http://ajc.sagepub.com/
Asian Journal of Management Cases
http://ajc.sagepub.com/content/8/1/89
The online version of this article can be found at:
DOI: 10.1177/097282011000800107
Asian Journal of Management Cases
P. Bala Bhaskaran
Telangana : A Morton's Fork?
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
Additional services and information for
Asian Journal of Management Cases can be found at:
Email Alerts:
http://ajc.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions:
http://ajc.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations:
http://ajc.sagepub.com/content/8/1/89.refs.html
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 7(2), 2010: 113–134
T
ELANGANA: A MORTON’S FORK?
P. Bala Bhaskaran
The case is set around the dilemma that the Government of India faced in the
early weeks of 2010, that is, whether to create the new state of Telangana or not. It
traces the history and evolution of state reorganization in India from independence
to the year 2000. With this as background, the case examines the desirability or
otherwise of the demand for newer and smaller states. The case offers an opportunity
to examine the problems and prospects of articulating the aspirations of
people towards development and effective governance. It explores the critical
factors to be considered in designing the governance and administrative structures
in a democratic polity, and also explores the contours of managing in situations
of abundant diversity.
Keywords:
Public policy, developmental administration, governance, inclusive
growth, growth strategy, state reorganization
I
NTRODUCTION
On 9 December 2009, Mr Palaniappan Chidambaram, Minister of Home Affairs,
Government of India (GOI), stated that his government would initiate steps for the
formation of the state of Telangana (
The Times of India 2009). This came as a welcome
shower to the Telangana Rashtra Samiti (TRS), the political party spearheading
the movement for the creation of Telangana state by carving out ten districts from
the state of Andhra Pradesh. K. Chandrsekhara Rao (KCR), the supreme leader of
TRS, had been on a hunger strike for the previous week and a half and his health
had deteriorated to a precarious condition. In fact, there was ample reason to believe
that it was the hunger strike of KCR, the imminent danger to his life and the possible
consequences that prompted the GOI to arrive at a decision.
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
S
AGE PUBLICATIONS LOS ANGELES/LONDON/NEW DELHI/SINGAPORE/WASHINGTON DC
DOI:
10.1177/097282011000800107
This case was prepared by P. Bala Bhaskaran, Vice President & Chief Learning Offi cer, Everonn
Business Education Ltd, and former Director, IBS Ahmedabad, to serve as a basis for class
discussion rather than to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of an administrative
situation.
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
90 P. B
ALA BHASKARAN
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
The announcement by the Home Minister cooled tempers in the Telangana area;
KCR called off his hunger strike and the TRS went into a thanksgiving mode. However,
the people in the rest of the state of Andhra Pradesh felt cheated. Protests and violence
erupted in various cities and towns in the state. A large number of members of
legislative assembly (MLA), the state legislature and members of parliament (MP),
the federal legislature from the Andhra region offered their resignation in solidarity
with the people agitating for the status quo. The announcement was also instant fuel
to the dormant fi res of a number of political organizations elsewhere in the country,
seeking statehood for their regions. Notable among these were Gorkhaland,
Vidarbha, Purvanchal, Paschimanchal, etc. They immediately commenced issuing
press statements.
M
ETAMORPHOSIS OF INDIAN STATES
Early Stage of State Formation
In August 1947, at the close of the British Raj, the Indian subcontinent saw the emergence
of two dominions—India and Pakistan—from the British-held territories of the
region. A large number of princely states, scattered across the subcontinent, which
were under British suzerainty, were given the option to either join one of the dominions
or remain independent. So one of the fi rst tasks that the two nascent dominions undertook
was to persuade and amalgamate the princely states (Menon 1955).
1
India was already working on a constitution through a Constituent Assembly elected
for this purpose, a few years earlier. On 26 January 1950, India adopted a constitution
and became a democratic republic. The constitution envisaged a federal structure with
a union government at the apex and several state governments at regional levels; the
constitution was based on the principle of universal adult franchise (Guha 2010).
2 At
that time India was a cluster of about a dozen major provinces and 600 odd princely
states almost like a jigsaw. The smaller and contiguous princely states were grouped
together into medium-sized provinces before the fi rst general elections in 1951.
1
The author gives a fi rst-hand account of the integration of the princely states as he was a bureaucrat
at that time actively involved in the integration process along with Jawaharlal Nehru, the Prime Minister,
and Sardar Patel, the Home Minister.
2
The author describes and comments on the experiment of introducing democracy based on universal
adult franchise to a country of 360 million people when two-third of the population was illiterate and an
equal number was below the poverty line by the standards of that time.
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
T
ELANGANA: A MORTON’S FORK? 91
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
Linguistic States
Soon demands emerged from various parts of the country to create states on the basis
of regional languages. The proponents argued that regional language was a strong
basis of identity and that governance would reach the governed most effectively only
through regional languages. The state of Hyderabad had three to four prominent
regional languages. The area that had Telugu as the spoken language was known
as Telangana. This was perhaps the largest area. In certain areas, Marathi was the
prominent language; in certain other areas, Kannada was the spoken language. The
offi cial language of the state of Hyderabad was Urdu; this language was prominent
in the urban areas of Hyderabad and only to a small extent in other places. Telugu
was spoken in the northern districts of former Madras province as also the coastal
areas known as Andhra. Telugu-speaking people from all these areas demanded the
unifi cation of all such areas under one state to be called Andhra Pradesh. The demand
was vociferously taken up by a freedom fi ghter called Potti Sriramulu; he embarked
on a hunger strike which eventually resulted in his death.
3
Such demands also arose from other parts of the country because linguistic and
cultural identities were quite strong. Certain districts of Madras province were predominantly
Kannada-speaking just as certain districts of the Hyderabad state were.
The people of the princely state of Mysore were also Kannada-speaking. The Kannadaspeaking
people from all these areas demanded the unifi cation of their areas into a
single state. Similarly Malayalam-speaking people were scattered in certain districts
of Madras province and in the princely states of Travancore and Cochin. They too
demanded unifi cation of their areas into a single state. Considering the plethora of
such demands, GOI appointed a States Reorganization Council to study the situation
and come up with a blueprint for redrawing the political map of the country. On
the basis of its recommendations, the country was reorganized into fourteen states,
primarily on linguistic basis, and they came into existence on 1 November 1956.
4 In
this process, a major part of the state of Hyderabad was merged with the new state
3
Potti Sriramulu (1901–52) was a freedom fi ghter and an ardent follower of Mahatma Gandhi. He
championed the cause of uniting all the Telugu-speaking people under one state immediately after
independence. In true Gandhian tradition he went on an indefi nite hunger strike to press this goal; he
succumbed on 16 December 1952. He is respected all over Andhra Pradesh for this great sacrifi ce.
4
States Reorganization Commission, headed by Fazal Ali, was constituted by Prime Minister Jawaharlal
Nehru in December 1953, with the objective of redrawing the boundaries of the states on linguistic
basis. The Commission submitted its report in 1955. The Act was passed and the new states came into
existence on 1 November 1956.
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
92 P. B
ALA BHASKARAN
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
of Andhra Pradesh (AP), while some parts went to Bombay state and some others to
the new state of Mysore (later renamed Karnataka).
The reorganization of the Union of India on linguistic basis was not complete. The
state of Bombay had its northern part with Gujarati as the lingua franca, while the
central and southern parts were predominantly Marathi-speaking. Soon the Gujaratispeaking
people started agitating for a separate state, resulting in the bifurcation of
the state of Bombay into Maharashtra and Gujarat in 1960.
N
EW DIMENSIONS, NEW STATES
Nagaland
A set of about fourteen tribes, under the generic group name of Nagas, were located
predominantly in the district of Naga Hills in Assam at the time of independence
(Kunz and Joshi 2008, Roy Burman 2008). These tribes were, all along, fi ercely independent
warriors with little exposure to the outside world. Towards the close of the
nineteenth century, Christian Missionaries had become active among the Nagas; the
consequent gradual conversion to Christianity had mellowed the Nagas’ fi erceness;
the English language had started replacing tribal dialects. In 1947 the Nagas were not
prepared to be a part of India; they wanted to be an independent nation. A group of
Nagas had formed Naga National Council and resorted to guerilla warfare against the
GOI. Given this legacy of the spirit of independence among the Nagas, GOI continued
a prolonged strategy of dialogues and persuasion. In 1957, Nagaland Peoples Council
was constituted, with participation from the Nagas, to address their special needs and
aspirations. A 16-point agreement was entered into and eventually full statehood was
granted on 1 December 1963.
