Hyderabad – No to Joint or Share Capital, Please name Residual AP Capital


Further to my yesterdays post on  Why Telangana? What was Tyranny of Majority?

I now wish to place my view on Hyderabad

Let me begin by saying any Indian, Language, Community or Region can ever claim that we developed Hyderabad.  It’s the mother earth on which the city exists forever rest all are mortals.

Below will dismiss the claim Hyderabad has grown faster after 1956 merger with Andhra  as the evidence is not supporting it.

Hyderabad as is shown below in the 1931 census by British as the 4th Largest Indian City and the fact is its 6th Largest Indian city now as per 2011 census.

Telangana Hyderabad 4th Largest City of India in 1931

My personal view Hyderabad actually had its ups and downs during this period but overall it just did like other 2 metros in South India Chennai and Bangalore and it would continue to do so, as its to do with the very location and what Hyderabad offers to humanity from all over the world.

Rayala seema people have made more contribution and have closer affinity even to-day with both Bangalore and Chennai and rightly so and the Nellore and Chittor people continue to have their affinity and association with Chennai again for good reason, neither the language or being other state can ever stop that and it should not.

In previous article it was already pointed out clearly the claim Amarajeevi Sri Potti Sriramulu Garu put through his precious life was for a fair share in the then city of Madras (now Chennai) not the Telugu state of Andhra that was already agreed in principle. However, and rightly so the emotions and supreme sacrifice could not prevail over physical geographical reality and to-day India is glad that it did that way.

In this article I wish to share the following content solely from below source on Mumbai.

http://www.indiasoft.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=67&Itemid=41

  • The Samyukta Maharashtra movement to create a separate Maharashtra state including Bombay was at its height in the 1950s.
  • In the Lok Sabha discussions in 1955, the Congress party demanded that the city be constituted as an autonomous city-state.
  • The States Re-organisation Committee recommended a bilingual state for Maharashtra–Gujarat with Bombay as its capital in its 1955 report.
  • Bombay Citizens’ Committee, an advocacy group of leading Gujarati industrialists lobbied for Bombay’s independent status.
  • Following protests during the movement in which 105 people were killed by police, Bombay State was reorganized on linguistic lines on 1 May 1960.
  • Gujarati-speaking areas of Bombay State were partitioned into the state of Gujarat.
  • Maharashtra State with Bombay as its capital was formed with the merger of Marathi-speaking areas of Bombay State, eight districts from Central Provinces and Berar, five districts from Hyderabad State, and numerous princely states enclosed between them.

I was glad to note as per the 2011 census the % of Gujaratis in Mumbai seem to have went up not down since 1960, and I fully believe even for Hyderabad the influx will increase not decrease in future.

So the lesson that Mahatma’s soul keeper Sri Rajagopalachari left during Andhra state separation and later the unfortunate violent fight that preceded the separation of Maharastra with Mumbai and Gujarat  in 1960 left is this :

Capital City is determined by the mother earth not by people or emotions and I hope the wisdom comes to the leadership in Congress and Govt of India and initiates the process of consultation on naming capital city of residual AP in the Telangana State Bill to be introduced in parliament before it leaves its office..(hopefully it lives to its promise..)

Its a bad idea and has no precedence for any state to have its capital outside its geography away and in center of other state geography till date, on top of it  in the same location as the capital of the hosting state.

In addition,

  • It would be unfortunate case of Government of India by design introducing the division in the people of the city that never existed till date, all living in Hyderabad are proud Hyderabadi Indians.
  • It will deny the time and opportunity for the Residual AP state to move forward faster
  • Distance the people  of residual AP from its elected representatives and Govt machinery
  • With fuel costs raising rapidly and energy sources depleting travel has to be minimized moving forward not increased.
  • Governance has to move closer not keep it far from people.

In summary the wisdom lies to let Residual AP have transition capital arrangement for the period of max 10 years in Hyderabad and name the capital city of residual state of AP from the day 1 so that confusion ends people and states get on with life and take charge of their destiny.

Jai Hind

Advertisements

14 thoughts on “Hyderabad – No to Joint or Share Capital, Please name Residual AP Capital

  1. Kishan

    Bombay presidency re-bordering, Madras presidency re bordering are like princely states re-bordering. Its different from creating Chattisgarh or Uttaranchal or Telangana. Beginning of post independence the India was reframing itself and earlier princely states and british presidencies were re-bordered and the vision for the economic progress of the citizens of newly born independent India was taken up. Telangana state neither existed as a princely state nor was a British province. Telangana demand is an out of the blue demand. Not everybody supported Samyuktha Maharashtra nor Aikya Kannada. Similarly some people wished for separate T state. Please note these facts before posting anything further.

    Reply
    1. Venkat Gandhi Post author

      Dear Kishan Disagree
      India got freedom in 1947
      Became republic on 26 Jan 1950 and period of all princely states is over by that day and are governed by constitution of India

      Andhra state came out of Madras in 1953
      Maharastra got created from Bombay state in 1960 and many others since all under Article 3 of constitution of India

      Facts do not depend or change based on your or my wish or opinion.
      Neither I or you have the right to tell other not to express opinion.
      Perfectly alright to agree or disagree or ignore !

      Reply
      1. kishan

        As a Telangana/Telugu sympathizer I respectfully disagree with you again.
        I think you are not getting the fact. Before 1956 India had princely states and British provinces. (Even after Patels work of joining them in India).When do you think were all British presidencies were re-bordered using article 3 and made into proper administrative structures? Is it not after 1956. Your same article 3 was used in creating AP. This was done rajyangabadhanga. Then whats the problem now. FYI Article 3 is a legal instrument. For making a car and repairing a car same screw driver is used. But there is a difference between when it is used. Article 3 just shows a way “how” to do. It wont say “why” to do it.

