REVIVAL OF TELANGANA STATE – A JUST DEMAND – PART 1

HISTORY OF VIOLATIONS AND BROKEN PROMISES

“Naa Telangana koti ratanala veena”, said Dasaradhi Krishnamacharya. The lute was kept silent for 40 long years. But on 29th November 2009, Osmania University, which symbolizes the conscience of Telangana, resumed the symphony. The students of the university were lathi-charged when they were protesting the Government’s decision to forcibly end a declared fast-unto-death by K.Chandra Shekhar Rao, Telangana Rashtra Samithi President and Member of Parliament from Mahaboobnagar constituency. The huge police build-up, a day before, at the proposed site for the fast, at the TRS’ north Telangana Head Quarters in Karimnagar and all over Telangana in general, already made the students restive. The lathi-charge only added fuel to the flames! But every lathi-blow on students produced one single scream – JAI TELANGANA. Unintentionally, the police made the dormant lute active. Once again it reverberates, reverberates now to produce notes that signal the end of an experiment called Andhra Pradesh!!!

There are two popular interpretations for the word Telangana. One – Telangana is the distorted form of Trilinga + 'aane'. Trilinga symbolizing three famous Shiva pilgrim places – Srisailam(in Kurnool district), Draksharamam(in East Godavari district) and Kaleshwaram (in Karimnagar district) – and 'aane' meaning region. Two – Telangana emerged from ‘Telang’ or ‘Tilang’ + nadu. Telang or Tilang is how Muslim rulers called Telugu and nadu is an administrative unit. Hence, either way, Telangana is the ‘land where Telugus live’.

Nizam's Rule Vs. British Rule - Contrast

Telugus lived together under Satavahanas and Kakatiyas as a single unit. For the last time, Andhras lived together under Qutbshahis of Golconda(1512-1687), before the formation of Andhra Pradesh. Qutbshahis were replaced by Asafjahis in 1724. Mir Qumaruddin Chin Qilich Khan, popularly known as Nizam-ul-mulk(Administrator of the Realm), was the founder of this dynasty. Nizams were the first to enter into Subsidiary Alliance with the British. In lieu of payments under this agreement, the Nizam ceded the present Rayalaseema to the British by 1800.Coastal Andhra came under the British rule earlier by 1787 itself. Telangana remained under the Nizams till the ‘Operation Polo’ in 1948. Though Asafjahis were tolerant towards other religions they were worst oppressors. Mir Osman Ali Khan, the seventh Nizam was popular as the rich man next only to Henry Ford, had Jagirdars and Deshmukhs besides his own revenue staff collecting crores of rupees from the districts condemned to backwardness without any modern facilities except for some degree of support for modern education , health, and transportation in Hyderabad. Poor people mostly dependent on agriculture were subjected to forced labour such as begar and vetti.

On cultural front, the official language both in politics and education was Urdu. Telugu language and literature was totally neglected. There were severe restrictions even on speaking in their mother tongue i.e. Telugu. There were instances of cutting off of tongues when the diktats were not adhered to! While their fellow Andhras were experiencing cultural renaissance, Telangana remained insulated and was under the influence of Islamic culture and Urdu. Telangana was unaffected by this Telugu renaissance also because their relatively more Urduised Telugu was despised by the people of coastal Andhra. The Indian National Congress, for long, did not extend national movement to princely states. This way, people of Telangana, as in other princely states, were never politically mobilized and Nizams effectively discouraged the same. At the same time, coastal Andhra was witness to language renaissance movement, ‘non-Brahmin movement’, ‘vyavahara bhasha’ movement, Indian freedom struggle, movement for the separate Andhra state etc. People of Telangana, bound by their shared history of struggle, transcended bonds of caste, faith and language fought the despotic Nizam rule, as a single heterogeneous community for bhumi, bhukti, vimukthi (land, livelihood, liberation). Communists spearheaded this uprising. The revolt started somewhere in 1945 and continued till 1950 when it was suppressed by Indian forces.