Punjab
The demand for carving out the Punjabi-speaking areas of Punjab into a separate
state had been on the boil since independence. At the time of partition, a major part
of the undivided Punjab went to Pakistan in terms of the Muslim majority districts;
only a small part came to India as East Punjab. The forced migration of Hindus and
Sikhs from the proposed Pakistan to Indian East Punjab followed the partition. The
languages prevalent in the state were Punjabi and Hindi. Sikhism had emerged at
a turbulent time in the Indian history (fi fteenth to seventeenth century) to protect
the basic principles of Hinduism, when persecution of the non-Muslims by the
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
T
ELANGANA: A MORTON’S FORK? 93
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
Muslim rulers was at its peak (Kohli 1993: 78–89).
5 Guru Gobind Singh, the tenth
Guru of Sikhism, forged his disciples into a strong army of warriors to fi ght against
the continuing onslaught and atrocities by the Muslim rulers. The next century saw
the decline of the Mughal Empire; emergence of strong Sikhism can be attributed to
be one of the reasons for this. Sikhs carved out an empire of Greater Punjab, which
stretched from the Sutlej River to Peshawar on one dimension and from Ladakh to
Gujarat on another, with Lahore as the capital. The English had to wait till the middle
of the nineteenth century (Anglo-Sikh Wars, 1845 to 1849) to annex the Sikh Empire
into the East India Company (Duggal 1988, Rai 1987, Singh 2006). To be a part of India
and not even controlling a state within it was perhaps a big loss of identity to the Sikh
psyche. They badly needed a symbol of a state to resurrect and sustain their identity.
Sikhs identifi ed emotionally with Punjabi written in the Gurumukhi script, which was
modifi ed and developed into its present form from the original Punjabi script by Guru
Angad Dev, the second Guru of the Sikhs. The demand for bifurcation of the state was
being spearheaded by Akali Dal, the political arm of Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandak
Committee (SGPC), the apex Sikh religious body. Indian political leadership, haunted
by the trauma of partition, was always averse to the idea of bifurcation of any state,
especially when the demand had a tinge of religious tone to it. Since the demand
for statehood had an element of religious fl avour, there was a lurking suspicion in
some quarters that the campaign might be hijacked by extremist elements, who were
known to be active outside the country with an agenda to establish an independent
country for the Sikhs.
These contradicting forces clouded a smooth decision process. It was only in
September 1965 that a Parliamentary Committee
6 was formed to study the issue. On
the basis of the recommendations of the Parliamentary Committee, GOI appointed
Justice J.C. Shah Commission to detail the bifurcation. The Commission completed its
task on 31 May 1966 and the new states of Haryana and Punjab came into existence
on 17 September 1966.
5
Guru Tegh Bahadur (1621–75), the ninth Guru of the Sikhs was beheaded, in Delhi in 1675, under
the orders of the Mughal Emperor Aurangazeb (1618–1707) for refusing to embrace Islam. This prompted
Guru Gobind Singh, the next Guru, to raise an army called Khalsa to defend the faith and the faithful.
6
A parliamentary Committee headed by Sardar Hukam Singh, Speaker of the Lok Sabha, was appointed
by the GOI in September 1965 ‘to arrive at an amicable arrangement for meeting the needs of the Punjabi
and Hindi speaking regions of Punjab State’. The Committee submitted its report in 1965. This formed
the basis for the formation of the new states of Punjab and Haryana.
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
94 P. B
ALA BHASKARAN
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
Mizoram
Mizos were a set of tribes living in the Lushai Hills region in the north-eastern part of
India. These tribes are believed to have migrated from the northern part of Myanmar
in the fourteenth century. They established themselves in self-contained villages with
little or no interaction with the outside world. In 1895, the British proclaimed the region
to be a part of British India and brought them under British administration. In
1898, the district of Lushai Hills was formed with Aizawl as its headquarters. Later in
1919, the Lushai Hills district, along with other tribal-dominated areas, was declared
a Backward Tract under the GOI Act of 1919. Much later in 1935, the tribal districts
of Assam were declared as Excluded Area. A gradual political awakening occurred
during the British rule. Mizo Union, formed in 1946, was prominent in representing
the aspirations of the Mizo people. The Constituent Assembly working on the Constitution
of India created an Advisory Committee to look into the special needs of
the tribes and minorities. A subcommittee headed by Gopinath Bordoloi
7 advised
the Constituent Assembly on the affairs of the North East. On the basis of the Subcommittee’s
recommendations, GOI accepted and gave a certain degree of autonomy
to the tribal areas; this was enshrined into the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution.
Accordingly Lushai Hills Autonomous District Council came into existence in 1952
which only partially satisfi ed the aspirations of the people of the region. When GOI
formed a States Reorganization Council in 1955, the Mizo Union and the members
of the Lushia Hills Autonomous District Council pleaded for a state, larger than the
Lushai Hills, comprising all the Mizo-dominated areas. Their plea was not accepted.
In 1959, the region was devastated by an unprecedented famine, known as the
Mautam Famine
8; during this period Mizo National Famine Front emerged as the most
7
As a prelude to granting independence, Constituent Assembly was formed and members were indirectly
elected to it by the Provincial Legislative Assemblies. The Constituent Assembly met for the fi rst
time in 1946 at Delhi when India was still under British rule. This was to be the interim parliament until
a formal constitution was adopted and formal elections were held. The constituent Assembly formed
various sub-committees to address specifi c issues. One such subcommittee was North East Tribal Areas
and Assam: Excluded and Partially Excluded Areas Sub-Committee headed by Gopinath Bordoloi. This
subcommittee looked into the special needs and safeguards specifi c to the North East region and its
people.
8
Mautam Famine refers to the famine conditions that occur almost every 48 years along with the
fl owering of the special bamboo species found in the Indian states of Manipur and Mizoram. These states
have almost 30 per cent of the land area covered by bamboo forests. This bamboo species has a life cycle
of 48 years, at the end of which it fl owers across the entire forest, sheds the seeds and dies naturally.
Black rats found in the region feed on the bamboo seeds and multiply at phenomenal speed because
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
T
ELANGANA: A MORTON’S FORK? 95
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
popular local organization, spearheading the relief activities under the leadership
of Pu Laldenga. After the famine, Laldenga converted the organization in 1961 into
a political body with the name of Mizo National Front and started campaigning for
an independent state of Greater Mizoram. He unleashed a campaign of confrontation
which forced GOI to deploy armed forces. This state of mistrust and confrontation
continued for a very long time; continued negotiation and persuasion made GOI to
grant Union Territory status to Mizoram in 1972. Full statehood came much later on
20 February 1987.
Seven Sister States of the North East
At the time of independence, the North East had only three states: Assam, the
princely state of Manipur and the princely state of Tripura. The region had far more
diversity—ethnic, linguistic, socio-cultural—than any other region of India. The
North East was characterized by mountainous terrain which limited accessibility to
the region historically. Various tribes had occupied different parts of the region with
little or no effort on
inter se communication and interaction. Each tribe had its own
dialect, distinct and unique from any other.
9 Assamese and Bengali were the only
developed languages in the region.
There was no unifi ed political or governance structure in the region till the arrival
of the British. This meant that there had been little effort in developing physical infrastructure
in the region. The entire terrain was landlocked. After 1947, the situation
was further aggravated with only a small corridor (the Siliguri corridor) linking the
North East to mainland India. Meaningful agriculture was possible only in Assam; all
other regions were hilly and offered little scope for agriculture. All essential goods were
required to come from outside as imports. In the post-1947 scenario, absence of cordial
relations with China, Pakistan (and later on Bangladesh), Myanmar and the prolonged
history of insurgency within the region continued to keep the region strategically
sensitive. All these factors had a serious negative impact on the development of the
region.
of some special properties of the bamboo seeds. The enhanced rat population attacks the farms, grain
storage in the villages and anything that is edible to them in the region, resulting in famine conditions.
The cyclical ecological phenomenon of bamboo fl owering, precisely once in 48 years, thus brings disaster
to the region. In olden days, this phenomenon brought havoc and very often altered the history of the
region. Now with science and technology, serious attempts are being made to genetically manage the
fl owering season. ‘Mautam’ literally means bamboo death in Mizo.
9
For more information on the North Eastern states, refer to Pandey (2008) and Sharma (2005).
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
96 P. B
ALA BHASKARAN
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
In 2000, the total population of the region was in the range of 40 million or 4 per
cent of the national population, spread among the states of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam,
Meghalaya, Manipur, Mizoram, Nagaland and Tripura. Arunachal Pradesh, a union
territory, received statehood in 1987 along with Mizoram.
Three New States in Y2K
The year 2000 saw the emergence of three new states in the Republic of India:
Chhattisgarh came into existence on 1 November 2000, Uttarakhand on 9 November
2000 and Jharkhand on 15 November 2000. These three sister states emerged due to
the change in the political thinking that smaller states contributed to better governance
and development. All of them came out of larger states—in terms of population and
geographical area; each had its own history, shared legacy and consequently, an individual
identity. All of them came from the most backward states of India, described
by economists as BIMARU
10 states.
