much worse. The Nizams systematically suppressed the vernacular (native languages), promoted the tiny minority of Muslims to top posts in every sphere, virtually plundered the properties, prestige and lives (dhana mana prana) of the subject people and imposed Urdu as the official language. The Nizamshahi Rule was a dark age in the history of the people of Hyderabad State, especially of the people of Telangana, who were put to untold sufferings due to backward but merciless feudalism exacerbated by stark religious and cultural oppression. It is universally accepted that the educational condition of a people is a sure pointer to its progress or backwardness. And if we compare the condition of the Telangana Andhras with that of the Andhra Andhras in the first decades of the twentieth century on this count, we see that whereas not more than 4 - 5% of the Telangana Andhras could be considered literate, that figure was about 10% in the case of Andhra Andhras, who considered themselves backward as compared to 15 to 20% literacy prevalent among the Tamilians and Malayalees in those days. Late Kodati Narayana Rao, one of the stalwarts of the Andhra Mahasabha movement in Telangana, had written in his memoirs that there was not a single High School in the entire Nalgonda district in his childhood and a College could only be seen at Hyderabad and nowhere else in Telangana, not even in Warangal. This compared quite unfavourably with Andhra where there were several High Schools in Krishna District itself and the students from his Munagala Paragana used to go to Jaggayyapeta nearby to study in the High School there. It was only towards the end of the Nizam Rule, a few years before the Police Action in 1948, that a High School was set up at Nalgonda. He contrasts that woeful state with the improved condition in 1987 by which time 75 High Schools were there in Nalgonda District and congratulates with awe the new generation students for their luck. {It is noteworthy that there were 546 High Schools and 113 Junior Colleges in Nalgonda District in 2001!} As on today i.e. 2004 we can say that in matters of education the Telangana Districts are not at all inferior to, and in some respects are even in a better position than, the Andhra Districts.
From the foregoing it is obvious that for short periods of history occasionally the entire Telugu people were enjoying political unity but for long periods in their history the Andhras (Telugus) were divided into various political states. However, it is to be noted that all along there was free inter-flow of not only ideas and literature but also people among these regions and the culture and traditions of the people tended to coalesce in all the parts of the Telugu land. Of course regional variations were bound to be and were there, but cultural unity was more of a norm than exception - to this day people from both regions celebrate the same festivals and take pride in common heroes from all regions. So we can say that there is unity in diversity among the Telugu people which is much more so than in the case of entire India. We know that India was almost never united politically except for even shorter periods of history than in case of the Telugu people, and never in our history was there any common language binding the different peoples inhabiting our country. But would that be a cause for negating the now forged Indian unity and calling for the breaking up of the country to the previous disunity - to chappanna rajyams? Language is a powerful binding factor and as such the case of unity of Telugu people is all the more strongly. Another important and even strange fact to be noticed from history is that it is not the people or rulers from the present Andhra regions who invaded Telangana to establish any kind of political unity but it is the other way round. Be it the Satavahanas (if at all they can be called Andhras), or the later Kakatiyas or Golconda Nawabs or the Nizamshahis - all were rulers from Telangana region who made inroads into the Andhra areas. It is only with the modern development of capitalism and the accident of Andhra regions getting relatively more developed under the British capitalist-imperialist rule that now there is even a cause for complaint that the Andhra people have made or are making serious inroads into Telangana to the detriment of the people therein.
Nationalism and movement for linguistic provinces:
And then it is obvious that it is only under the modern capitalist era that nation states developed anywhere in the world and the concept of nationalism itself is a relatively modern phenomenon in world history. Take European history and we will see how long a period in the phase of modern capitalist development was necessitated for transforming Gaul into France and for unification of Italy, Germany, etc. and in all cases the binding factor of language was the or one of the strongest causes. In pre-capitalist feudal times there was hardly any room or necessity for the budding and flowering of such linguistic nationalities. So did it happen in India also; it was only the introduction of the modern capitalist phase by means of British imperialist oppression and expansion that could even forge political unity for India, which we are now enjoying as an inviolable boon. Then with the development of national movement the urge and agitation for separate linguistic states have also developed, which indeed was a pointer to the fact of the more compact and contiguously coherent linguistic communities being the basic nationalities of the country. The reality is that the political unity of India was based on the cultural and nationalistic diversity and the actual and more rational development of the nationalities was through the process of amalgamation of linguistic communities and their emergence as politically unified states. Naturally with the increase of political consciousness among the people in the wake of the ever strengthening national movement, the demand and agitation for re-drawing the political map of India on linguistic lines also began to be espoused and grew stronger and stronger day by day. As far as Andhras were concerned, the first Andhra Mahasabha at Bapatla that had taken place in 1913 had projected the desire of the Andhra people for a separate province. It did take into account the division of the Telugu people among various political formations and desired that the Telugus from Andhra and Telangana regions should unite though such desire was not spelt out as a demand or as a resolution. And year by year the movement for a separate Andhra province began to grow and most of the proponents and participants of the movement were also staunch supporters and participants in the national movement and many of its leaders were in leading positions in the Indian National Congress also. So it gradually happened that the Indian National Congress simultaneously with its agitation to rid the country of the foreign rulers put its stamp of approval to the formation of linguistic provinces also and showed the way for such development by constituting its provincial committees on the basis of linguistic criteria. Thus a separate Andhra Provincial Committee and Tamil Nadu Provincial Committee of the Congress were constituted as far back as in the 1920's when the movement for separate Andhra Province was just in the beginning stages and so did the provincial committees for Assamese, Gujaratis etc. were also constituted though all these people were then living together with other linguistic groups in united presidencies.
Movement for Andhra Province and Telangana Armed Struggle:
As the movement for separate Andhra Province began to pick up momentum in the Andhra and Rayalaseema regions, so did the anti-feudal and anti-Muslim (monopoly rule) agitation in the Telangana region began to pick up momentum from 1920's onwards and there is no doubt that the socio-cultural and psychological impact of the Andhra movement was very much there on the Telanganites. Especially the beginning of Andhra Mahasabha in Telangana in 1930 was clearly inspired by the Andhra Mahasabhas in the Andhra region, to certain sessions of which some 'Andhra' leaders from Telangana too occasionally attended. Also it is noteworthy that the entire leadership as well as cadres of the Andhra Mahasabha in Telangana always took pride in the appellation of Andhra being attached to their organization and when an overture was made by the Nizam Government that it would extend all support and benefits to the organization if only the appellation be changed from Andhra to Telugu or so, such offer was scornfully rejected by them. The Andhra Mahasabha, which first began as an effort to mobilize the Telugus of Hyderabad State for securing their linguistic and educational rights, in the course of time began to espouse political causes - including the causes of the peasantry and labour groaning under the double exploitation of the Muslim monarchy and the Hindu Jagirdars and Zamindars, and became a powerful force of resistance to the feudal system in Hyderabad State. A movement for securing the legitimate rights of the peasantry, especially against forced labour (vetti) and compulsory procurement (levigalla) was first launched in 1944, which gradually picked up momentum and a militant anti-feudal struggle developed all over the rural areas of Telangana, especially in the Nalgonda and Warangal districts. By this time the leadership of Andhra Mahasabha fell into the hands of the communist party, which was carrying on an uncompromising anti-landlord agitation in the rural areas. Simultaneously in Andhra area, the movement for a separate province began to gain momentum.
Nizam's Ploys during World War II and Andhra Province:
During the II World War period, the Nizam had firmly and unswervingly sided with the British and was rendering valuable military support to them all through. Taking advantage of the critical situation of the British Rulers in those days the Nizam wanted to influence the British Indian Government to cede back to him the Berar Districts which were taken from him by the British and also the Machilipatnam Port and some districts of Andhra. There were numerous Muslim religious chauvinists in Hyderabad State in those days who demanded that the entire circar districts and ceded districts should be given back to the Nizam, who was but a symbol of the rule of Islam in Hyderabad, and a greater Osmanistan be formed as an Islamic State in the hinterland of India. The Andhra leaders had vehemently opposed such moves by the Muslim imperialists of Hyderabad State, and so did the Hindu Mahasabhaites too. In a resolution passed by the All India Hindu Mahasabha under the presidentship of V.D. Savarkar in December 1940 it was declared: "This session of the Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha records its emphatic disapproval of the strenuous and widespread agitation carried on for the purpose that Berar and the Northern Circars and Ceded Districts of the Madras Presidency be handed over to the Nizam in recognition of the latter's help in the War-effort and the studied silence of the British Government thereon. The Hindu Mahasabha demands of His Majesty's Government an emphatic assurance that the said territories will not be handed over to the Nizam or to any Prince or Power and wants that any such move will be fraught with serious and far-reaching consequences and will be resolutely opposed by the Hindu Mahasabha by all means within its power. The Hindu Mahasabha further considers Gandhiji's support to the transfer of Berar and other parts of the Madras Presidency to the Nizam and the suggestion, that the Nizam will be the Emperor of India as atrocious, and a gross betrayal of the Hindu Nation." In February 1942 Savarkar issued a statement sharply criticizing the proposed state of 'Osmanistan' and, inter alia, categorically stated: "… if any re-adjustment of territories in connection with the Nizam State is to be considered at all, equity and urgency require that those Hindu districts of Andhra which were cut off in the past from the homogeneous Andhra Province and are now groaning under Moslem oppression in the Hyderabad State should be liberated from the Nizam rule and reannexed to Andhra, so that the earnest and most justified desire of the Andhra people to form themselves into an integral and unitarian Andhra Province should be fulfilled." This was in the background of the case made out by the esteemed Professor Mamidipudi Venkatarangaiah, a naturalized Andhra Brahmin of Pudur Dravidian origin, for a Vishal Andhra (Greater Andhra) for the first time ever in the Andhra Week meetings held under the auspices of the Andhra University at Vizag in 1937. However, at that time Mamidipudi Venkatarangaiah had advocated the formation of such Greater Andhra encompassing the Telangana and Mysore Andhra Districts also even if it be totally under the Nizam Rule, saying that after all the movement for democracy was going to march ahead everywhere - even in the Native States, and the Nizam could be reduced to the status of a constitutional ruler in no time. By that time the II World War had not started and the demands for the restitution of Berar and Northern Circars and Ceded Districts was not made by anybody in the Hyderabad State, nor did the plans and demand for 'Osmanistan' arise. Here itself it should be stated that the map of Andhra Desa originally drawn by Jonnavithula Gurunadham and Unnava Lakshminarayana in 1912 included Telangana districts; and the latter had gone on record to state that he and some others always thought of a larger Andhra Province including the Telangana Districts. The Congress Constitution, both in 1920 and in 1929, provided for the Telangana Districts to be attached to the Andhra Provincial Committee of the Congress. From 1935-36 onwards the Andhra agitators in the Andhra region used to prominently display Andhra Maps of 24 districts, including the Telangana districts. It is quite another thing that in practical politics the leaders of the Andhra movement in the Andhra region concentrated on securing a separate Andhra Province limited to 12 districts to be detached from the united Madras Presidency. All these developments took place much before the communist party had taken a categorical stand in favour of Vishalandhra, as espoused by Sundaraiah in his famous 'Vishalandhralo Praja Rajyam' (People's State in Greater Andhra).