Meanwhile British India, and coastal Andhra as a part of it, attained Independence on 15th August 1947. Hyderabad state was merged into the Indian union on 17th September 1948 after a Police Action by India Armed Forces, nick-named ‘Operation Polo’. Once the Nizam submitted to India, demand for Vishalandhra got momemtum and took the shape of a popular movement in coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema. Communists who played a significant role in the armed peasant uprising strongly favoured it. But opinion in Telangana region did not yet crystallize. They did not favour breaking up of Hyderabad state (comprised of Marathi, Kannada and Telugu speaking divisions) based on linguistic lines. In fact on June 16, 1952, a motion for the dismemberment of the state was defeated in the state legislative assembly – 79 votes against to 63 votes favouring. Aware of their backwardness and the consequent problems that would arise out of the merger, people of Telangana resisted the idea of ‘Visalandhra’. As a matter of fact, Telangana did not evince any interest in the movement for a separate Andhra state. Even the national leadership of Indian National Congress wanted to retain Hyderabad as a multilingual state, a kind of bastion against linguistic feelings. Also, they thought Urdu tradition in Hyderabad made it an ideal centre from where Hindi could be propagated down south.

Liberation and Separation

But, as early as in 1927, Indian National Congress passed a resolution in favour of organizing the regional congress committees along linguistic lines. Immediately after the independence, congress was reminded of its promise. Nehru did not favour reorganizing the country, especially after the bloody Partition, along linguistic lines as he thought it would propel parochial tendencies. But after persistent demand from the people, especially south India, he had to give in. Linguistic Provinces Commission was set up in June 1948 under the chairmanship of S.K.Dhar to examine the feasibility of such reorganization. Commission favoured reorganization of states on the basis of administrative convenience. The subsequent resentment made the Congress Party appoint Linguistic Provinces Committee- the JVP Committee- in December 1948, with Jawaharlal Nehru, Vallabhai Patel and Pattabhi Sitaramaiah as its members. This committee too, rejected reorganization of states on the basis of language. However, in October 1953, the Government of India was forced to create the first linguistic state – the Andhra state – by separating Telugu speaking areas from the then Madras state. This followed a prolonged popular agitation and the death of Sri Potti Sriramulu, after a 56 day hunger strike for the cause. Some critics blame Andhra leaders’ intransigent claim over Madras city costed Sriramulu his life.

Major General J.N.Choudhry, who commanded the Indian forces in the ‘Operation Polo’, continued to carry on the administration in Hyderabad till December 1949 when a civil administrator M.K.Vellodi, a Civil Servant, was made the Chief Minister in 1950, and the Nizam was given the status of a Raj Pramukh (Governor). Vellodi preferred people from coastal region for assisting him over native Hyderbadis. The excuse was Telanganites knew neither English nor Telugu. In the first general elections that ensued in 1952, Congress party got majority in the Hyderabad state and formed the government under the chief-ministership of Sri Burgula Ramakrishna Rao. On the other hand, C.Rajagopalachari became Chief Minister for the erstwhile Madras state, though Congress failed to get the majority by itself. Tanguturi Prakasam, famously known as ‘Andhra Kesari’, became Chief Minister of the first linguistic state – Andhra- on 1st October 1953 after the Telugu-speaking regions were separated from Madras state and formed into a state. The jubilant Andhras from coastal and Rayalaseema regions raised the slogan of Visalandhra. While the demand for a Visalandhra was vociferous in Andhra state, Telangana region of Hyderabad state was indifferent to the idea. In fact, prominent leaders like K.V.Ranga Reddy and Chenna Reddy resisted the idea of Visalandhra.

