Thursday, August 8, 2013
Telangana has been in news recently after the decision by the Government of India to make it 29th state of the country. I had a conversation with few friends about the decision and discussing various factors on the basis of which the decision of forming a new state is taken. The factors during our discussion ranged from backwardness to ease of administration to states too big to govern to language and cultural identity. However, in my opinion formation of the state has once again proved supremacy of politics over all other factors. Had the decision been taken based on the above mentioned grounds there are genuine demands of formation of other new states such as Gorkhaland, Bodoland, Purvanchal, Avadh Pradesh, Bundelkhand, Vidarbh, Maru Pradesh and many more. The current count of demand of new states could take the number of states in the country to 50. Ironically, demand of few such states has involved even violence and insurgence and the magnitude of the matter has increased after the decision on Telangana. The question is what is it that makes Telangana a unique case for bagging the status of a new state and others not to qualify? I join the group of many who believe the recent decision makes a stronger case of politics rather than the development of the region which should ideally be the case. Indian National Congress has taken the decision to harvest political advantage in the upcoming Lok Sabha election. The recent decision also raises the question of having a uniform method based on principles for all such demands instead of taking decisions as a favor for political gain or other vested interests.
The government has declined the request of creating ‘State Reorganization Commission’ which in my opinion is anti-democratic and against the constitution of India. I am of the opinion of creating ‘State Reorganization Commission’ with immediate effect to look into demands in greater details taking a decision based on the above mentioned factors to control the raising violence. May be all the demands can’t be accepted but as many of those can be, should be. There are concerns raised by some thought leaders such as danger to the unity and integrity which is beyond my understanding. People are mostly concerned for the basic services reaching to them and not so specifically whether it comes from central, state or local government irrespective of its size and functioning etc. Only when development and public services for long time didn’t reach to people, they realized that in the current political set up their interest wouldn’t be looked into in lack of appropriate representation and political advantages and started demanding separate state which better represents them. There are several advantages of having a small state which even comes as learning from Chattishgarh, Uttakhand and Jharkhand. And even if the policy makers don’t see many advantages, they need to respect the sentiments of people in Indian democracy. While their concerns can be too small states making it difficult to administer rather than giving it ease, I am sure people would also learn from their mistake and will also demand for unification. We do have a wonderful example of European Union to learn from where countries voluntarily decided to come together to make a larger union.