        Because you said I am reminding you that when Andhra state was formed entire Madras assembly opinion was taken and was accepted. Andhra did not runaway like how Telangana wants to run away from AP. Same thing should be followed here. In furture if Rayalaseema wants to run away or Andhra wants to run away or Telangana wants to run away the same process will be followed. No difference. Entire AP should ACCEPT it.And NO loss should be there for citizens of AP of any district. Until all of us get there, the process will be stalled legally.

        The job of convincing depends upon the group which wants to run away. Not the other way round. If KCR had convinced AP , Telangana would have been a reality 4 years back. Unfortunately he took a wrong path for prolonging the process for which Telangana people are suffering and are going to suffer after 2014 heavily. This was never needed for a common man of Telangana. But looks inevitable. Why I am saying, you will see it in a month. Still time is there. KCR has a proactive role to play(Politically) before december parliamentary session so that New Delhi is “motivated” to go ahead with division.

        Reply
        1. Venkat Gandhi Post author

          Can’t agree.
          As far as India goes British Provinces Ended with Independence of Indian in 1947
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidencies_and_provinces_of_British_India
          all remaining princely states ended including Kashmir by 26th Jan 1950.
          Indian Constitution came into force in Kashmir on 26 January 1950 with special clauses for the state.
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Republic_of_India

          New States in India since 1950 and Article 3
          https://gandhipv.wordpress.com/2013/09/15/new-states-in-india-created-after-1950/

          Reply
  2. kishan

    Please read my first four lines carefully. u will understand what i am saying. Princely states and British provinces were re-distributed for post independent india scenario,which is different from creating chattisgarh or uttaranchal even though the instrument used was same. Its motive thats imp not the instrument. This is where telangana legal people are confused.Please talk to a non telangana judge for more clear explanation.

    Reply
    1. Venkat Gandhi Post author

      State or Union Terriories with special status to J&K is all that India refers to any part of its territory since 1950

      Last chance for you to produce the evidence of any Indian Leagal document that ever described any State in India after it became Republic in 26th Jan 1950..as Princely State or British Province or any other term

      Else will take the call on this comment..

      Reply
      1. kishan

        How an independent India can have a British province? It can be named as an an Indian state by little customization (Bombay state) or not(Like Hyderabad state). But when did they re-organize Hyderabad state and Bombay state?. If all reorganization was done in 1950 then what is first SRC and why was it put? Your crux of the argument is comparison of Bombay state division to AP division or Chattisgarh formation ,which is not apples to apples even though LEGAL INSTRUMENT USED IS SAME.

        Hope this helps.

        Reply
        1. Venkat Gandhi Post author

          So now you yield and understood from 1950 what India has is States and UT not what you wish to keep talking about.

          Since 1950 till the time constitution is amended it is only Article 3 and there is no limit to the number of State re-organizations that parliament can decide on..
          So Relax and welcome the #The29thState Telangana

          Reply
  3. sandeep

    kishan : : 1) telangana state is not a newly carving state it was existed before 1956.
    2) in united ap ,telangana used for vote bank nothing has developed except hyderabad,funds ,employment opportunities everything was taken away. farmers lost their crop during heavy rains …..andhra farmers got money from govt but in telangana officers not even identified correct loss…wrong calculations was shown….cm himself stated that 1.2 lak jobs will be gone if bifurcation is done which is illegal recruit if this situation how can they leave with them
    3) everyone thinks telangana people raises demand during elections …..demand is there continuously from 60 years leaders utilized it for formation govt in elections with votes.leaders have betrayed telangana people.
    4) come and see how telangana was looted.they made mahaboobnagar and nalgonda waterless districts .they not even supplied drinking water to nalgonda in these 60 years as result most of people effected by fluroide.
    5) rayalaseema leaders were looting minerals in khammam district that to forest land dont sit infront of computer and talk about telangana state blindly because it squeezes our hearts…please understand the situation and support for telangana .

    Reply
  4. Pingback: Hyderabad Telangana will Test Narendra Modi legacy to Sardar Patel | Words of Venkat G

  5. vgreddy

    Exceptional article on bifurcation and Capital for state.. I still do not understand why people turn a blindeye on issues like this.. They strongly believe that Confuse people if not able to convince them… There is no point arguing now when issue came to climax.. But I strongly condemn two things 1) running away 2) lose to Andhra people
    1) who is running away.. We are fighting for ages but these so called politicians running away from issue.. It took 6 decades to come to this stage.. If this is running away then what should we call Andhra leaders when Hyderabad was merged before the general elections which was not suggested
    2) lose to Andhra people .. Yes it is lose to them because all these years they have enjoyed at the cost of our lose… After all what we are asking, to give back what was looted from us… our rightful share which is denied in the name Telugu brotherhood
    I pity on the people who still not able to understand the gravity of issue and cry for Telugu Jathi..

    Once again hats off to venkat g

    Reply
    1. Venkat Gandhi Post author

      Thanks vgreddy for visiting and sharing your feedback.
      Its time to spread the fair information to bring sanity in to peoples minds, so kindly share the posts as much as you can among your near and dear and social media circles..

      Reply
  6. Pingback: My Top 10 Blog Posts | Words of Venkat G

  7. Pingback: First Anniversary of My Blog Life ! | Words of Venkat G

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s