Fazal Ali Commission's Recommendations

The formation of separate Andhra State gave stimulation to the demand for the creation of other linguistic states in India. Central government, in August 1953, decided to set up States Reorganisation Commission (SRC) under the Chairmanship of Fazl Ali. The three-member Commission also had H.N.Kunzru and K.M.Panikker as its members. After elaborate discussions with different organizations, individuals and leaders, SRC submitted its report in October 1955. One must understand Fazl Ali Commission’s report so as to understand why the experiment of Andhra Pradesh has been such a mess. The Commission favoured breaking up of Hyderabad state on the linguistic lines. Excerpts from the report:

“The advantages of a larger Andhra State including Telangana are that it will bring into existence a State of about 32 millions with a considerable hinterland, with large water and power resources, adequate mineral wealth and valuable raw materials. This will also solve the difficult and vexing problem of finding a permanent capital for Andhra, the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad are very well suited to be the capital of Vishalandhra.

“At the same time, we have to take note of the important fact that, while opinion in Andhra is overwhelmingly in favour of the larger unit, public opinion in Telangana has still to crystallize itself. Important leaders of public opinion in Andhra themselves seem to appreciate that the unification of Telangana with Andhra, though desirable, should be based on a voluntary and willing association of the people and that it is primarily for the people of Telangana to take a decision about their future.

“A further point to be borne in mind is that the State of Andhra was brought into existence only recently and has still not got over the stress of transition… Integration of Telangana with Andhra at this stage is, therefore, likely to create administrative difficulties both for Andhra and Telangana.

“After taking all these factors into consideration we have come to the conclusion that it will be in the interests of Andhra as well as Telangana, if for the present, the Telangana area is to constitute into a separate State, which may be known as the Hyderabad State with provision for its unification with Andhra after the general elections likely to be held in or about 1961 if by a two thirds majority the legislature of the residuary Hyderabad State expresses itself in favor of such unification.

“The advantage of this arrangement will be that while the objective of the unification of the Andhras will neither be blurred nor impeded during a period of five or six years, the two governments may have stabilized their administrative machinery… The intervening period may incidentally provide an opportunity for allaying apprehensions and achieving the consensus of opinion necessary for a real union between the two States. ”

Quite contrary to the SRC’s recommendation, the union Government succumbed to the pressures of leaders from coastal Andhra. There was intense politicking of forces fighting for separate Telangana state and those for merger of Telangana with Andhra. Political manipulations and behind the screen moves led to unexpected twists in Telangana history. Burgula Ramakrishnarao, Chief Minister of Hyderabad who was a strong advocate of separate Telangana state surprisingly gave consent in favour of the merger at the Chief Ministers’ conference held in New Delhi on October 22, 1955 and gradually forces insisting on unification gained strength. In such circumstances, as a last resort, an idea of safeguards was mooted by Telangana leaders so that the merger becomes conditional.

Gentlemen's Agreement - Neither 'gentle' nor an 'agreement'!

Gentlemen’s Agreement comprising 14 points was signed at Hyderabad House in Delhi on 20 February, 1956 by Bezawada Gopal Reddy (Chief Minister), Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy (Deputy Chief Minister), Gouthu Lachanna (Minister), and Aluuri Satyanarayana Raju (President, Provincial Congress Committee) from Andhra and Burgula Ramakrishna Rao (Chief Minister), Konda Venkata Ranga Reddy (Minister), Marri Chenna Reddy (Minister), J V Narsing Rao (President, Provincial Congress Committee) from Telangana. None of the promises were implemented except minor ones like the formation of Telangana Regional Committee in 1957. Every care was taken to make TRC toothless and all the recommendations of the TRC for development of the region were neglected.

In fact, the constitution of the ‘Gentlemen’ in self is a case to question. It is understandable that it included respective Chief Ministers and Cabinet Ministers from both regions. However, it is questionable why the chiefs of respective PCCs were chosen for this important Agreement. Let alone representatives of dozens of political and social formations from both regions, even the Leaders of Opposition in both state legislatures were not included. The issue of merger of two regions with crores of people was confined to Congress politicians alone. This casual and big-brotherly attitude of Congress party shows the scant respect it accorded to the real people’s aspirations. The ruling party seemed to restrict the integration to be an in-house affair only. And since the Congress treated the Agreement as its own internal matter, it could violate the Agreement without any compunction.