Chhattisgarh was carved out of Madhya Pradesh, the largest state in India in terms
of area. The state derives its name from thirty-six princely states that were supposed
to have existed in the region (Hunter 1923, Lethbridge 1893, Markovits 2004). The
population had a high percentage of tribal people; the region was landlocked resulting
in very little exposure to the external world and the consequent low development. The
region was rich in mineral deposits and had a socio-cultural identity of its own that
had evolved over a long period of time. Chhattisgarh at present was the tenth-largest
state in India in terms of area.
Uttarakhand was carved out of Uttar Pradesh, the most populous state of India.
Initially called Uttaranchal, the state was renamed in 2006 as Uttarakhand, a name
which fi nds mention in the ancient text of Rig Ved (Handa 2002). The region is
mountainous and located on the southern slope of the Himalayas. The geography
of the region made it quite distinct from the rest of Uttar Pradesh, on the Gangetic
plain. The region has two major divisions: Garhwal and Kumaon. Though these two
were traditionally rival kingdoms, geography, economy, culture and traditions had
developed strong bonds and a common identity for Uttarakhand (Agarwal et al. 1995,
Husain 1995, Kumar 2000, Mukhopadhyay 1987, Thapliyal 2005).
10
BIMARU states refer to the most backward states of the Indian Union in terms of per capita income,
growth rate, etc. The term BIMARU is an acronym for the states Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and
Uttar Pradesh, created by an economist Prof. Ashish Bose in early 1980s by taking the fi rst letters of each
state’s name. In the Indian language of Hindi, the term ‘
bimar’ means ‘unhealthy’.
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
T
ELANGANA: A MORTON’S FORK? 97
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
Jharkhand was carved out of Bihar, the second-largest state in India, in terms
of population. Geographically, the region came under the Chhota Nagpur Plateau,
whereas the rest of Bihar formed a part of the Gangetic plain. The Jharkhand region
had signifi cant tribal population, while the rest of Bihar had predominantly non-tribal
population. The Jharkhand region had a geopolitical and cultural identity of its own
dating back to the period of Magadh Empire. There were royal families of tribal origin
who could trace back their lineage to as far back as 1,200 AD. These families had
ownership rights over large tracts of farmlands. The region came under the British
Empire in 1765. The tribal people revolted against the British rule in innumerable
battles starting from 1771. Twentieth century brought industry to this mineral-rich
area. Jamshedpur, Dhanbad and Bokaro were cities that adorned the industrial map
of India. Despite industrialization, Jharkhand was characterized by economic, social
and educational backwardness (Singh 1983, The World Bank 2007). List of states in
India and some basic data as in 2009 are placed in Exhibit 1 for an overall perspective
of the Indian Union.
D
YNAMICS OF TELANGANA
Background
Geographically Andhra Pradesh comprised two distinct regions—the coastal region
and the eastern half of the Deccan Plateau. The plateau region of Andhra Pradesh
could further be divided into two parts. The upper (northern) side of river Krishna was
known as the Telangana region, while the lower (southern) part was the Rayalaseema
region (Exhibit 2). Two major rivers, namely, Krishna and Godavari and large number
of their tributaries fl owed through the state into the Bay of Bengal. The coastal region
was irrigated by surface water with the water table being pretty close to the surface.
In the region forming part of the plateau, the water table was much lower and hence
this region drew its water requirements from ground water through tube-wells and
similar systems. The major part of the rainfall in the state was derived from the
North Eastern Monsoon which occured in the months of October–November. Again,
the coastal region got the majority of the rainfall, while the plateau region received
scanty rains. These basic differences had wider implications on the cropping patterns,
occupations, habitations, lifestyles and densities of population of the two regions
(Sachs 2005).
11
11
In this book, Sachs analyses the impact that geography has on the development of a region. He
explains the differential development of regions and argues for differential diagnosis. These concepts
have extensive relevance while looking for bases for creation of administrative units or states.
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
98 P. B
ALA BHASKARAN
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
Andhra Pradesh had always been a predominantly agrarian state. The southern
part of Andhra Pradesh was known as the rice-bowl of India, accounting for a signifi
cant portion of the rice production of the country. Like all other states in the
country, feudalism was rampant in Andhra Pradesh as well (Patnaik 2007). Waves
of land reforms in the 1970s changed the situation; in 2009 most (80 per cent) of the
farming lands were owned by small and marginal farmers. The land reforms brought
in prosperity among a larger number of farmers; however, with the increasing cost
of agricultural inputs, depleting ground water resources and spiraling wages, farming
had become less remunerative over the years.
The growth of the independence movement and political awakening in India was
simultaneous. Andhra Pradesh witnessed a communist movement in the late 1940s and
early 1950s. The communists had signifi cant control over the peasants and landless
labourers, though they were never able to garner signifi cant seats in the legislative
assembly which was controlled by the Indian National Congress and its variants for
most part of the post-independence period. People’s War Group (PWG), the organization
of the communists who did not accept democracy as the prevalent form of government
in India, continued to wage war against the elected government. With proactive developmental
administration and punitive police action (
The Economic Times 2010), the
infl uence of PWG eventually decreased even in the remote areas of the state.
Telugu was the main language of the state spoken by nearly 81 per cent of the
popu-lation as their mother tongue. On 1 November 2008, GOI designated Telugu as
a classical and ancient language. Urdu was the mother tongue to 8.6 per cent of the
population; Hindi, Tamil and Kannada each were spoken by less than 2 per cent of
the population and Marathi by less than 1 per cent. The main ethnic group of Andhra
Pradesh was the Telugu who were primarily Dravidians. In terms of religious composition,
the state had 88 per cent Hindus, 9 per cent Muslims, 2 per cent Christians
and the rest belonged to other religious groups (UNDP 2007, Andhra Pradesh Human
Development Report 2007).
The Telangana region has been a part of the former Hyderabad state ruled by the
Nizams for over three centuries, and hence its historical evolution had been quite
different from the rest of Andhra Pradesh which was under British rule for about
the same period. The former Hyderabad state had Urdu as the language of administration
and hence the Telangana region, though Telugu-speaking, evolved a hybrid culture
and traditions. The British-ruled areas had better education infrastructure and
had introduced English education fairly early. This had created some advantages
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
T
ELANGANA: A MORTON’S FORK? 99
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
to the region in terms of development. In effect these factors led to the differential
development of the three regions, namely, Telangana, Rayalaseema and Coastal
Andhra (Burman 2009, Kanjilal 2009).
The Telangana Movement
The Telangana region was a part of the Hyderabad state, which was the largest princely
state that was integrated into the Indian Union in 1948. Due to the prevailing socioeconomic
conditions, the early communists in India found the Telangana region as
a fertile fi eld to nurture armed rebellions of peasants. The peasants, under the infl
uence of the Communists, had started armed rebellion in 1946 and in the next few
years gained control over a major part of the region. As this was a direct threat to
the democratic polity that GOI was trying to establish, the armed rebellion was put
down through the induction of the army in 1951. Gradually, the Communists came
around to accept the democratic framework of the constitution and decided to pursue
their goals within this framework. Fringe elements like the People’s War Group did
not toe this line; they continued their agenda of armed struggle in the interior parts
of Telangana and the adjoining regions.
In 1951, the Hyderabad state experienced the fi rst general election of the new
republic after the constitution was accepted and established a democratically elected
government headed by Dr B. Ramakrishna Rao as the Chief Minister. While Potti
Sriramalu was leading the emotional campaign to unite all the Telugu-speaking regions
under one state, the people of Telangana region and their leaders were skeptical
about the movement’s relevance and utility to them (Ali 1955).
12 The skepticism
stemmed from three factors: (a) People of Telangana believed that the region was
less developed than other Telugu-speaking areas but contributed a larger share of
the revenue. On coming together, they feared that the higher revenue contribution
would be snatched away by other regions. (b) The rest of Andhra had enjoyed better
educational infrastructure under the British rule and hence would grab a major share
of the job opportunities in the government. (c) Major rivers like Krishna and Godavari
originated from the Telangana region. However, the irrigation projects that were
underway at that time would give reduced benefi ts to the Telangana region.
12
Para 369 to 389 of the ‘Report of the States Re-organization Commission, 1955’, Government of
India (Ali et al., 1955), deals with the observations and recommendations of the SRC on Vishal Andhra,
Telangana and the related matters.
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
100 P. B
ALA BHASKARAN
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
The State Reorganisation Commission (SRC), while exploring the prospects of
re-drawing the political map of India on the basis of language, had assessed the
predicament of the people of the Telangana region. Para 382 of its report states the
following:
Opinion in Andhra is overwhelmingly in favour of the larger unit, public opinion
in Telangana has still to crystallize itself. Important leaders of public opinion
in Andhra themselves seem to appreciate that the unifi cation of Telangana and
Andhra, though desirable, should be based on a voluntary and willing association
of the people and that it is primarily for the people of Telangana to take a decision
about their future.