From 1946 onwards the glorious Telangana Peasant resistance movement raged with all intensity and soon overshadowed all other developments in the Hyderabad State. This movement was based on the earlier Andhra Mahasabha renaissance and the leaders of the movement set for themselves the establishment of Vishalandhra (Greater Andhra) as one of their main ideals. After the transfer of power that took place in August 1947 bestowing political independence to India and Pakistan, the movement for merger with the Indian Union was begun by the Hyderabad State Congress under Swami Ramanand Tirth and the same was firmly supported by the communist party. The Muslim religious chauvinists under Qasim Razvi and his Razakars let loose untold terror and atrocities on the people of Hyderabad State, especially in the Telangana region and the same was supported and encouraged by the Nizam Government. At that juncture, the communist party gave a call for a full-fledged armed struggle against the Nizam Rule. That gave rise to a concerted armed struggle by the communists which had almost overthrown the Nizam State Power in wide areas of Telangana where parallel government was run and lakhs of acres of land were freely distributed to the poor peasants and labourers. The Nizam Rule began tottering and it would have fallen anyway to the deadly blows of the people's armed struggle, when the Government of Indian Union intervened by means of a 'Police Action', which was intended more for suppressing the communists than to humble the Nizam. Anyway Hyderabad was speedily surrounded in September 1948 and the Nizam had no option but to surrender. He was continued as a titular head of Hyderabad for some more time though the Hyderabad State was merged into the Indian Union. The Indian Army then quickly took up the ruthless campaign of suppression of communist insurgency in Telangana and committed untold atrocities in that wake. Anyway the communists were also in disarray and ideological confusion and controversy about the future course of action to be taken by them and hence after futile continuance of the armed struggle for about 3 years, they finally decided to give it up and participate in the General Elections to be held all over India. In the first General Elections held in 1952 the communists won a spectacular victory both in Telangana and Andhra regions. The communist party emerged as the biggest party with 41 assembly seats to its credit as compared to 40 seats of the Congress in the Andhra region whereas it was the second biggest party in the Hyderabad Assembly, mainly due to its sweeping victories in the Telangana region. Subsequent to the General Elections, a Congress Ministry under Burgula Ramakrishna Rao was installed in Hyderabad but a Ministry under Chakravartula Rajagopalachari (CR) came to power in the united Madras Province. Naturally CR, basically a Tamilian leader (but perhaps of Telugu origin), was not favourably disposed towards the formation of a separate Andhra Province and was definitely opposed to ceding Madras City or any part of it to the Andhras in case a separate Andhra province be conceded by the Union Government. The Nehru Government at the Centre also dilly dallied about the demand for a separate Andhra Province, always citing some technical or bureaucracy oriented problems to postpone any decision on that matter. Especially Nehru would insistently hint that Andhras first settle the problem of Madras City with the Tamilians before asking for a declaration about a separate Andhra Province, which anyway would be conceded to them. At this juncture, the votaries of Separate Andhra Province grew restive and it was decided to launch an agitation for achieving the ideal. As such Potti Sriramulu sat on a fast-unto-death to achieve the ideal of separate province for Andhras as also the inclusion of Madras City in the Andhra province. Now it is well known that he was prepared to compromise to the extent that if the Central Government were to publish a notification declaring the formation of a separate Andhra Province without any further details as to the component districts of such province, he would give up his fast, but that was not to be. Potti Sriramulu, a stubborn non-violent fighter, had in the end to give up his life and his martyrdom sparked off very violent protests all over Andhra and Rayalaseema regions. In the wake of such burning developments the Union Government had no option but to announce the formation of a separate Andhra Province which was duly inaugurated with Kurnool as the capital city (in pursuance of the 1937 Shri Bagh Agreement between the coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema 'elders') and with Prakasam as the first Chief Minister on 1 October 1953.
For a united Andhra Pradesh:
By that time the Hyderabad State had been liberated and was existing as an independent entity in Indian political scenario. But the desires of the different linguistic groups in Hyderabad - Telugus, Maharashtrians and Kannadigas - for linguistic union with their respective linguistic fraternities in the rest of India were unfulfilled and manifesting intensely. So much so that the Hyderabad State Congress under Swami Ramanand Tirth passed a specific resolution in its Nizamabad Conference that Hyderabad State be trifurcated and the three regions - Marathwada, Hyderabadi Karnatak and Telangana - be respectively merged with Bombay, Mysore and Andhra States in the rest of India. Much earlier to that, as far back as in 1946, a delegation of Hyderabad State Congress under Swami Ramanand Tirth had gone to Madras and met Prakasam Pantulu, the then Prime Minister of Madras Province, and appealed to him to give a call for a greater Andhra including the Nizam Andhra (Telangana) also in it. Prakasam had arranged a dinner in Connemera Hotel for that delegation and inspiring speeches in favour of Greater Andhra were made by the different leaders of Andhra and Hyderabad on that occasion. Needless to repeat, Swami Ramanand Tirth was all through a staunch votary of united linguistic provinces. It is also known that immediately after the Police Action, on September 19, 1948, Swami Ramanand Tirth had presented a detailed note to the Central leaders listing demands like the abolition of the Jagirdari System, trifurcation of the Hyderabad State, etc.
However, it is also true that a powerful section of the Hyderabad State Congress, especially some old guards like K.V. Ranga Reddy and his son-in-law and disciple, Marri Channa Reddy, were quite opposed to the formation of Vishalandhra and desired the formation of a separate Telangana State. Maulana Azad was also opposed to the formation of Vishalandhra because he thought that the identity of the Hyderabadi Muslims would be completely submerged in that eventuality. Nehru was as usual undecided but after having conceded the Andhra Province, it seemed only logical to him that some more Telugu districts should also be merged in it. The masses of the people, I mean the peasantry and the working class - urban and rural - had no definite inclinations but they were mainly led by the powerful communist party, which was going all out for the formation of Vishalandhra. Sundaraiah, one of the most respected Andhra communist leaders who was also one of the top leaders of the Telangana Armed Struggle together with Chandra Rajeswar Rao and Devulapalli Venkateswara Rao, wrote his thesis on "People's State in Greater Andhra" and fervently advocated the merger of Telangana Districts with Andhra. Incidentally K.V. Ranga Reddy and M. Channa Reddy, who spearheaded the Separate Telangana Agitation in 1956, were die-hard feudal leaders and had been among the most bitter enemies of the people's armed struggle in Telangana. As such the masses of the people in Telangana in those days, except perhaps some petty bourgeois elements in the towns, did not in any way support the separatists. Many of them stayed neutral and remained aloof while yet many others actively supported the Vishalandhra movement under the inspiration and guidance of the communist party as well as the Congress leaders who stood for unification. Burgula Ramakrishna Rao, the then Chief Minister of the Hyderabad State, did not at first pronounce himself openly in favour of Vishalandhra, which was taken by the separatists as a support to their cause. But they were mistaken. It was Burgula who later on argued fervently against the Fazl Ali Commission Report, courageously opposed Azad's invectives and, securing the support of G.B. Pant, prevailed upon Nehru to agree to the formation of united Andhra Pradesh.
Here we should note that the Fazl Ali Commission for Reorganization of States in its report submitted to the Central Government in 1955 did not favour the formation of united Andhra Pradesh but suggested that the Telangana Districts be constituted into a separate Hyderabad State first. The Commission suggested that thereafter if in the next elections (to be held in 1961-62) at least two-thirds of the elected Hyderabad Assembly members opt for united State, then a united Andhra Pradesh could be formed on linguistic basis. Curiously, this Commission did not oppose the trifurcation of the Hyderabad State on linguistic basis and the merger of the Kannada and Marathi speaking areas of the erstwhile Hyderabad State - which were more backward as compared to Bombay and Mysore States than Telangana was in comparison to Andhra - with their respective linguistic communities in the former British India. Doubtless Fazl Ali Commission was influenced by Azad's views and desires and it is said C. Rajagopalachari, who was cross with Prakasam and other Congress leaders of the Madras Province for their espousal of the cause of a separate Andhra Province, also pulled the wires to oppose united Andhra Pradesh and influence the Fazl Ali Commission in that regard. Anyway the firm support of Burgula, who was obviously influenced by Andhra Mahasabha old guards like Madapati Hanumantha Rao in this regard, and the intense movement for Vishalandhra by the people mainly under the leadership of the communist party soon prevailed over the separatist forces and Nehru also firmly decided in favour of unity of Telugu people. Prior to that, on 25 November 1955, the Andhra Assembly had passed an unanimous resolution introduced by their Chief Minister Bezwada Gopala Reddy, urging the Telangana people to unite with them and, on their own, offering many safeguards and liberal treatment to the Telanganites. The same was repeated in another resolution, also unanimously passed by all parties, of the Andhra Assembly on 1 February 1956. All this prodded and facilitated the Separate Telangana leaders also to rethink their stand, and finally with the active intervention and persuasion by Govind Vallabh Pant, a Gentlemen's Agreement was in principle arrived at by the Andhra and Telangana leaders on the basic issue of unification with safeguards to Telangana. Pursuant to this, on the suggestion of Burugula Ramakrishna Rao, Nehru announced the Central Government's decision to form a united state of Andhra Pradesh in a mammoth public meeting held at Nizamabad on 5 March 1956. It might or might not be fortuitous that such an eventful declaration was made at this place where the Andhra Mahasabha had for the first time passed a resolution on political matters and thereby paved the way for its becoming a powerful political movement in course of time. It is also noteworthy that much later the Hyderabad State Congress passed its historic resolution at this very place for the trifurcation of Hyderabad State on linguistic basis and merger of different linguistic communities of the Hyderabad State with their respective linguistic communities in the former British India. Referring to this salient fact, Burgula Ramakrishna Rao had further stated in his reply to Dr. Pattabhi, then Governor, who applauded Burgula as the real founder of Vishalandhra: " The ideal of uniting all the Andhra areas was before us since the last 40 years or more. Several elders like Prakasam, Kaleswara Rao and Madapati Hanumantha Rao worked in the political field and several poets and writers in the literary field for the achievement of this ideal. And I consider it my great fortune, special luck, to have been endowed with such an opportunity to serve to the best of my abilities such a great movement in its last phase." At first the name Andhra-Telangana was suggested for the united province but later on the Hyderabad Assembly as well as the Andhra Assembly overwhelmingly opted for the name "Andhra Pradesh". Finally the united State of Andhra Pradesh was inaugurated on 1 November 1956 with Hyderabad as its capital-city and Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy as the first Chief Minister. It was the first unwise move by the Andhra leaders who should have in all courtesy requested Burgula Ramakrishna Rao to head the first ministry of a united State. Also Sanjeeva Reddy who became Chief Minister did not appoint a Telangana Minister as Deputy Chief Minister though this requirement was clearly laid down in the Gentlemen's Agreement and that too in the background of himself serving as Deputy Chief Minister in Andhra Province till a day prior to his incumbency in the Chief Minister's saddle in united Andhra Pradesh. But what is more strange and astonishing is that none of the Telangana 'Gentlmen' raised a voice of protest and seemed to have happily acquiesced in this misdeed.
Later on the fears expressed by the separatists earlier began to take roots in reality with the better educated, more experienced and much tactful Andhra leaders and employees dominating the affairs of the united State and doing some real injustices to the Telangana people and employees. Not that no efforts were made to develop Telangana - development a la Avadi Socialism i.e. capitalism in the bottle of socialism - but those were not full-hearted so to say and definitely surplus funds from Telangana were initially diverted for use in Andhra and Rayalaseema regions and the Regional Council for development of Telangana (strangely named Andhra Pradesh Development Council or so) did not work. Some protests were made no doubt but on the whole the Telangana leaders also acquiesced in such neglect and misuse because after all the Congress everywhere became or was fast becoming corrupt and those leaders were only for power and pelf. But undoubtedly within the framework of the lopsided and anti-people development policies of the central and state governments, Telangana was also being developed to an extent, compared to its very backward position while under the feudal autocracy of the Nizam. However, it should be remembered that a separate identity had developed among the people, especially the urban classes of Telangana due to the about 150 years or so of feudal slavery under the Nizam, the imposition of Urdu and stifling of their mother tongue. So the articulate feudal and middle classes began to flame fans of discontent against what they now called the 'Andhra colonialism' though they did never come out openly against the real injustices if any committed as and when such took place. All was looked as part of the power game but the final straw leading to a sentimental break for a considerable section of the urban middle classes of Telangana came with the controversy over the Mulki Rules.
MULKI RULES:
The Mulki - Non-Mulki controversy in Hyderabad State dates back to the last decades of the nineteenth century. It was primarily raised by the local (native) Muslims who were denied high posts in civil service by the policies of Nizam and his ministers of 'importing' persons of talent and eminence from the North Hindustani regions. In the course of the movement the native Muslims had also to espouse the cause of eligible local Hindus, though one should note that in Hyderabad State as a whole there was great discrimination against Hindus in general with only 20% of the posts in civil services falling to their lot even as late as in 1948 and the Muslims grabbing about 75%. The Mulki rules were then framed by the Nizam to pacify the agitators and appease the local Muslims and influential Hindus. The essence of the Mulki Rules was that those were based on discrimination by birth and requirement of residence. These Mulki Rules were reiterated and incorporated in Chapter III of Article 39 of Hyderabad Civil Service Regulations in obedience to the Nizam's Firman dated 25th Ramzan 1337 H. By that time the Indian Independence At, 1947 had been passed by the British Parliament but the Hyderabad State had refused to accede to the Dominion of India and continued to remain as an autonomous native Indian State. It was laid down in this Article 39 that no person would be appointed in any superior or inferior service without the specific sanction of the His Exalted Highness (Nizam), if he is not a mulki in terms of the rules laid down in Appendix N, which ran as follows:
1. A person shall be called a mulki if -
(a) by birth he is a subject of the Hyderabad State; or
(b) by residence in the Hyderabad State he has been entitled to be a mulki; or
(c) his father having completed 15 years of service was in Government Service [under Hyderabad State] at the time of his birth; or
(d) she is a wife of a person who is a mulki.
2. A person shall be called a subject of the Hyderabad State by birth at the time of whose birth his father was a mulki;
3. A person shall be called a mulki who has a permanent residence in Hyderabad State for at least 15 years and has abandoned the idea of returning to the place of his previous residence and has obtained an affidavit to that effect on a prescribed form attested by a Magistrate.