Due to historical reasons, Coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema got earlier access to irrigation, administrative centres, urbanization, industrialization, education and medical facilities than other regions. Therefore there would be time lag and other regions, in our case Telangana, require special focus, assistance and will to develop on par with developed regions. In modern times it is administrative policies that have significant role in bridging this gap. Access to modern facilities in a region juxtaposed with the lack of it in another region within the area ruled by a single government indicates relative and differentiated or discriminated importance of state policy. Newly educated sections and elite groups emerge from regions that have educational opportunities earlier than other owing to the development activities in general and proliferation of agricultural modernization leading to surplus and industrial opportunities. The former elites gain power to dominate in regions that have growth of elites at a later stage. Elite groups intervene in decision making processes, allotment of resources, formulation and implementation of policies, government jobs, and designing of development schemes to secure a larger share for their region at the cost of others. Already existing inequalities due to historical factors are thus perpetuated by intervention of the elites from developed regions.

And hence, violations started the very moment the promises were made and Agreements were signed. As per the Gentlemen’s Agreement, there should be a Deputy Chief Minister from Telangana if the Chief Minister happens to be from the coastal Andhra or Rayalaseema and vice versa. It is shocking to note that the very first government did not have a Deputy CM. N.Sanjeeva Reddy the first CM of the integrated Andhra Pradesh, who earlier worked as a Deputy CM in T.Prakasam’s government calls the post as ‘sixth finger’ (supernumerary finger) and hence redundant. Another provision is that two out of the following portfolios should be assigned to Ministers from Telangana: Home, Finance, Revenue, Planning & Development and Commerce & Industry. Desapati Srinivas of Telangana Vidyavantula Vedika (Telangana Intellectuals Forum) says, revealingly, that Home Ministry and Irrigation Ministry almost always had a Telanganite as Head. He alleges – ‘One (Irrigation Minister) sits there silently as a spectator, as the water that rightfully belongs to Telangana is diverted to coastal Andhra & Rayalaseema and the other (Home Minister) points the gun at those who question this!’

'Mulki Rules' and Murkiness Rules

To safeguard the interests of the employees of Telangana region, Gentlemen’s Agreement spells out that there should be some kind of domicile rules in order to secure their rightful share i.e. 40% as per the population, in recruitment of services for Telangana region. This arrangement is just a continuation of already existing arrangement known as ‘Mulki Rules’. Mulki (a local) rules had come into force by a ‘firman’ of the Nizam in the erstwhile Hyderabad State in 1919. The rules debarred non-Mulkis from appointment to any superior or inferior service without specific sanction of the Nizam. In Urdu, ‘mulk’ referred to a nation and the residents were ‘Mulkis’. Mulki Rules were violated even before the Gentlemen’s Agreement and the formation of Andhra Pradesh. As early as in 1952, people of Hyderabad had revolted against ‘alien’ rule. Six students laid down their lives in the anti-non-Mulki agitation. However, after the integration of Telangana and Andhra states, non-Mulkis flooded into government service in Telangana. The government claimed the educational backwardness in Telangana made the filling of posts with qualified non-Mulkis and when steps were taken to expand education it was inevitable that a large number of non-Mulki teachers had to be imported in the first instance. This did not satisfy the Mulkis and the consequent resentment was so rife that in 1959, central government promulgated Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Requirement as to Residence) Rules - in accordance with The Public Employment (Requirement as to Residence) Act, 1957 - providing that 15 years continuous residence would be required for appointment to government jobs. But the Rules provided loopholes and false Mulki certificates were obtained in good scores. The influx of non-Mulkis never stopped. Another problem, as feared by the Fazal Ali Commission, surfaced due to hasty integration of administrative machineries of Andhra and Hyderabad states. Administrators at all levels in Andhra had been better qualified and less well paid than their equivalents in Hyderabad state. After the state formation, Hyderabadi employees were put on a lower salary scales than previously, their prospects of promotion impaired, a large proportion of the more important positions in Telangana were filled by people from coastal and Rayalaseema districts.