The SRC had even toyed with the idea of creating the Telangana state initially
and later integrating it with Andhra Pradesh after 1961 with two-thirds majority in
the legislative assembly of Telangana. The fl avour of the season was predominantly
linguistic states; the leaders of the Telangana region were persuaded to accept the concept
of a single Telugu-speaking state in return for a Gentleman’s Agreement which
gave them reassurances in terms of power-sharing, domicile rules in employment and
fairness in distribution of expenditure budgets. The strong sentiments of linguistic
identity and the persuasive powers of charismatic leaders like Pandit Jawaharlal
Nehru repressed the strong undercurrents of apprehensions prevalent among the
people of Telangana.
The guarantees assured in the Gentleman’s Agreement in 1956 were to lapse by
1969. The underlying assumption was that by 1969, the developmental defi cit would
have been nullifi ed. But 1969 saw the emergence of agitation for continuance of the
assurances. The leaders of Telangana argued that the commitments inherent in the
Gentleman’s Agreement were seldom honoured and that the developmental defi cit continued
to exist. The Indian National Congress, under the leadership of Indira Gandhi,
was strongly opposed to the creation of one more state. This prevented most of the
Congress legislators from the Telangana region from championing the case for a new
state, though most of them were inclined towards it. The lone exception was M. Chenna
Reddy who left the Congress to form a new political party (Telangana Praja Samithi or
Telangana Peoples Association) which won 10 seats out of 14 in the Telangana region
in the Parliament elections of 1971. On its part, GOI took the initiative to appoint
P.V. Narasimha Rao, a veteran Congress leader from the Telangana region as the Chief
Minister of Andhra Pradesh in 1971, thereby assuaging the feelings of the people of
the Telangana region. The continued disinclination of the Congress High Command
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
T
ELANGANA: A MORTON’S FORK? 101
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
towards the new state and the strengthening of the Congress Party’s fortunes in the
post-Bangladesh scenario saw many of the colleagues of Chenna Reddy rejoining the
safer political haven of the Congress party.
Towards the end of 1972, the Supreme Court of India upheld the Mulki Rules (rules
granting preference and protection to the persons based on domicile). This led to
eruption of violent protests across the state barring the Telangana region leading to a
state of anarchy. Narasimha Rao resigned as Chief Minister and President’s rule was
promulgated. The situation was salvaged by GOI through political negotiations. The
Mulki Rules were abolished; the state was divided into various zones and employment
opportunities in each zone were to be fi lled in with personnel from the zone. A central
university was established at Hyderabad to enhance the educational infrastructure in
the Telangana region. These measures pacifi ed the situation. The undercurrents were
at a subdued level till the early 1990s when Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) promised a
separate state if they came to power. BJP believed that smaller states would accelerate
the process of development and hence when it came to power in the late 1990s, it
took initiatives for the formation of Uttarakhand, Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh states.
BJP could not create the Telangana state primarily because of the opposition from
Telugu Desam Party (TDP), a coalition partner of BJP at the Centre and the ruling
party in Andhra Pradesh. However, the intentions of BJP and the creation of the
three new states gave impetus to the dormant sentiments of statehood to the people
of Telangana. At about the same time, K. Chandrasekhar Rao formed a new political
party called the Telangana Rashtra Samiti with the single point agenda of creating a
separate Telangana state.
Was there Development Deficit?
Protagonists of Telangana state claim that their region was less developed in terms of
socio-economic indicators and that they had a distinct culture, though the language
was common with the rest of AP.
In 2009, there were twenty-three districts in the state and the proposed state of
Telangana envisaged ten of them covering 41.84 per cent of the land area, 41.67 per
cent of the population and 42.86 per cent of gross state domestic product [GSDP]
(see Exhibit 3). This gave a picture of balanced sharing of resources between the two
segments. The population densities in the two segments were also not very different
(269 in Telangana and 282 in Andhra). Urbanization in Telangana was higher at 31.77
per cent vis-à-vis 24.89 per cent in Andhra; this showed up in higher contribution of
non-agricultural sectors of the economy in the GSDP of Telangana (77.74 per cent vs.
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
102 P. B
ALA BHASKARAN
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
67.73 per cent). To some extent this was contributed by the higher contribution of
Hyderabad which was the largest city in the entire state. On the whole, Andhra region
was more focused on agriculture than the proposed Telangana.
In terms of literacy, Telangana was behind Andhra (58.99 per cent versus 65.18
per cent). In fact the three districts of Adilabad (27.2 per cent), Nizamabad (25.9 per
cent) and Karimnagar (47.52 per cent) had contributed signifi cantly to this drag.
The aver-age per capita GSDP of AP was
`34,660. In the Telangana region, eight out
of the ten districts were below the average; in the Andhra region, eight out of thirteen
were below the average. The literacy rate of Telangana region after excluding the metro
city of Hyderabad was 57.15 per cent; similarly, the per capita GSDP of the Telangana
region minus the Hyderabad city was
`32,180. A look at the Development Indicators
(Exhibit 4) for the districts show that the Telangana region had more districts which
were behind the state average in almost all parameters of development leading to the
conclusion of development defi cit even after 60 years of independence. In the early
1950s, the development defi cit was invariably much higher.
The protagonists of Telangana believed that due to the innate backwardness of the
region, in terms of education and skills, most of the opportunities that arose since
independence had been grabbed by people of the Andhra region who migrated into
the capital city of Hyderabad, notwithstanding the Gentleman’s Agreement of 1956.
They also believed that the cascading effect of this would continue into the future if
preventive measures are not taken.
Who were Opposed to Telangana and Why?
The votaries of Telugu culture and sub-nationality were the ones deeply disappointed
by the demand for a separate Telangana state. The city of Hyderabad, the capital of AP,
emerged as a vibrant city in the last few decades with many a feather in its cap. In this
age of information technology it became the second-largest hub, after only Bangalore,
of IT professionals, IT organizations and IT output. Hyderabad was a much bigger
city than any city in the state of Andhra Pradesh; it emerged as a metro of national
stature. In 2009, it had the biggest and best international airport in the country and
the longest single-entry fl yover, some 11-km long, leading to the airport. People of
Andhra Pradesh, who took pride in the growth and emergence of Hyderabad as the
cultural capital of all Telugu-speaking people, did not grudge about large investments
for the growth of Hyderabad. They felt cheated at the prospect of Hyderabad becoming
a part of a small state called Telangana and at the prospect of Hyderabad ceasing to
be part of their iconic city. As a metro city, Hyderabad had attracted a large number
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
T
ELANGANA: A MORTON’S FORK? 103
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
of people from all over Andhra Pradesh (as also from all over India) in search of
employment, professions, businesses and other economic activities. Now with the
demand for Telangana rising, the migrants from the Andhra region feared that they
would be aliens in their own land. It appeared that the loss of Hyderabad would be
more painful than the loss of the vast areas of land forming Telangana.
On another plane, if the state of Telangana became a reality and if the city of
Hyderabad was ceded to it, then the rest of Andhra would have to create a capital city
out of one of the smaller cities at considerable costs. This would probably take anything
between a decade and a quarter century to assume some critical mass and size. This
was not a soothing thought to those already perturbed by a sense of cultural loss.
The Stakeholders
The primary stakeholders to an effective governance system were the people. The
people and their aspirations were channelized through the representative process of
the political system. As a result the stakeholders’ list included, apart from the people,
the elected representatives, the political parties, the political leaders, the political processes,
the administrative system and the administrators.
Since creation of new states or splitting up of larger states would imply enlargement
of the administrative system and more administrative positions, this segment
of stakeholders was unlikely to harbour any antipathy towards the concept. In the
political arena, the situation was slightly more complex. Smaller states would imply
increased emphasis on regional and local issues with regional and local leaders
having a larger say in the decision process. These would imply a restructuring of the
political organizations and decentralization of the power structure which could lead
to discomfi ture and trauma of varying degrees at different levels. Glimpses of this
discomfi ture could be seen in the behaviour of the political parties and the elected
members during December 2009.
1. Telangana Rashtra Samiti (TRS) led by KCR had been championing the demand
for a Telangana state all along; this political party had only a one-point agenda
and hence the infl uence of this party was restricted to the Telangana region.
2. The UPA with the Indian National Congress as a leading member had promised to
‘consider’ the Telangana demand; this promise was incorporated in the Common
Minimum Program (CMP) of UPA while fi ghting the elections in 2004. On the
basis of this promise, TRS aligned with UPA in fi ghting the elections in 2004.
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
104 P. B
ALA BHASKARAN
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
3. During UPA’s term from 2004 to 2009, no tangible action was taken about its
promise to ‘consider’ the demand for the new state; this angered TRS to walk
out of the UPA in 2009 into the welcoming arms of the rival grouping of National
Democratic Alliance (NDA), which included Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), a
national level party; Telugu Desam Party (TDP), a leading regional party, and
many others.