4. Where a mulki woman married a non-mulki but does not give up her residence in the Hyderabad State, her rights which she enjoys by virtue of her being a mulki shall not be affected in any way.
5. Where a woman is a mulki, marries a non-mulki and resides outside the Hyderabad State along with her husband and returns to reside permanently in the Hyderabad State after the death of her husband or after obtaining a judicial separation, shall again be called a mulki, but her children shall be called non-mulkies unless they are entitled to be mulkies under these rules.
6. Subject to the above provisions, the Taluqdar, Hyderabad District for Hyderabad City and Hyderabad District and the Taluqdar of the Districts in the Districts shall be competent to grant mulki certificates on the prescribed form, provided that the father of the applicant prior to his residence in the Hyderabad State on appointment in the Hyderabad Government Service or the applicant himself prior to his residence in the Hyderabad State -
(a) was not a British Subject; or
(b) was a subject of any State other than a British Protectorate;
(c) if he has not obtained a certificate under Indian Naturalization Act of 1926,
the application for the grant of mulki certificate shall be submitted in the office of the Secretary, Judicial Department for action.
However, with the merger of Hyderabad State into Indian Union in September 1948 the political situation in Hyderabad State had radically changed. And with the application of the Indian Constitution to Hyderabad State with effect from 26 January 1950, much of the Mulki Rules lost its validity and relevance, especially the provisions referring to the requirement of birth. So when ultimately these mulki rules were challenged in the constitutional courts the common ground (i.e. the plea accepted by all parties to the litigation) was that only Rule 1 (b) of the above mulki rules survived and the rest of the provisions of the rule did not survive. So what remained was only Rule 1 (b) which speaks of residence in the Hyderabad State and it should be read with Rule 3 as it prescribes permanent residence in Hyderabad State for at least 15 years abandoning the idea of returning to the place of his previous residence.
These mulki rules were sought to be validated under the new Constitution of India and even after the dissolution of the Hyderabad State itself since the Gentlemen's Agreement which was one essential foundation for the formation of united Andhra Pradesh specifically called for the continuance of such safeguards for the Telangana people. But when the Government made certain rules to give effect to the provisions of these mulki rules in the matters of appointment and promotion in civil services, the same were challenged by the aggrieved (Andhra) civil servants in High Courts and Supreme Court that such action was discriminatory and hence violated Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. In A.V.S. Narasimha Rao and others v. State of Andhra Pradesh (AIR 1970 SC 422) the Supreme Court struck down Section 3 of the Public Employment (Requirement as to Residence) Act, 1957, insofar as it relates to Telangana and Rule 3 of the rules framed by the State Government under it as ultra vires the Constitution though it did not pronounce upon the validity or otherwise of Mulki Rules as such since the matter was not agitated before it in that case but it is to be noted that those provisions were akin to the Mulki Rules. By this time the protection of Telangana Rights movement was going on in all intensity and some militant sections were already raising the slogan of Separate Telangana.
Separate Telangana Agitation:
That which has started as a students movement for Protection of Rights of Telangana People and protest against the violation of the terms of the Gentlemen's Agreement, and that too with the blessings and manipulations of Jalagam Vengala Rao and first in Khammam, had in a matter of a few months fallen into the hands of political leaders like K.V. Ranga Reddy and Channa Reddy. The latter was at that time disqualified from contesting in any election for six years by the High Court for his confirmed electoral malpractices as proved by Vande Mataram Ramachandra Rao in his election petition against him. So he was politically unemployed, seething with wrath and discontent and found this a golden opportunity and with the blessings of K.V. Ranga Reddy, the diehard feudal separatist leader, speedily diverted the movement into separatist channels. Here itself it would be instructive to note what Vandemataram Ramachandra Rao personally told me regarding the gimmicks of these two leaders: "Yet [i.e. though I was an anti-communist] Ravi Narayana Reddy and I were good friends. I remember we both were there at the Shadnagar Andhra Mahasabha as volunteers where Konda Venkata Ranga Reddy read his presidential speech in Telugu, written down in Urdu script! I was really flabbergasted - quite disappointed that this K.V. Ranga Reddy, who could not even properly read Telugu, was made the President of Andhra Mahasabha. This K.V. Ranga Reddy, along with Channa Reddy and others, later on opposed the Vishalandhra movement and agitated for Separate Telangana in 1954-56. I was opposed to the Separate Telangana movement in 1954-56 as well as the later Separate Telangana movement of 1969-70. I think it is a hypocritical movement and I firmly stand for the unity of the Telugu people."
In this context I think I should also say something about my personal experience during the Separate Telangana movement. I was not only a keen observer of but also a sort of participant too in this hypocritical movement. I was an engineering student in Warangal at that time and an activist in the just split away Marxist-Leninist group (called Charu Mazumdar group) mainly in the student front. I was even arrested once in connection with that movement but somehow managed to escape from police custody. Along with another student comrade I represented our student wing at the Kavali Conference of the Student Federation of India, which at that time was almost exclusively in our i.e. revolutionary students' hands. It was I who proposed the resolution that the Conference adopt a resolution for "People's State in Separate Telangana" and persuaded it to do so. Of course I did all that under the dictates of Comrades K.G. Satyamurthy and K. Seetharamaiah who were our party leaders at that time. I was quite ignorant about the Andhra Mahasabha movement in the 1930-48 period or the Vishalandhra movement of the later days. I did not know even about the developments which led to the communist party espousing the cause of "Vishalandhralo Praja Rajyam" (People's State in Greater Andhra) which was parodied in the above slogan given by our leaders with regard to the Separate Telangana movement. But soon the naxalite movement broke out in Telangana and I was one of the first amongst the student activists to go underground and plunge into the 'armed struggle' and that naturally 'separated' me from the Separate Telangana movement, which we considered not so important as compared to our liberation struggle for seizure of power though we did support it. However, the communist revolutionary group led by Tarimela Nagi Reddy and Chandra Pulla Reddy had strongly and efficiently opposed the Separate Telangana movement at that time and we were fuming and fretting about it criticizing them left and right (just as the People's War group comrades would now do with other 'revolutionaries' opposing the present Separate Telangana movement) and asking what business 'revolutionaries' had to oppose an anti-Government mass upsurge, etc. But later my study of the history of Andhra and Telangana, especially of the vicissitudes of the communist movement in our state in the background of the history of the international and national communist movements as well as the betrayal of the Separate Telangana movement by Channa Reddy and the like other feudal, bourgeois leaders convinced me about the correctness of the stand taken by Nagi Reddy and Pulla Reddy at that time. Hence this article too emanates at this juncture.
Jai Andhra Movement and the 6-point Formula:
This implied threat to Mulki Rules as such exacerbated the discontent and with K.V. Ranga Reddy, Channa Reddy and other self-centred leaders taking up the cause, the Separate Telangana movement raged in all its ferocity. Much agitation and violence was there, and indiscriminate repression and police firings too resulting in the deaths of more than 300 agitators. A Telangana Praja Samiti was formed, which contested the 1971 parliamentary elections under the overall leadership of Channa Reddy and won a thumping majority of 10 out of 14 Lok Sabha seats in the Telangana area. However, Channa Reddy and other TPS leaders soon compromised with Indira Gandhi and were willing to abide by the eight-point and five-point formulas devised by or at the instance of her. Meanwhile the Andhra Pradesh High Court sitting in Full Bench (larger bench) of 5 Judges struck down the Mulki Rules as ultra vires the Constitution and this further complicated the matters. However, the decision was soon appealed to the Supreme Court vide CA No. 993/1972 and a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court reversed the decision of the larger bench of the High Court on 03-10-1972 holding that the mulki rules continued to be valid under Article 35 (b) of the Constitution [see AIR 1973 SC 827]. This gave rise to a lot of jubilation in the Telangana circles but at the same time generated much heat and discontent in the Andhra and Rayalaseema regions. Soon the self-serving leaders, mainly of the Congress Party, of the Andhra and Rayalaseema regions launched a mammoth Jai Andhra movement, demanding that the separate safeguards to Telangana like the mulki rules be totally scrapped or else a separate state for Andhra (including Rayalaseema) be granted. Much violence and bloodshed followed in the wake of the movement but interestingly Telangana remained calm and aloof all along. It should be said to the credit of the communists (CPI, CPM and certain ML groups also) that they all along firmly opposed these parochial movements and stood firmly for the unity of the Telugu people. The turmoil in Andhra soon compelled the resignation of the P.V. Narasimha Rao Ministry and President's Rule was imposed in the entire State on 18-01-1973. While the State was under President's Rule, behind-the-scene negotiations went on between the different Telangana leaders, Andhra leaders and the Central Government representatives and finally on the initiative of the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, a six point formula was devised to overcome the difficulties, while at the same time keeping up the unity of the State. It was proposed that not only in Telangana but in other regions also local candidates have to be given priority and major quota in education and employment and hence a local area candidacy system has to be introduced. Likewise the backward areas in every region ought to be developed with special care and attention for which a backward areas development commission might be necessitated and that would render any regional committee like the Telangana Regional Committee superfluous. The capital city of Hyderabad was to be kept as a free zone with the entire state divided into 7 zones. Whatever be the merits and demerits of this formula, it finally worked and strangely both the Telangana and Andhra separatist leaders acquiesced in it. From 1973 to 1997, that is for about 25 years, with all its defects the local area candidacy system and the development of backward areas orientation worked and no overt slogans or movement for separate Telangana or Jai Andhra were heard or witnessed anywhere in the State. Especially the emergence of Telugu Desam Party under N.T. Rama Rao, the matinee idol of the Telugu masses, had as though wiped out all regional differences in the State and the word and culture of Telugu was popularized as never before under the rule of NTR. It seemed as if the long cherished unity of the Telugu 'nation' was in the offing thanks to the NTR phenomenon. But not much was done in reality to buttress this image and usher in real flowering of the Telugu language, culture and unity - especially Telugus continued to lag behind in socio-economic development despite the bombastic phraseology of the matinee idol. This inevitably brought down his fall - first to his traditional rivals - the Congress Party and the second time to his own vily son-in-law who proved a better master of the situation than the vainglorious father-in-law. With his fall and later demise, the psychological rapport created under his celluloid spell also ended and the harsh ground realities of stark non-development, neglect and betrayal began to assert in the regional and political contexts. And so, for the first time in the Telugu Desam Party rule, it is only under the Chandra Babu regime that we find a resurrection of the regional discontent and separatist demand.
But this time it is not a voice of the backward and the cheated. It is more the voice of the prosperous and the articulate. It is more the demand for a share in power first and then for power exclusively by a new coterie of self-centred elite of Telangana basking in the relative development of the region over these 2-3 decades since the earlier agitation. However, to hide the reality this new class is inventing and singing the songs of backwardness and betrayal to hoodwink the masses who otherwise may not join their bandwagon. It is not as if the entire saga is a mere figment of imagination - we cannot say that there has not been or there is not any backwardness at all in the region, that there has not been or there is no cheating at all of the people of the region, etc. But it is a case of clear exaggeration of the actuality, a blowing-out-of-proportion, of making mountain of a molehill, of the alleged exploitation, oppression, humiliation and suppression of the Telangana region, its people and its leaders. On the contrary the real facts of the situation are that over the decades, especially keeping in view the very low base, the very backward state under the Nizam Rule with which Telangana had started and with which alone any real comparison of development indices can be made, Telangana has progressed more rapidly than other regions of the State. This has created a very powerful and articulate middle class, which is now espousing the cause of separation in which alone it sees its salvation if it were to ascend to the portals of exclusive power. In a sense this is a problem of affluence and not of poverty - of course relative affluence of a powerful middle class.
Exploitation or Development - Comparative Statistics:
I have carefully gone through the different contentions put forth by the separatist votaries and the abundant statistics reeled out by them to buttress such contentions, and have tried to arrive at the true picture by rearranging and real-analyzing, as far as possible, their own statistics. These vested interests do always try to present such statistics in a distorted manner and invariably lack a dialectical and historical perspective. I have only taken a few development indicators, mainly education as an important indicator, and most of the statistics presented here are culled from the books written by votaries of separate Telangana. But I tried to present them in a historically comparative context, re-arranging them suitably in the quest to reveal the real truth behind the scene. The tables given hereunder speak for themselves but I would supplement here and there with a sentence or two of necessary interpretation for better clarification:
Table A: POPULATION (2001 Census):
ANDHRA PRADESH
TELANGANA
ANDHRA
RAYALASEEMA
7,60,77,842(100%)
3,06,96,566(40.35%)
3,19,21,302(41.96%)
1,34,59,974(17.69%)