4. This implied that NDA had tacitly accepted TRS’ demand for the new state; UPA
had not removed from the CMP its promise to ‘consider’ the demand for fear of
losing the Telangana vote bank. In effect, all the political parties that participated
in the Andhra Pradesh elections in 2009 were open to the idea of the Telangana
state in some form or other.
5. On 8 December 2009, in a meeting convened by K. Rosaiah, Chief Minister of
Andhra Pradesh, all political parties of Andhra Pradesh except the Communist
Party Marxist (CPM) supported the proposal to adopt a resolution in the state
assembly for creation of Telangana. The declaration of P. Chidambaram, on
9 December 2009, to start the process of state formation was based on the minutes
of this meeting.
6. In the following days and weeks, all MLAs and MPs from the Telangana region
made it clear that irrespective of party affi liations, they stood for the creation
of the new state. Similarly all MLAs and MPs from the rest of Andhra Pradesh
made it clear that irrespective of party affi liations, they stood against the creation
of the new state. Obviously, none of the elected representatives wanted to be
seen swimming against the tide, even for a short while. Leading political parties
like Congress, BJP and TDP, with their organizational units inside and outside
Telangana taking diametrically opposite stands, found themselves at a loss about
how to formulate a clear policy.
7. Why was the CPM opposed to the Telangana state? Did CPM not believe in federalism?
CPM had strong following only in three states of India—Kerala, West
Bengal and Tripura. Probably CPM feared that supporting Telangana would mean
tacit support for the demand for carving Gorkhaland out of West Bengal, which
in turn would weaken the CPM’s overall strength.
The city of Hyderabad, in the post-independence era, had grown into a metro
attracting people and investments from all across the country and abroad. In 1948,
it was a small city with a population of 1.03 million which had grown to 6.3 million
by 2009. Major manufacturing facilities in 1948 were those of Alwyn and Praga
Tools. Immediately on integration with India, the city gained importance when the
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
T
ELANGANA: A MORTON’S FORK? 105
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
army and air force set up major bases around the city. The nation’s industrialization
efforts through establishment of public sector undertakings (PSUs) found Hyderabad
as a prominent location. Hindustan Machine Tools Ltd, Hindustan Aircrafts Ltd,
Indian Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd and Electronics
Corporation of India Ltd were some of the prominent new PSUs that came into the
city. Later it became a hub for pharmaceuticals and life sciences with majors like
Novartis, Dr Reddy’s Labs, Aurobindo Pharma, etc., setting up manufacturing and
research bases in and around Hyderabad. In the 1990s when India witnessed the
software boom, Hyderabad had a signifi cant share of it. By 2010, the city had grown
to 650 sq. km; it had become sixth most populous city in India and the ninety-third
richest city in the world in terms of GDP (US$ 60 billion).
The city had a large share of migrant population from all parts of India constituting
signifi cantly to the city’s wealth, vibrancy and cosmopolitan culture. This segment
of the city’s population were not emotionally attached to the cause of Telangana nor
were against it; they were, if at all, worried about the turmoil and backlash that might
happen to the growth of the city if the uncertainty continued.
Do Smaller States and Larger Number of States Mean Weaker India?
Telangana could be the trigger for many such demands. How many states could India
optimally have? Will large number of states weaken the unity of India? The US, for
instance, had 51 states with only a population of 300 million; India had a population
of 1,100 million with only 28 states. The US had a history of only 300 years; India
had more than 3,000 years of history with unparalleled diversity. Uttar Pradesh had a
population (195 million) larger than that of Brazil (180 million), Russia (190 million) or
Pakistan (166 million). In terms of population, each state—Maharashtra (106 million),
West Bengal (96 million) and Andhra Pradesh (90 million)—was much bigger than
France (62 million) or UK (62 million). In contrast, India also had very small states
like Sikkim (0.6 million), Mizoram (1.1 million) and Arunachal Pradesh (1.3 million).
What could be the criteria for state formation? Given the Indian context, could there
be a guideline for state formation?
Should Metros become Independent States?
Mumbai accounted for substantial part of the wealth created in Maharashtra. If
Maharashtra was stripped of Mumbai and its outskirts, Maharashtra would be a backward
state not signifi cantly better than say Madhya Pradesh or Rajasthan. Did keeping
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
106 P. B
ALA BHASKARAN
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
Mumbai a part of Maharashtra amount to camoufl aging the inherent poverty and
underdevelopment of the rest of the state?
13 Alternatively, by being part of the state,
was Mumbai contributing to the wealth of the rest of the state in any manner? This
was true of other metros and states, too. Would it make sense to keep metros of certain
critical mass and size as independent states (or union territories for that matter) and
cater to their development on a different pedestal? SRC in 1955 was inclined to keep
Bombay as a separate state because of its cosmopolitan nature and being a major
commercial centre (Rao 2009). The sentiments of linguistic identity pushed Bombay
towards Maharashtra and later towards Mumbai.
Sanjay Baru (2009) has argued in favour of city states on four counts:
1. Indian metro cities have been meted out a stepmotherly treatment by the
respective state governments and the political bosses for their developments.
Mumbai and Kolkata stand testimony to the decline of two great cities as a result
of the misplaced priorities of the successive state governments. Four decades
ago, these two cities were comparable to Singapore, Shanghai and Hong Kong;
they were far ahead of Kuala Lumpur, Jakarta and Seoul. Today all these cities
are far ahead of Mumbai and Kolkata. Delhi escaped this destiny because it
became a state of its own and its bosses—political and bureaucratic—had a better
perspective about the developmental needs of Delhi as a city-state per se.
Chandigarh also will escape this tragedy. Because it is a Union Territory.
2. Urban centres are of signifi cance to the Indian polity and economy because the
third wave—the service sector revolution—has to begin from these urban centres.
India is becoming increasingly urban with nearly 30 per cent of its population
living in the urban areas. Urban planning has to get its due priority in the overall
schema.
3. Urban centres are the places where people from different regions of the country
come to live together. This is where the concept of India as envisaged by the
founding fathers of the nation begins to take root. The nation cannot afford such
urban centres to be appended to a single cultural or linguistic lineage; they need
to be fl exible, vibrant, multilingual, multicultural and hybrid.
13
See Rao (2009). In Rao’s (2009) article, the author cites that Maharashtra has 30.7 per cent poor,
while the national average is 27.5 per cent. Maharashtra is ranked second or third in terms of Human
Development Index, while it has the maximum number of urban poor. Most of the poor are outside
Mumbai. The author concludes that without Mumbai, Maharashtra is an underdeveloped state.
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
T
ELANGANA: A MORTON’S FORK? 107
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
4. India needs to allow its cities to grow naturally and be at par with global cities.
Mumbai and Kolkata have lost some decades in this growth trajectory. Now
Bangalore and Hyderabad are coming into this league and the existing structure
would ensure the same fate to them too. If these cities, as also those emerging
ones like Ahmedabad, Bhubaneswar, etc., were to escape such a fate they need
to be converted into small states on their own, irrespective of whether they are
capitals of adjoining states or not. Just as Delhi is the capital of India while being
a state on its own, Mumbai could be a state on its own while being the capital
of Maharashtra; Kolkata could be a state on its own while being the capital of
West Bengal, Bangalore could be a state on its own while being the capital of
Karnataka, etc. Such an arrangement will enhance the status of each city and
would ensure better space and scope to address its developmental needs.
Do Smaller States Mean Better Governance, Growth and Development?
The cases of Uttarakhand, Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand provide some evidence in
this direction. All these states were formed in 2000; all of them were carved out of
the most backward states, BIMARU states, of the country. Further Jharkhand and
Chhattisgarh were the most backward parts of Bihar and Madhya Pradesh, respectively.
In the fi ve years from 2004–05 to 2008–09, Uttarakhand averaged 9.31 per cent annual
growth rate in GSDP, Jharkhand 8.45 per cent and Chhattisgarh 7.35 per cent. All the
three states have grown spectacularly with Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh emerging as
industrial dynamos (Aiyar 2009). The new Bihar after truncating Jharkhand from it
has also shown a remarkable growth rate (11.03 per cent) in the same period. This was
very close to the highest growth rate achieved by any state for the period (Gujarat,
11.05 per cent) (Aiyar 2010). The stellar performance by Bihar could be attributed to
two major factors—one, the pragmatic and dynamic leadership of the Chief Minister
Nitish Kumar, and two, the fact that the state had become smaller and hence far more
manageable. The triggers for the creation of states in the post-1956 era and the outcome
of creating each of these states are listed in Exhibit 5.
National Policy Framework for State Formation?
Looking back at the evolution of states in India, it was seen that the decision-making
process had been predominantly political; also that each state was created only when
the popular demand had reached a stage of crisis. The States Reorganization Council
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
108 P. B
ALA BHASKARAN
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
of 1955 was preceded by the death of Potti Sriramulu. Many of the states in the
North East were created at the threat of insurgency and secession. The bifurcation of
Punjab and Haryana had a prolonged history of agony and crisis management. Had
India learned any lesson from the evolutionary process of state creation spread over
six decades? India became willing to discuss Telangana in 2010 only because the issue
was on the boil. If India had cared and dared to discuss the issue a few years ago, the
deliberations would have been far more rational than emotional (Editorial 2009). Now
in 2010, there were other demands for new states on the horizon. Should India wait
till they come to a boil or should it address the issues proactively now?
Considering the size of India’s population, vastness of its land area, its diversity in
terms of culture, language, climate, history and geography, it is imperative that the
pace of development of different regions would be different. The concerns and needs
of each region would be varied and they would change differently with time. It would
be prudent to expect paradigm shifts in the aspirations of the people as well as the
developmental needs of each region over time. Exhibit 6 is an attempt to capture the
triggers relevant in formulating a framework for decision-making in states creation.
Was it not time that the federal government created a structure that systematically
looked into all aspects and handled the process of reorganization more rationally,
devoid of emotional arm-twisting and blackmail (Aiyar 2010)? What could be the
parameters relevant in assessing the demands for reorganizing or creating new administrative
units?
Chidambaram’s Choice
It was in this context that Home Minister P. Chidambaram convened an all-party
meeting on 5 January 2010 to seek cooperation of all parties concerned and to ‘evolve
a mechanism and roadmap’ to resolve the Telangana issue. Between the all-party
meeting convened by K. Rosaiah, Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh, on 8 December
2009 and the proposed meeting on 5 January 2010, much water had fl own down all
the rivers of the country. While the consultative approach had the best of merits,
everyone realized that such a step should have been taken much earlier. There was
also widespread realization that Telangana was only one knot in a chain of knots that
needed to be attended to. Would this meeting pave the way to untangle all such issues
in the future? What were the options before Chidambaram and the members of the
all-party meeting?
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
T
ELANGANA: A MORTON’S FORK? 109
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
R
EFERENCES
Agarwal, J.C., S.P. Agarwal, S.S. Gupta (eds). 1995.
Uttarakhand: Past, Present and Future. New
Delhi: Concept Publishing Co.
Aiyar, Swaminathan S. Anklesaria. 2009. ‘The Economic Case for Creating Smaller States’,
The
Times of India
, Ahmedabad, 20 December.
———. 2010. ‘New Miracle Economies: Bihar, Poor States’,
The Times of India, 3 January.
Baru, Sanjay. 2009. ‘Centre, States and India’s Metropolis’,
Business Standard, 21 December.
Burman, Abheek. 2009. ‘Why Telangana Makes Sense’,
The Economic Times, Ahmedabad,
15 December.
Duggal, Kartar Singh. 1988.
Philosophy and Faith of Sikhism. Pennsylvania: Himalayan Institute
Press.
Editorial. 2009. ‘States’ Reorganisation—Not by Mob Fury’,
The Economic Times, Ahmedabad,
15 December.
Ali, Fazal, K.M. Panikker and H.N. Kunzru. 1955. ‘Report of the States Re-organization Commission,
1955’, Government of India, New Delhi.
Guha, Ramachandra. 2010.
Makers of Modern India. New Delhi: Viking.
Handa, Umachand. 2002.
History of Uttaranchal. New Delhi: Indus Publishers.
Hunter, Sir William Wilson. 1923.
Imperial Gazetteer of India, Vol. 6, 1908–31. Oxford: Clarendon
Press.
Husain, Z. 1995.
Uttarakhand Movement: The Politics of Identity and Frustration—A Psychoanalytical
Study of Separate State Movement: 1815–1995
. Delhi: Prakash Book Depot.
Kanjilal, Pratik. 2009.
Telangana Crisis and Its National Impact. Hyderabad: Free Press,
17 December.
Kohli, Surinder Singh. 1993.
The Sikh and Sikhism. Columbia, MO: South Asia Books.
Kumar P. 2000.
The Uttarakhand Movement—Construction of Regional Identity. New Delhi:
Kanishka Publishers.
Kunz, Richard and Vibha Joshi (eds). 2008.
Naga—A forgotten Mountain Region Rediscovered.
Basel: Christoph Merian Verlag.
Lethbridge, Sir Roper. 1893.
The Golden Book of India: A Genealogical and Biographical Dictionary
of the Ruling Princes, Chiefs, Nobles and other Personages, Titled or Decorated, of the Indian
Empire
. Delhi: Aakar Books.
Markovits, Claude (ed.). 2004.
A History of Modern India: 1498–1950. London: Anthem Press.
Menon, V.P. 1955.
Transfer of Power. Priceton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Mukherjee, Writtankar and Bikash Singh. 2010. ‘Firms Go North-East for Talent’,
The Economic
Times
, Chennai, 5 November.
Mukhopadhyay, R. 1987. ‘Uttarakhand Movement: A Sociological Analysis’, Centre for Himalayan
Studies Special Lecture, University of North Bengal, Darjeeling, West Bengal.
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
110 P. B
ALA BHASKARAN
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
Pandey, Nishchal. 2008.
India’s North East Region. New Delhi: Manohar Publishers; Singapore:
Institute of South Asian Studies.
Patnaik,Utsa. 2007.
The Agrarian Question in Marx and His Successors, Vol. I. New Delhi: Left
World.
Rai, Gulshan. 1987.
Formation of Haryana. New Delhi: B.R. Publishing Corporation.
Rao, S.L. 2009. ‘Big City, Small Politics’,
Business Standard, 19 December.
Roy Burman, J.J. 2008. ‘Contours of Naga Upsurge’,
Asia Europe Journal, 6(1), 145–56.
Sachs, Jeffrey. 2005.
The End of Poverty; Economic Possibilities for Our Time. New York:
Penguin.
Sharma S.K. 2005.
Discovery of North East India (11 Volumes). Delhi: Mittal Publications.
Singh, Khushwant. 2006.
The Illustrated History of Sikhs. India: Oxford University Press.
Singh, Kumar Suresh. 1983.
Birsa Munda and His Movement (1874–1901): A Study of Millenarian
Movement in Chotanagpur
. London and Calcutta: Oxford University Press.
Thapliyal, Umaprasad. 2005.
Uttaranchal—Historical and Cultural Perspectives. Delhi:
B.R. Publications. Corp. ISBN: 8176464635
The Economic Times
. 2010. Dantewada: A One-off Setback, The Economic Times, Ahmedabad,
19 April.
The Times of India
. 2009. ‘Telangana is a reality’, The Times of India, p. 1, Ahmedabad,
10 December.
The World Bank. 2007. World Bank Publication on Jharkhand:
A New State: Emergence, Future
& Challenges
. Available at http://siteresources.worldbank.org/SOUTHEASTASIAEXT/
Resources/223546-1181699473021/3876782-1181699502708/summary.pdf .
UNDP. 2007. ‘Andhra Pradesh Human Development Report , 2007’, New Delhi, India.
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 7(2), 2010: 113–134
Exhibit 1
India—List of States and Basic Data, 2009
S.
No.
(1)
State
(2)
Capital
(3)
Land
Area
(sq. km)
(4)
Population MPs in
Lok
Sabha
(7)
Population
Density
(nos/sq. km)
(8)
Literacy
2001
(%)
(9)
Urbanization
(%)
(10)
GSDP
Millions
(5)
Per cent
of Total
(6)
2006–07
(
` billion)
(11)
Per cent
of Total
(12)
Per Capita
(
`)
(13)
1. Andhra
Pradesh
Hyderabad 275,068 75.73 7.37 42 275 60.47 27.08 2,691.7 7.12 33,142
2. Arunachal
Pradesh
Itanagar 83,743 1.09 0.11 2 13 54.34 20.41 n.a. n.a. n.a.