At one time, at least till 1981, the population of Telangana was only about 35% of the total State population and it was an accepted norm that Andhra (including Rayalaseema) to Telangana proportion should be taken as 2:1 for almost all purposes. But the population of Telangana increased very fast during the last two decades or so and though the votaries of Separate Telangana tend to attribute this to the migrations from outside (mainly Andhra) the real picture does not bear out the same. But here I do not consider it necessary to deal with this aspect in any further detail.
Table B: PUBLIC LIBRARIES (1999 figures):
---
TELANGANA
ANDHRA
RAYALASEEMA
TOTAL
1595
2081
789
Source: Director of Public Libraries, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh.

The above figures clearly show that Telangana is proportionately having more than 1/3rd of the total libraries in Andhra Pradesh and this should be no cause for worry. Of course, it can be argued that the total number of libraries itself is insufficient and more and better libraries are needed but that applies to all regions in A.P.

Table C: COMPARATIVE LITERACY RATES (1951-1961-2001): {as % of population}
Region
1951
1961
2001
Telangana
NalgondaMedakNizamabad
6.39%6.50%5.78%
KarimnagarAdilabad
13.36%13.07%
KarimnagarAdilabadNalgonda
56.40%54.40%58.20%
Andhra
- - -
Krishna
35.69%
Krishna
69.90%
Rayalaseema
- - -
Kurnool
24.34%
Kurnool
54.40%
Source: C. Srinivas, Jai Andhra - Jai Telangana, Vijayawada, 2004, pp. 111-112.