3. Assam Gauhati 78,483 26.64 2.59 14 340 63.25 12.72 637.7 1.69 22,068
4. Bihar Patna 94,164 82.88 8.07 40 880 47.00 10.47 989.6 2.62 10,799
5. Chhattisgarh Raipur 135,194 20.8 2.03 11 154 64.66 20.08 642.4 1.70 27,810
6. Delhi Delhi 1,483 13.78 1.34 7 9294 81.67 93.01 1,182.4 3.13 72,580
7. Goa Panaji 3,702 1.34 0.13 2 363 82.01 49.47 145.2 0.38 90,317
8. Gujarat Gandhinagar 196,024 50.6 4.93 26 258 69.14 37.35 2,545.3 6.73 45,882
9. Haryana Chandigarh 44,212 21.08 2.05 10 477 67.91 29.00 1,264.8 3.35 53,661
10. Himachal
Pradesh
Shimla 55,673 6.08 0.59 4 109 76.48 9.79 283.6 0.75 42,062
11. Jammu &
Kashmir
Srinagar 222,236 10.07 0.98 6 99 55.52 24.85 290.3 0.77 26,307
12. Jharkhand Ranchi 79,700 26.91 2.62 14 338 53.56 22.25 626.8 1.66 21,198
13. Karnataka Bangalore 191,796 52.73 5.13 28 275 66.64 33.98 1,882.7 4.98 33,236
14. Kerala Trivandrum 38,863 31.84 3.10 20 819 90.86 25.97 1,424.7 3.77 42,623
15. Madhya
Pradesh
Bhopal 308,144 60.39 5.88 29 196 63.74 26.67 1,282.2 3.39 19,108
(
Exhibit 1 continued )
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 7(2), 2010: 113–134
S.
No.
(1)
State
(2)
Capital
(3)
Land
Area
(sq. km)
(4)
Population MPs in
Lok
Sabha
(7)
Population
Density
(nos/sq. km)
(8)
Literacy
2001
(%)
(9)
Urbanization
(%)
(10)
GSDP
Millions
(5)
Per cent
of Total
(6)
2006–07
(
` billion)
(11)
Per cent
of Total
(12)
Per Capita
(
`)
(13)
16. Maharashtra Mumbai 307,713 96.75 9.42 48 314 76.88 42.40 5,093.6 13.48 32,590
17. Manipur Imphal 22,327 2.39 0.23 2 107 70.53 23.88 53.4 0.14 20,796
18. Meghalaya Shillong 22,429 2.31 0.22 2 103 62.56 19.63 69.6 0.18 27,971
19. Mizoram Aizawl 21,083 0.89 0.09 1 42 88.80 49.50 n.a. n.a. n.a.
20. Nagaland Kohima 16,579 1.99 0.19 1 120 66.59 17.74 56.7 0.15 22,734
∗
21. Orissa Bhubaneswar 155,707 36.71 3.57 21 236 63.08 14.97 911.5 2.41 23,227
22. Punjab Chandigarh 50,362 24.29 2.37 13 482 69.65 33.95 1,234.0 3.27 45,731
23. Rajasthan Jaipur 342,236 56.47 5.50 25 165 60.41 23.38 1,484.4 3.93 23,581
24. Sikkim Gangtok 7,096 0.55 0.05 1 76 68.81 11.10 n.a. n.a. n.a.
25. Tamil Nadu Chennai 130,058 62.11 6.05 39 478 73.45 43.86 2,626.9 6.95 40,145
26. Tripura Agartala 10,492 3.19 0.31 2 304 73.19 17.02 102.8 0.27 29,960
27. Uttar Pradesh Lucknow 238,566 166.05 16.17 80 689 56.27 20.78 3,121.1 8.26 16,841
28. Uttarakhand Dehradun 53,566 8.48 0.83 5 159 71.62 25.59 297.1 0.79 31,928
29. West Bengal Kolkata 88,752 80.22 7.81 42 904 68.64 28.03 2,726.0 7.21 31,783
30. Others (Union
Territories, etc.)
207,617 2.66 0.26 6
National Total 3,287,240 1027.02 100.00 543 324 64.84 27.78 37,793.9 100.0 36,800
Sources:
Data compiled from CSO, Census of India, NSSO and RBI sources.
Notes:
Columns (10) and (12) are based on GSDP at factor cost at current prices.
∗
indicates that the GSDP data pertains to year 2005–06.
n.a.
= not available.
(
Exhibit 1 continued )
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
T
ELANGANA: A MORTON’S FORK? 113
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
Exhibit 2
Map of Andhra Pradesh Showing Regions of Telangana, Rayalaseema and Andhra
Map not to scale
Maharashtra
Adilabad
Nizamabad
Karimnagar
Medak
Sangareddi
Rangareddi
Warangal
Mehboobnagar
Nalgonda
Khammam
Guntur
Krishna
West
Godavari
East
Godavari
Kakinada
Yanam
(Pondicherry)
Visakhapatnam
Vizlanagaram
Srikakulam
Chhattisgarh Orissa
Prakasam
Cuddapah
Nellore
Anantapur
Kurnool
Chittoor
Karnataka Tamil Nadu State of Andhra Pradesh, INDIA
Andaman
& Nicobar
BANGALORE CHENNAI
HYDERABAD
Bay
of
Bengal
Ongole
N
(Not to scale)
Rayalaseema Region
Telangana Region
Andhra Region
Source:
Developed from http://www.mapsofi ndia.com/maps/andhrapradesh/Andhra-pradesh-district.
htm.
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 7(2), 2010: 113–134
Exhibit 3
District-wise Statistics of Andhra Pradesh
S.
No.
(1)
District
(2)
District HQ
(3)
Land
Area
(sq. km)
(4)
Population Gross District Domestic Product (2006–07)
Density
Urbanization
(%)
(7)
Literacy
% 2001
(8)
Total
(
`
billion)
(9)
Per Capita
(
`
‘000)
(10)
Primary
Sector
(%)
(11)
Secondary
Sector
(%)
(12)
Tertiary
Sector
(%)
(13)
(Million)
(5)
(nos/
sq.km)
(6)
1. Adilabad Adilabad 16,128 2.49 129 26.48 27.20 76.45 30.70 39.03 18.91 42.07
2. Nizamabad Nizamabad 7,956 2.35 257 18.00 25.90 67.40 28.68 30.31 25.31 44.39
3. Karimnagar Karimnagar 11,823 3.49 295 19.40 47.57 112.44 32.22 36.59 23.73 39.68
4. Medak Medak 9,699 2.67 274 14.36 53.24 89.11 33.37 32.35 25.81 41.84
5. Warangal Warangal 12,846 3.25 473 19.20 58.41 101.35 31.18 33.43 18.16 48.41
6. Rangareddy Hyderabad 7,493 3.58 478 54.19 66.21 171.28 47.84 10.98 32.83 56.19
7. Nalgonda Nalgonda 14,240 3.25 228 13.22 78.00 86.75 26.69 20.66 27.86 51.47
8. Mehboobnagar Mehboobnagar 18,432 3.51 167 10.57 74.00 90.22 25.70 32.59 21.45 45.97
9. Khammam Khammam 16,125 2.58 160 19.81 72.00 79.42 30.78 34.11 21.47 44.42
10. Hyderabad Hyderabad 625 3.83 5,853 100.00 68.80 258.03 67.37 1.85 17.34 80.80
Sub-total A for Telangana region 115,367 31.00 269 31.77 58.91 1132.45 36.53 22.26 23.06 54.68
11. Anantapur Anantapur 19,130 3.64 190 25.26 57.00 104.79 28.79 22.20 25.28 52.52
12. Chittoor Chittoor 15,359 3.75 214 21.65 90.60 109.50 29.20 24.58 23.21 52.21
13. Cuddappah Kadapah 15,379 2.60 169 22.59 70.00 84.64 32.55 30.65 20.72 48.63
14. Kurnool Kurnool 17,600 3.53 199 23.16 54.43 116.78 33.08 34.42 19.43 46.15
15. East Godavari Kakinada 10,807 4.90 453 23.50 65.50 159.73 32.60 38.64 17.51 43.86
16. Guntur Guntur 11,391 4.47 392 28.80 68.00 158.63 35.49 31.76 20.31 47.94
17. West Godavari Eluru 7,742 3.80 491 9.74 67.61 131.78 34.68 42.32 17.73 39.95
18. Krishna Machilipatnam 8,727 4.19 479 32.08 70.00 167.93 40.08 30.57 18.42 51.01
19. Nellore Nellore 13,076 2.67 204 22.45 71.00 104.33 39.07 41.65 18.72 39.62
20. Prakasam Ongole 17,626 3.06 174 15.28 57.86 100.93 32.98 35.67 21.06 43.26
21. Srikakkulam Srikakulam 5,837 2.54 403 10.98 55.40 65.74 25.88 32.93 21.16 45.92
22. Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam 11,161 3.83 343 57.95 59.40 145.33 37.95 14.44 27.35 58.21
23. Vizianagaram Vizianagaram 6,539 2.25 344 18.00 51.82 59.73 26.55 29.05 17.78 53.17
Sub-total B for Andhra region 160,374 45.23 282 24.89 65.18 1509.84 33.38 31.46 20.64 47.90
Total for Andhra Pradesh 275,741 76.23 276 27.69 62.63 2642.30 34.66 27.52 21.68 50.80
Sources:
Data compiled from CSO, Census of India, NSSO and RBI sources.