Table D: COMPARATIVE LITERACY RATES (per 2001 Census): {as % of population}
Region
LITERACY RATE
Male
Female
Total
TELANGANA
69.49
47.77
58.77
ANDHRA
71.38
55.69
63.58
RAYALASEEMA
72.68
48.04
60.53
ANDHRA PRADESH
70.85
51.17
61.11
Source: Prof. K. Jayashankar, Telangana Rashtram: Oka Demand, Godavarikhani, 2004, p.48, as per the figures of Census 2001 and Director of Economics & Statistics, A.P.

As for literacy rate, the above Tables C and D have to be taken together to gauge the enormous development made in Telangana since 1951 or 1961. Prof. Jayashankar has raised a hue and cry on the issue, concentrating on the Telangana literacy rate being less than the State average but he should have been honest enough to notice that Telangana started with a very low literacy, primarily due to the Nizam's tyranny which suppressed the native language and education of the masses, and comparatively it achieved greater progress. Taking table C one can see that there was 800% increase in literacy rate in Nalgonda since 1951, and more than 400% increase in case of Karimnagar and Adilabad districts since 1961 whereas the increase in Krishna and Kurnool districts of Andhra and Rayalaseema areas is not so spectacular since education was relatively better developed there even in 1951-61. Of course it could be argued 100% literacy rate was not achieved even after 50 years but that applies to the entire state.

Table 1 :- Statistics about Education: Important Details pertaining to the 3 regions:-
PRIMARY SCHOOLS:
Type of School
TELANGANA
ANDHRA
RAYALASEEMA
Central:
3
7
12
State:
2277
2852
87
Mandal:
15066
20440
11440
Municipal:
-
1025
405
Aided (Private):
131
1652
209
Unaided (Private):
441
528
326
TOTAL:
17918
26504
12479

Table 1 (contd.):- Statistics about Education: Important Details pertaining to the 3 regions:-
UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOLS:
Type of School
TELANGANA
ANDHRA
RAYALASEEMA
Central:
2
-
1
State:
291
73
4
Mandal:
2581
1967
1049
Municipal:
-
163
55
Aided (Private):
179
275
71
Unaided (Private):
1966
488
655
TOTAL:
5019
2962
1835
HIGH SCHOOLS:

Type of School
TELANGANA
ANDHRA
RAYALASEEMA

Central:
17
17
9

State:
552
345
128

Mandal:
2628
2003
975

Municipal:
-
178
62

Aided (Private):
381
373
111

Unaided (Private):
1644
448
406

TOTAL:
5222
3364
1691

HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOLS:

Type of School
TELANGANA
ANDHRA
RAYALASEEMA

Central:
25
22
5

Unaided (Private):
16
12
2

TOTAL:
41
34
7

JUNIOR COLLEGES:

Type
TELANGANA
ANDHRA
RAYALASEEMA

…
1049
1019
381

Table 1 (contd.):- Statistics about Education: Important Details pertaining to the 3 regions:-
DEGREE COLLEGES:

Type
TELANGANA
ANDHRA [excluding Nellore]
RAYALASEEMA[including Nellore]

Government
65
57
54

Private (Aided)
55
93
33

Private (Unaided)
287
236
118

TOTAL
407
386
205

Statistics above as taken (and re-arranged) from the book: Exploitation of Telangana - Separate State is the Only Solution by A. Lokender Reddy, Hyderabad, 2003.

ENGINEERING COLLEGES (2003-2004 figures):

Type
TELANGANA
ANDHRA
RAYALASEEMA

University
4
2
2

Private
120
71
23

TOTAL
124
73
25

OTHER PROFESSIONAL COLLEGES (2003-2004 figures):

Type
TELANGANA
ANDHRA
RAYALASEEMA

M.B.A.
99
48
14

M.C.A.
158
83
23

B. Pharmacy
15
8
4

Polytechnic
35
46
-

TOTAL
397
185
41+ x

MEDICAL, DENTAL & HOMEO COLLEGES (2003-04): (Government or University)

Type
TELANGANA
ANDHRA
RAYALASEEMA

Medical
3
4
3

Dental
1
1
---

Homeo
2
2
---

UNIVERSITIES (2003-2004 figures):

Type
TELANGANA
ANDHRA
RAYALASEEMA

Full-fledged
11
3
7


Table 1 (contd.):- Statistics about Education: Important Details pertaining to the 3 regions:-
Number of Graduates (1998-1999 figures):

Type
TELANGANA
ANDHRA [excluding Nellore]
RAYALASEEMA[including Nellore]

B.Sc. (Males)
41, 803
46, 240
22, 101

B.Sc. (Females)
26,202
24, 190
12, 127

B.Com. (Males)
35, 131
33, 298
15, 315

B.Com. (Females)
26,074
20, 282
7, 555

TOTAL
1, 29, 210
1, 24, 010
57, 098

Number of Post-Graduates (1998-1999 figures):

Type
TELANGANA
ANDHRA [excluding Nellore]
RAYALASEEMA[including Nellore]

M.Sc. (Males)
668
1150
Not available

M.Sc. (Females)
522
477
Not available

M.Com. (Males)
560
919
Not available

B.Com. (Females)
452
393
Not available

TOTAL
2, 202
2939
Not available

Source: NET - Commissionerate of Collegiate


Looking at the above longish table 1, it is crystal clear that not only Telangana is less developed in these education indicators, but surprisingly it is also more developed in many fields. Compare the number of primary schools or high schools or colleges or universities, everywhere Telangana is today No. 1 in the State. Well then one could still argue that the quality of education imparted is not so standard, the colleges etc. are set up by 'outsiders', etc. but with local area candidacy system, it is clear that it is generally the locals of Telangana that are studying in and benefiting by these institutions. Further there are no statistics to clearly demarcate how many of these institutions are set up by 'outsiders', etc. and anyway it is a general law of development that there would be and has been considerable impetus to development anywhere by 'migrations' and 'outsiders'.