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 7(2), 2010: 113–134
Exhibit 4
Andhra Pradesh—District-wise Development Indicators
HDI HPI GDI GSDP LR IM HBLP DiLP DoLP
Road
Density
Bank
Density
Tele
Density
Telangana Region
1. Adilabad 0.361 0.65 0.56 30.7 27.2 51 368 2 70 519 5.74 2,789
2. Nizamabad 0.383 0.59 0.59 28.68 25.9 37 409 1 67 696 6.98 3,696
3. Karimnagar 0.448 0.58 0.65 32.22 47.5 33 288 1 59 755 5.39 3,811
4. Medak 0.385 0.62 0.65 33.37 53.2 43 334 3 71 747 6.07 2,749
5. Warangal 0.349 0.62 0.58 31.18 58.4 45 479 1 129 648 5.82 3,233
6. Rangareddy 0.452 0.49 0.62 47.84 66.2 25 347 0 44 795 6.03 6,937
7. Nalgonda 0.36 0.62 0.57 26.69 78 51 296 1 59 772 5.72 3,121
8. Mehboobnagar 0.249 0.71 0.49 25.7 74 35 289 1 62 645 5.44 2,259
9. Khammam 0.42 0.58 0.67 30.78 72 43 299 0 51 564 6.28 3,340
10. Hyderabad 0.591 0.23 0.69 67.37 68.8 22 1,567 14 340 959 15.5 12,617
(
Exhibit 4 continued )
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 7(2), 2010: 113–134
HDI HPI GDI GSDP LR IM HBLP DiLP DoLP
Road
Density
Bank
Density
Tele
Density
Rest of Andhra Pradesh
11. Anantapur 0.343 0.64 0.56 28.79 57 34 320 2 90 538 6.15 2,731
12. Chittor 0.451 0.57 0.64 29.2 90.6 29 486 3 138 772 6.93 3,922
13. Cudapah 0.447 0.58 0.59 32.55 70.6 26 330 1 75 523 6.5 3,637
14. Kurnool 0.327 0.65 0.54 33.08 54.4 38 559 5 135 497 6.06 2,743
15. East Godavari 0.411 0.59 0.63 32.6 65.5 31 443 7 111 745 6.96 7,741
16. Guntur 0.49 0.56 0.66 35.49 68 23 490 2 120 748 7.58 4,328
17. West Godavari 0.448 0.55 0.68 34.68 67.6 29 228 3 53 948 7.5 8,888
18. Krishna 0.51 0.52 0.66 40.08 70 26 359 3 105 840 8.57 5,199
19. Nellore 0.452 0.59 0.63 39.07 71 30 465 5 60 596 7.72 3,985
20. Prakasam 0.409 0.63 0.62 32.98 57.9 32 268 3 64 616 7.58 3,157
21. Srikakulam 0.269 0.73 0.33 25.88 55.4 36 376 3 78 973 5.39 1,735
22. Visakhapatnam 0.383 0.62 0.64 37.95 59.4 36 669 3 155 704 5.78 1,948
23. Vijayanagaram 0.236 0.77 0.52 26.55 51.8 46 295 4 78 685 7.86 4,055
Overall AP 0.402 0.58 0.62 34.66 62.6 47 449 3 101 666 7.08 4,121
Source:
Based on data from UNDP 2007, ‘Andhra Pradesh Human Development Report 2007’, New Delhi.
Notes:
DiLP: dispensaries per lakh population; DoLP: doctors per lakh population; GDI: Gender Development Index;
GSDP: per capita GSDP; HBL: hospital beds per lakh population; HDI: Human Development Index; HPI: Human
Poverty Index; IM: infant mortality rate; LR: literacy rate as %.
Shading in light grey indicates parameters are far below state average.
Shading in dark grey indicates parameters far above the state average.
Telangana Rest of AP
Light grey % of districts VERY POOR on indicators 40.00 23.72
Dark grey % of districts VERY GOOD on indicators 15.83 24.36
No shade % of districts Moderate on indicators 44.17 51.92
(
Exhibit 4 continued )
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 7(2), 2010: 113–134
Exhibit 5
New States in India after 1956 and the Outcome
S.No. Name of State/s (Year) Trigger for Formation Impact on Development, Integration, etc.
1. Maharashtra, Gujarat
(1960)
Linguistic-cultural
identity
Maharashtra, on the whole, has been a fast growing state;
thanks to the presence of Mumbai, the business capital
of India. Interior areas/districts of the state still lag in
development (Kanjilal 2009).
Gujarat emerged as a fast growing state (Aiyar 2009);
thanks to the entrepreneurship of its people. It is better
balanced in spatial distribution of development than many
states.
2. Nagaland (1963) Ethnic-cultural identity Alienation from mainstream minimized; levels of
insurgency reduced signifi cantly (Mukherjee and Singh
2010).
3. Punjab, Haryana
(1966)
Linguistic identity;
history/legacy
Better identity; better integration.
4. Mizoram (1987) Ethnic-cultural identity Alienation from mainstream minimized; levels of
insurgency reduced signifi cantly (Mukherjee and Singh
2010).
5. Chhattisgarh (2000) Ethnic-cultural identity;
history
Faster pace of development (Aiyar 2009 and Baru 2009)
6. Uttarakhand (2000) Cultural identity;
different history;
different geography
Faster pace of development (Aiyar 2009 and Baru 2009)
7. Jharkhand (2000) Ethnic-cultural identity;
different history;
different geography
Faster pace of development (Aiyar 2009 and Baru 2009)
Source:
Compiled by the author.
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
118 P. B
ALA BHASKARAN
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
Exhibit 6
Triggers on Criteria for Creation of States
Objective
1. Size and structure of the state must facilitate the
governance to reach everybody and every place in the
state. The people must be able to participate in the governance of the state effectively. The distance
between the ruler and the ruled must be as small as possible.
2. The size and structure of the state
must enable smooth and fast economic development of all regions in
the state. If the regions of the state are endowed with different natural resources and capabilities, then
the process of development is likely to be dissimilar. This would call for special/different strategies
of development for each region. It would be desirable to have less variety within a state or the focus
and priorities are likely to be lost.
3. It would be wise to
minimize the heterogeneity among the regions and the people, so that policies
and plans of the state can be designed, incorporated and implemented far more smoothly and
effectively.
Some Parameters/Factors
1.
Geography: Geography is observed to enable or obstruct the natural process of development. Coastal
regions and islands have been historically found to be better linked with the outside world and
hence they have experienced faster development. Similarly, regions with rivers and navigational
facilities have been found to have experienced faster development. In contrast, landlocked or
mountainous regions have been less linked with external world and their development has been
slower resulting in differential development (Sachs 2005). So, in creating states, geographical
contiguity and similarities should be the important criteria.
2.
Ethnicity, language, culture and religion: These are primary bases of shared history and legacy.
They bind people fairly well and one or more of these have the potential of becoming the basis
of identity of the people. Such factors can be harnessed to unite the people.
3.
Shared History, Legacy: When certain regions have a long history of co-evolution they are bound to
have many things in common and it would be natural for them to think, live and grow together.
When two regions have had different paths of evolution, then such shared feelings and aspirations
are unlikely to be found.
4.
Degree of Development: When there is more than one region or people with different degrees of
development, then the aspirations and needs of the people are bound to be different; the focus
and priorities of developmental efforts would need to be different. It would not be wise to group
such regions and people into one state.
5.
Economic viability: Ideal situation is to have states that are self-suffi cient. In developing countries,
such an ideal situation would rarely exist; we need to look at the potential for self-suffi ciency.
Another aspect to consider is the size of the state economy in terms of the national economy.
Size of the state economy decides the control of the resources and consequently, the balance of
power vis-à-vis other states as also vis-à-vis the centre. In a federal set-up, it will not be desirable
to have too wide a range of the sizes of the state economy.
Downloaded from
ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
T
ELANGANA: A MORTON’S FORK? 119
A
SIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT CASES, 8(1), 2011: 89–119
6.
Size: The size of the population primarily decides the relative signifi cance of the state in a federal
structure. The number of parliament seats is decided on the basis of population. Geographical
area may indicate the resources available to the state and also the investments required to create
and maintain the physical infrastructure. To ensure healthy democratic processes and balance of
power among states and the centre, it will be desirable that the sizes of states, in terms of their
population and number of parliament seats, are within a meaningful range.
7.
Political Viability: Political viability emerges from the quality of the people, their representatives,
political processes, and the political system. Quality of the people depends on the civilization,
culture, education and maturity of the people; on the social and economic development as well
as the governance structure of the region. In a federal structure the political system, political
processes and the governance structure will be fairly identical in all the states; the difference
will come from the softer issues. Political viability is also dependant on the balance of power
between the centre and state on one side and among the states on the other. Hence issues of size
and economic viability also have their impact on political viability.
Source:
Developed by the author.Downloaded from ajc.sagepub.com at K.R.E.T'S TRIDENT INSTITUTE on August 11, 2011
No comments:
Post a Comment