Table 2 (a): Total Number of Educational Institutions:-
Region
1956-57
2001
% Growth
TELANGANA
7657
33, 593
438.72 %
ANDHRA
16, 255
34, 080
209.66 %
RAYALASEEMA{excluding Chittoor}
4897
11, 396
232.71 %
TOTAL
28, 809
79, 069
274.46 %
Table 2 (b): Total Number of Students:-
Region
1956-57
2001
% Growth
TELANGANA
6, 61, 050
60, 39, 915
913.69 %
ANDHRA
16, 96, 766
50, 30, 886
296.50 %
RAYALASEEMA{excluding Chittoor}
4, 34, 665
18, 42, 741
423.95 %
TOTAL
27, 92, 481
1, 29, 13, 542
462.44 %

The above two tables 2 (a) and 2 (b) fortify my statement about the enormous progress in education indicators in Telangana and one can see that whereas in terms of total number of educational institutions there has been a four fold increase, in terms of total number of students there has been a nine-fold increase in Telangana region in the four decades from 1956 (since the formation of the united Andhra Pradesh). In contrast, the development in this sphere in Andhra and Rayalaseema (as regards no. of educational institutions) is not that spectacular and in terms of absolute figures in 2001 also Telangana has either a clear edge as compared to its population proportion or even an absolute upper-hand (in terms of total number of students) over (coastal) Andhra even.
Table 3: Public Health and Medicine:
(a) Doctors (Allopathic) :
Region
1961(All)
2001(Government only)
Growth
TELANGANA
3053 (22.02%)
4104 (41.79%)
Good
ANDHRA
8405 (60.61%)
3811 (38.81%)
---
RAYALASEEMA
2408 (17.37%)
1905 (19.40%)
---
TOTAL
13, 866 (100%)
9820 (100%)
---
3 (b) Government Hospitals :
Region
1955
2002
Growth
TELANGANA
31 (entire Hyderabad State)
163 (43.82%)
Very Good
ANDHRA
160
143 (38.44%)
---
RAYALASEEMA
66 (17.74%)
---
TOTAL
---
372 (100%)
---
3 (c) Government Medical Facilities (Allopathic) - 2002 :
Region
Hospitals
SPECIAL HOSPITALS
PHCs
Beds
Dispensaries
TELANGANA
163 (43.82%)
19
519 (37.45%)
16, 750 (37.45%)
112(35.11%)
ANDHRA
143 (38.44%)
17
577 (41.63%)
13, 532 (41.63%)
155(48.59%)
RAYALASEEMA
66 (17.74%)
4
290 (20.92%)
6194 (20.92%)
52(16.30%)
TOTAL
372 (100%)
40
1386 (100%)
36, 476(100%)
319 (100%)
3 (d) Government Medical Facilities (Other Therapies) - 2002 :
Region
AYURVEDIC
UNANI
HOMEOPATHY
Dispensaries
Doctors
Dispensaries
Doctors
Dispensaries
Doctors
TELANGANA
226 (41.09%)
270 (43.62%)
121 (62.37%)
182 (75.21%)
93 (32.86%)
137 (31.14%)
ANDHRA
242 (44.00%)
270 (43.62%)
26 (13.40%)
22 (9.09%)
135 (47.70%)
208 (47.27%)
RAYALASEEMA
82 (14.91%)
79 (12.76%)
47 (24.23%)
38 (15.70%)
55 (19.44%)
95 (21.59%)
TOTAL
550 (100%)
619 (100%)
194 (100%)
242 (100%)
283 (100%)
440 (100%)
















The above Table 3 with its four separate categorizations (a), (b), (c) and (d) clearly shows how the Telangana region is in no way inferior to the Andhra and Rayalaseema regions in the field of public health and medicine and how it fast outstripped the progress of those regions as regards the number of allopathic doctors, hospitals, etc. Even in other therapies, Ayurvedic and Unani, Telangana has stood in the first rank whereas it has more than proportionate share of facilities as regards Homeopathy.

Table 4: Total Roads (length in kilometres) :


Region
1961
2001
% Growth


TELANGANA
7628.80 (28.58%)
64, 101 (40.76%)
840.25 %


ANDHRA
19,059.20 (71.42%)
57, 656 (36.6%)
488.79 %


RAYALASEEMA
35, 503 (22.57%)


TOTAL
26, 688
1, 57, 260
589.25 %


Table 5: Elecrification (villages/towns/cities) :


Region
1956
2001
Growth


TELANGANA
10
100%
Phenomenal


ANDHRA
545
100%
Good


RAYALASEEMA
100%


TOTAL
555
100%
Good


Table 6: Power Consumption Category-wise (1999-2000): {in million KWH}

Region
LOW TENSION
HIGH TENSION
TOTAL

Dom1
Agri2
Indus3
Indus4
Irri & others5
LT
HT
TOTAL

Telangana
2950(44.51%)
7094(66.76%)
726(40.27%)
2797(61.22%)
533(30.61%)
10, 814(56.98%)
3722(54.78%)
14, 626(56.75%)

Andhra
2841(42.86%)
1815(17.08%)
652(36.16%)
1367(29.92%)
766(44.00%)
5364(28.27%)
2226(32.76%)
7501(29.11%)

Rayalaseema
837(12.63%)
1717(16.16%)
225(23.57%)
405(8.86%)
442(25.39%)
2799(14.75%)
847(12.46%)
3645(14.14%)

TOTAL
6628 (100%)
10, 626 (100%)
1803 (100%)
4569(100%)
1741 (100%)
18, 977 (100%)
6, 795(100%)
25, 772 (100%)

1. Domestic includes non-domestic; 2. Agricultural includes Public lighting; 3. Industrial here includes cottage industries; 4. Industrial here includes categories I & II and 5. Irrigation and others includes Agriculture, Railway Traction, Electrical Cooperative Societies, Temporary and Colony lighting.
Source: A.P. Transco Ltd., as published in A. Lokendar Reddy, Ibid.
















The above tables 4 and 5 are self-explanatory and show how enormously Telangana developed as compared to other regions in Andhra Pradesh. Of course it could always be complained that the length and quality of roads still leave much to be desired and the electrification has not brought in needed development due to low voltage, very less hours of supply in the rural areas, frequent power cuts, etc. but then that is a problem being faced everywhere - at least everywhere in Andhra Pradesh. Table 6 clearly shows as to how Telangana stands first in power consumption, be it low tension electricity for use in domestic, agricultural and cottage industries sectors or high tension electricity for use in medium and heavy industries, railway traction, etc.
INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL FRONT:
Table 7 (a) : INDUSTRIES:-
Region
1956-57
1982-83
Growth (%)
TELANGANA
2709 (33.13%)
17, 693 (43.86%)
653%
ANDHRA
4349 (53.19%)
17, 027 (42.21%)
391%
RAYALASEEMA
1119 (14.68%)
5616 (13.93%)
501%
TOTAL
8177 (100%)
40, 336 (100%)
493%
7 (b) Industries - Capital Outlay:- (in crores of Rupees)
Region
1956-57
1982-83
Growth (%)
TELANGANA
0.7742 (33.17%)
29.10 (58.47%)
3758 %
ANDHRA
1.2400 (53.13%)
16.51 (33.17%)
1331 %
RAYALASEEMA
0.3198 (14.70%)
4.16 (8.36%)
1300 %
TOTAL
2.3340 (100%)
49.77 (100%)
2132 %
7 (c) Industries - Employees:-
Region
1956-57
1982-83
Growth (%)
TELANGANA
28, 347 (36.11%)
1, 58, 379 (54.67%)
558 %
ANDHRA
39, 765 (50.65%)
82, 923 (28.62%)
391 %
RAYALASEEMA
10, 392 (13.24%)
48, 412 (16.71%)
465 %
TOTAL
78, 504 (100%)
2, 89, 714 (100%)
369 %

Table 8: Working of Factories registered under 2m (i) & (ii) of Factories Act (1998-99):
Region
Number of Factories
Fixed Capital[in lakhs of Rupees]
Employees
TELANGANA
5266 (39.05%)
10, 45, 599 (40.33%)
5, 60, 616 (66.68%)
ANDHRA
6003 (44.52%)
11, 98, 065 (46.21%)
2, 20, 261 (26.20%)
RAYALASEEMA
2215 (16.43%)
3, 48, 893 (13.46%)
59, 823 (7.32%)
TOTAL
13, 484 (100%)
25, 92, 557 (100%)
8, 40, 700 (100%)

Table 9: Details regarding Commercial Banks (as on 31-03-2003):-
Region
Rural Banks
Urban Banks*
Total Banks
Average population per Bank
TELANGANA
971 (39.81%)
1185 (41.56%)
2156 (40.76%)
17, 500
ANDHRA
1045 (42.92%)
1245 (43.67%)
2290 (43.29%)
16, 000
RAYALASEEMA
423 (17.27%)
421 (14.77%)
844 (15.95%)
17, 000
TOTAL
2439 (100%)
2851 (100%)
5290 (100%)
17, 000 (appt.)
* Urban Banks include semi-urban, urban and metropolitan banks.
Table 10: Occupation-wise classification of outstanding credits and deposits of all scheduled Commercial Banks (as on 31-03-2000):- (in lakhs of Rupees)

Region
Agriculture
Industry
Transport Operators
Personal - loans & professional services
Trade

Telangana
2,10, 816 (37.05%)
6, 69, 753 (67.09%)
33, 011 (62.96%)
2, 93, 254 (50.29%)
2, 85, 073 (57.13%)

Andhra
2,60, 885 (45.85%)
2, 78, 820 (27.93%)
14, 347 (27.36%)
2, 19, 657 (37.67%)
1, 80, 198 (36.11%)

Rayalaseema
97, 987 (17.10%)
49, 652 (4.98%)
5076 (9.68%)
70, 158 (12.04%)
33, 760 (6.76%)

TOTAL
5, 69, 058 (100%)
9, 98, 225 (100%)
52, 434 (100%)
5, 83, 069 (100%)
4, 99, 031 (100%)













Looking at the above tables 7 and 8 regarding the industries as also 9 and 10 regarding the commercial banks in Andhra Pradesh, it is quite clear that Telangana has made enormous progress in industrial as well as commercial development. It even surpasses the progress and development in Andhra region in several of the indicators given thereunder. Obviously Rayalaseema region seems to be the most backward in this regard.

IRRIGATION & AGRICULTURE:
Table 10 (a): Total Irrigated Area (in hectares):
Region
1956-57
1983-84
1996-97
TELANGANA
9,12,000 (27.17%)
10,16,000 (34.99%)
7,18,000 (21.69%)
ANDHRA (including Rayalaseema)
24,45,000 (72.83%)
29,04,000 (65.01%)
25,93,000 (78.31%)
TOTAL
33,57,000 (100%)
39,20,000(100%)
33,11,000 (100%)
Source: A. Lokendar Reddy, Ibid., p. 154.
Table 10 (b): Total Irrigated Area (in hectares):
Region
1956-57
1997
2001
TELANGANA
9,13,883 (27.20%)
20,32,434 (38.41%)
22,41,591 (37.89%)
ANDHRA (including Rayalaseema)
24,45,567 (72.80%)
32,58,578 (61.59%)
36,74,556 (62.11%)
TOTAL
33,59,450 (100%)
52,91,012 (100%)
59,16,147 (100%)
Source: A. Lokendar Reddy, Ibid., pp. 156-157.

Tables 10 (a) and 10 (b) above, both taken (and of course rearranged) from Lokendar Reddy's book seem to be conflicting. Whereas on the basis of the first table [10 (a)], Lokendar Reddy argues that while the total irrigated area in Andhra region increased by about 1.55 lakhs hectares in 96-97 as compared to 1956-57, that in the Telangana region has decreased by 1.94 lakhs hectares (22%) in the same period, the tables given by him in pp. 156-157 of the same book present a different picture. Table 10 (b) as culled from those tables shows that there has been a continuous increase in the total irrigated area in Telangana too. But as Jayashankar also argues that the total irrigated area, as also the total cultivated area in Telangana decreased considerably in 2002 as compared to 1956, this point needs a closer scrutiny. If it is found correct, it is to be very much regretted and condemned, and of course speedily remedied. But somehow it seems quite improbable that whereas in the entire country the irrigated area has in general increased, and food crops production as also other agricultural production has consistently gone up in all these decades, it should decrease in Telangana area alone.
And as for sources of water for irrigation, we know that rivers are a major source and two major rivers - Krishna and Godavari - flow through Andhra Pradesh and finally into the Bay of Bengal forming the vast and fertile delta areas of Krishna-Godavari Basin in coastal Andhra. The votaries of Separate Telangana complain that while the catchment area of the Krishna River is the maximum in Telangana, the allocation of waters for irrigation is not accordingly done as shown by the following table:
Table 11: Krishna Waters - catchment area, water claims and allocations in the 3 regions:
Category
TELANGANA
ANDHRA
Rayalaseema
Catchment area proportion
68.5%
13.1%
18.4%
Water claim as per catchment area
553.88 TMC
104.65 TMC
147.47 TMC
Water allocations as done at present
277.86 TMC
388.44 TMC
133.7 TMC
As such it is contended that the coastal Andhra region is utilizing about 280-290 TMC of Krishna waters more than its due proportion and that is great injustice to the Telangana as also Rayalaseema regions. Likewise the present allocations from Godavari waters are also heavily in favour of the Andhra region. In my opinion this imbalance also needs to be corrected at the earliest and justice be done to both Telangana and Rayalaseema regions without further delay.
Table 12 (a) : Agricultural crops' yields in 1956-61(in pounds per acre):
Crop
TELANGANA
ANDHRA including Rayalaseema
STATE AVERAGE
Paddy
711 (Karimnagar)
1392 (Guntur)
1085
Wheat
131 (Hyderabad)76 (Nalgonda)
533 (W. Godavari)541 (Kadapa)
219
Millets
303 (Nalgonda)305 (Mahaboobnagar)
784 (Srikakulam)755 (Chittoor)
458
Pulses
70 (Karimnagar)
272 (Krishna)
184
Table 12 (b) : Agricultural crops' yields in 1995-96(in kilos per acre):
Crop
TELANGANA
ANDHRA
RAYALASEEMA
STATE AVERAGE
Paddy
2249
2663
2463
2498
Wheat
752
---
794
732
Jowar
685
747
893
731
Maize
2594
2866
2585
2630
Castor
270
257
257
269
Sugarcane
7031
7110
8441
7303
Cotton
206
351
282
259
Tobacco
2197
915
---
1027
Ulavalu
360
354
301
351
Pesalu
411
408
497
411
Table 12 (c): Area-wise cultivation of certain Cereals (2000-2001): (area in hectares)
Region
Rice
Jowar
Bajra
Maize
TELANGANA
15, 47, 985(36.49%)
5, 32, 239 (78.63%)
45, 381 (31.58%)
4, 49, 286(85.15%)
ANDHRA
23, 82, 584(56.16%)
15, 567 (2.30%)
62, 464 (43.47%)
71, 129(13.48%)
RAYALASEEMA
3, 12, 157(7.35%)
1, 29, 162 (19.07%)
35, 859 (24.95%)
7252(1.37%)
TOTAL
42, 42, 726 (100%)
6, 76, 928 (100%)
1, 43, 704 (100%)
5, 27, 667 (100%)










The above tables 12 (a) and 12 (b) clearly show that per acre yields of agricultural crops in Telangana have very much improved over the last four decades as compared to the lower level of such yields at the time of the formation of Andhra Pradesh. Telangana has even overtaken Andhra in per acre yields of certain crops. Table 12 (c) shows the area-wise cultivation of certain cereals in 2000-2001, where again Telangana is in a comfortable position as compared to the other two regions of the State.
Backwardness and Sustainable Development:
In the background of all these statistical details, it would be highly unjust for Telangana people themselves to project a picture of stark backwardness of the region. The real truth is that Telangana is developing fast and sufficiently fast in many spheres. Of course, there has been injustices done to Telangana and backwardness still prominent in some fields, but that does not warrant a total pessimistic approach. That way there are many backward regions in Andhra and Rayalaseema also, which are more backward than any backward regions of Telangana. For example, Anantapur District in Rayalaseema is suffering from serious drought for decades and its development is so low and insufficient that the problem has aggravated over the years and certain areas are becoming virtual deserts. Likewise Srikakulam District in Andhra is one of the most backward districts in the entire state. Well, with forests fast depleting in Telangana and the ground water falling to lower and lower levels, we should note that the danger of desertification is there in this region also and so does the increasing salinity of soil in certain delta areas in Andhra due to the present intense cultivation with chemical fertilizers, pesticides, etc. posing such danger therein also. Hence we should view the problems in realistic perspective and try to cope with those dispassionately, scientifically and for the benefit of all Telugus without falling prey to narrow parochial considerations.
Also when I am talking of development, one should not misunderstand that I am supporting this LPG economy oriented, oligarchic policy of development at the cost of the masses and environment. But what I am bringing to light is that within the present whatever development scenario in the country, the development criteria as adopted at present which hold good uniformly to all regions have to be taken into consideration. And on doing so the development indicators for Telangana are not in anyway inferior to those of Andhra and Rayalaseema regions and so in the current paradigm, in several fields Telangana cannot be adjudged backward at all. As for the real development desirable for the people in general, I am a strong advocate of sustainable development, which protects and promotes environment, human concerns and socio-economic justice - I am for a development oriented towards 'socialism with human face'. But then it is a problem affecting, and an ideal to be fought for, the entire country.

Real face of the present Separate Telangana Movement:
As such the present Separate Telangana movement, spearheaded by the Telangana Rashtra Samiti under Chandrasekhar Rao and Narendra, in my opinion, has not any justification and legitimacy but is purely a game of power hungry politicians exploiting the 'sentiment' of Telangana and inciting anti-Andhra passions for their narrow ends. It is to be remembered that Chandrasekhar Rao was a staunch follower of N.T.R. and a prominent leader of Telugu Desam and seems to have fallen apart from Chandrababu Naidu mainly over denial of speaker's and/or minister's post. He belongs to the Velama Caste and is known to be a quite well-to-do landlord. And then Narendra came from the BJP fold and it is well known that BJP is espousing the theory of smaller states and stronger centrlargee and is allergic to the very idea of federalism. Since the BJP entered into strategic alliance with Chandrababu Naidu, it had to stop canvassing even its own resolution for separate Telangana and irked by such stand Narendra, representing urban middle classes and himself belonging to upper middle class Padmashali (BC-B) section, broke away from that party on the question of Telangana alone. But it does not mean Narendra turned a secularist overnight and left his hindutva (in the sense of Hindu fundamentalist) ideology. So a strange alliance is now running the Telangana show and the present electoral equations have shown how fragile this alliance could be. In order that the newly emerged middle class of Telangana together with the old Reddy, Velama and other high caste feudal forces should grab power exclusively for themselves, all this hullabaloo about Telangana is being made and the high ideals and glossy image of a separate Telangana bringing in a people's friendly and all round development in the region are being paraded. Nothing more and nothing less.
Regional Identities and Unity in Diversity:
By saying so I should not be misunderstood to be oblivious of the regional peculiarities and the specific regional characteristics including the natural factors. We should not forget that Telangana is a part of Deccan Plateau and is some 400-600 metres above the sea level in general except in some areas where also it is about 150-200 metres above the sea level. It is rich in minerals and forests. Likewise Rayalaseema has areas (Anantapur and Chittoor districts) which form part of Mysore Plateau and the rainfall in Rayalaseema is the lowest in the State. Coastal Andhra has highest rainfall; it is not so rich in minerals but recently vast natural gas reserves were found. When it comes to the question of viable development of a region all such natural characteristics also play a significant part. There is more need and possibility in Telangana to develop it industrially and it should be realized that provision of irrigation facilities through canals, etc. is very difficult there because of the comparatively high altitude of the arable land. Whereas in coastal regions generally, irrigation by gravity becomes easier and in Andhra region, development of agriculture was, and can be, done better than in other regions. So one should plan the overall development of a region taking into account all such natural in addition to manmade characteristics also.
In this context, I am opposed to some aspects of the six-point formula mainly due to my recognition of the reality of regional identities and peculiarities. Though it is true that backward areas are there in every region, it is also true that every region separately for itself has developed an identity of its own - that is the people of the backward as wlargeell as the forward areas in the same region have developed a common identity apart from the people of other regions - backward or forward. It would be quite stupid, to say the least, to forget about such identities and peculiarities. As such I am of the view that scrapping of the regional councils by means of six-point formula was quite bad. What they could have done was to keep up or establish regional councils and then direct them to mainly cater for the backward areas and sections of the respective regions. Likewise the furore against mulki rules was also uncalled for - when our Constitution in certain situations makes it possible and feasible to make certain special provisions on the basis of requirement of residence {as per Article 16 (3)} within a State, then there is no reason why that provision could not be broadly interpreted as to include requirement of residence within a certain region of the State also to meet the ends of justice and equity. To allay or moderate the discontent and opposition of the people of the Andhra region, the period of residence could have been reduced - say to 10 years from the original requirement of 15 years or so and that would not have very much hurt the sentiments of the Telangana people. After all the present local area candidacy system protected by Article 371 D, specially inserted by a constitutional amendment, is nothing but a sort of mulki rule for all the regions of the state. And then I also suggest the re-adoption of the system of designating a Deputy Chief Minister - I prefer two such deputy chief ministers for the two regions to which the chief minister does not belong to - and also desire that such deputy chief ministers should invariably chair their respective regional councils.
For Regional Autonomy within Andhra-Telangana-Seema:
Likewise I am also not happy with the present name of the State as Andhra Pradesh and would very much like to see it changed. It may be recollected that the first name suggested for the new united state was Andhra-Telangana but after some discussion in the Assembly at that time, it was abandoned for the generally accepted name of Alargendhra Pradesh. But times have changed since then, much agitation and damage to the feelings of harmony and unity has occurred and it is high time to recognize the regional identities and peculiarities by suitably renaming the State. I suggest that our State be called Andhra-Telangana-Seema incorporating the names of all the three major regions of the State. One might question with Shakespeare as to "What is there in the name?" but it is also true that one recognizes the worth and impact of a name and nobody names a child or a person without thinking many times over it. The name also could summarize or lend the identity to the unit so named. Regional Councils should be established for every region and they be empowered to present regional budgets which would be the basis on which State Budget has to be finally formulated, of course with the necessary alterations and corrections. These regional councils should have the necessary authority to back up their suggestions and directions, and the State Government ought to be loathe to intervene against their decisions and action in the interest of the rightful claims and interests of the people of the region except in case of acute emergency or patent injustice occurring. If the present organizations fighting for the rights and interests of Telangana or Andhra or Rayalaseema concentrate on their efforts as lobbying or pressurizing groups within the broad unity framework than in futile endeavours for balkanization of the State, it would do immense good to the interests of all the people of the State. We should not forget that language is a powerful biding factor and is capable of lending the necessary psychological harmony and sentiment for emergence of a particular linguistic community as a viable nation. I am of the view that the major linguistic groups in India can be taken as so many viable nationalities and the unity of India can only progress and prosper as that of a federal setup in a multi-national country.
A nationality should have for its territory all the (contiguous) areas inhabited by the particular linguistic community making it, and it should also be endowed with all the resources in such territorial entity for its real efflorescence. Nobody doubts that if Andhra Pradesh could or would at any time be an independent sovereign state, the different regions in it could or would be autonomous provinces in it. In the same vein, if Andhra Pradesh is not or cannot be an independent sovereign state, it can and should be an autonomous unit in India - which is a broader unity - but within the State, the necessary regional autonomy should also be existent so that the people of the different regions should not and would not feel cheated and oppressed. By splitting up the bigger state in the name of regional autonomy, the real basis of federal equation with the centre will be lost and the smaller states generally tend to become mere stooges of the centre - generally an autocratic centre. Already much damage is done to our federal setup by the present constitution in which residuary powers are given to the centre as against the original federal scheme where residuary powers were to vest with the provinces. India is said to be a Union of States and by that one can only mean a voluntary union of willing and sufficiently autonomous states. But if the very States be split up as per the likes and dislikes of the Union in the name of catering to the aspirations of regional autonomy and popular pressure, then the very basis of the country being a voluntary union of autonomous or nearly autonomous units disappears. That will lead to disastrous consequences in the long term when the very basis of the unity and integrity of the country would be questioned on similar grounds and the balkanization of the country aided and abetted by scheming imperialist and other foreign powers would begin and take place. So my earnest appeal to all the people of the different regions of the State is that they should stand united but at the same time recognize the identities, autonomy and aspirations of different regions and with a large heart and intelligent mind work for the development of the entire state as a unity in diversity.
Much is said declaiming the migrations of Andhra farming communities/persons and Andhra employees to Telangana. Here it seems to me that such groups and persons of Telangana concentrating on such harangue are suffering from a sort of inferiority complex and desire to withdraw into a cocoon. That is quite bad, and dangerous too, and such a psychological makeup only stifles free thinking, democratic spirit and practical progress. One should remember that migrations in history have acted as catalysts for socio-economic development and cultural and ideological progress and it is only due to migrations, travel, trade and communications that free interaction with other nations, communities, peoples etc. becomes possible and that always creates opportunities for efflorescence of knowledge and culture. Look at America, which is a continent of migrants who got assimilated into a nation. True, the original inhabitants - Red Indians - were almost decimated and on their ruin that nation was built but that was three to four centuries back. However, other migrations of various national, religious and freethinking groups continued and these variegated entities got united and assimilated into one great American Nation. As for the present day, certainly there is no possibility or danger of decimation or extinction of a people by intra-national migrations; in any case, there is no such danger in Telangana and Telanganites can immensely benefit by properly channelling and utilizing such migrations. Already the Telangana agricultural community has benefited very much by the infusion of the new techniques, work culture and innovative agricultural practices brought in by the migrant Andhra farming communities/ persons and no less a person than Mr. Baga Reddy, a veteran Telangana leader and longstanding parliamentarian (who was also a separate Telangana votary), has attested to this positive feature. Moreover, in Telangana there are already sufficient numbers of North Indian migrants and curiously they are accepted without murmur or protest by the locals. And it is only sheer ignorance and misunderstandings fanned by the deliberate cunning of certain self-centred leaders and vested interests that has created much antagonism against the urban Andhra migrant. Once the people at large are educated about the real facts and implications of this phenomenon, the misplaced antagonisms and jealousies would disappear and hearty unity would certainly emerge. Moreover, it is high time that the Telanganite himself become an extrovert; try to go about the country, settle and work in new places and conquer those communities with his societal and work spirit. It is not impossible or improbable seeing the so many thousands of Telanganites who have gone abroad and are working in various countries to the general benefit of the community. Also several thousands of rural and semi-urban labourers and handicraftsmen have already migrated to places like Sholapur, Nagpur, Bombay, etc. and are working there in useful avocations, having got amicably mixed up with the people therein. Nothing is stopping them from going to Andhra region either and intermixing with the coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema people. The psychological barrier has to be broken up by putting an end to senseless animosities. The spirit of equality of human beings and dignity of labour should prevail over narrow feudal and parochial considerations.
Moreover, in case of Telangana it would be incorrect to say that the overwhelming opinion of the people of the region is in favour of a separate state notwithstanding the media hype generated by separatist outfits and by the hypocritical BJP Government and party setups. Actually Khammam, Nalgonda, Mahaboobnagar and Adilabad districts have little to gain by separation and the overwhelming popular opinion in these districts is against separation and for retention of the present unity. It is curious to note that there is a body of 'separatists' in Khammam too who complain about the injustices done to their district by the policies and practices which favoured other Telangana Districts and they are demanding 'a separate Khammam State'! In other (interior) districts of Telangana too the sentiments in favour of Separate Telangana are not that uniform and it is only in Karimnagar District that such sentiments are the strongest with Medak, Warangal and Nizamabad Districts also having strong separatist sections. As such the retention of present unity with of course the necessary immediate corrective measures is the need of the day. In such circumstances, yes, I stand for a united Andhra-Telangana-Seema protecting, and also benefiting by, its various regional identities, aspirations and peculiarities, and progressing forward in the path of a humane, democratic socialist setup within the broader unity of the multi-national, federal, socialist republic of India.

* * * * *
Written in April 2004 and published in Frontier in 2-3 instalments under the heading United States of Andhra sometime in 2004 only.