'Jai Telangana' Movement

The Andhra Pradesh government in July 1968 had passed the orders that all non-Mulkis in posts reserved for Telangana personnel should revert to the Circars and Rayalaseema, within three months, so as to pacify the growing discontent at the repeated failure of government to deliver on the promises. Quite revealingly, government had to reaffirm the same orders after six months in the All-party Accord of January 19, 1969. G.O No. 36 was issued in the same month. It was aimed at repatriating about twenty five thousand non-Mulki employees illegally appointed in the Telangana region, to their respective places and appointing local candidates in the resultant vacancies. But, the non-Mulkies appointed in the Telangana region challenged not only G.O.36 but also the very validity of Mulki Rules. In the month of March the Supreme Court declared Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Requirement as to Residence) Rules to be discriminatory and contrary to the Constitution. These Rules were to be continued till the March 1974. The Supreme Court judgment further infuriated the agitators. Beginning as an agitation for the implementation of safeguards of Gentlemen’s Agreement, the movement within a short time graduated into a demand for formation of separate state. The movement that began with an almost insignificant hunger strike in Khammam seeking fair share in employment and educational facilities soon spread all over the region like wildfire. Chenna Reddy, who had to step down as Union Minister after a Supreme Court judgment for electoral malpractices, smelled an excellent opportunity in the ongoing agitation. He soon took control of the Telangana Praja Samithi and changed the pace of the movement. Mass movement continued effectively for a year. Around 370 students and youth died in police firing across all districts of the region. An academic year was lost for students and government offices were suspended for months.

When the movement first broke out in 1969, the development theory was considered sufficiently valid because the movement was chiefly a protest against the violation of Gentlemen’s Agreement on which the conditional formation of A.P had been based. Although the demand for a separate state had been articulated at that time, development inequalities were the primary concern. Since there was no attempt to remove the inequalities in the following four decades, the continued portrayal of Telangana demand as question of development deprivation displays lack of basic understanding of the ruling classes about the burning social issues. Denial of the intensity and magnitude of real social issues might also be deliberate in order to narrow the problem to mere development inequalities. Giving importance even today to arguments of backwardness or developmental programmes or special packages will amount to taking history back by thirty or fifty years.

Fazal Ali 's prophecy!

During the time under consideration, Mrs. Indira Gandhi was involved in a scuffle for her political survival with senior members of the Congress – famously known as the Syndicate. Kasu Brahmananda Reddy, whom agitators often compare with General Dyer (responsible for the 1919 Jalianwalabagh tragedy) expressed unflinching support for Mrs.Gandhi. On 11 April, 1969, Mrs. Gandhi tried to simmer down the agitation by announcing an eight-point formula in the Lok Sabha, under which two committees were set up. K.N.Wanchoo committee was set up to suggest measures to provide constitutional safeguards for the Telangana people in the matter of public employment. Committee under Justice Bhargava was set up to assess the revenue surpluses of Telangana. As per the Gentlemen’s Agreement the expenditure of the administration should be borne proportionately by the two regions and the balance of income from Telangana should be reserved for expenditure on the development of Telangana area. For the record, ever since 1956 in no single year did Telangana receive 40% of state resources based on population ratio, or 42% based on ratio of area, or 40% based on revenue collected from the region. As per the Fazal Ali Commission, Telangana had a revenue surplus of Rs.5 Crore where as the Andhra was in revenue deficit. The Commission also noted that per capita revenue in Telangana was Rs.17 as compared to Rs.9 and 6 Anna in Andhra state. Telangana yielded higher revenue even after the formation of Andhra Pradesh. This was partly due to the increase in sale of lands and liquor. As Fazal Ali predicted, the integration of Telangana with Andhra state resulted in affluent landlords from Circars and Rayalaseema acquiring lands in Telangana. Unaware of the long term adverse impact, poor Telangana farmers sold out their lands to outsiders for quick, albeit, short-term incomes. The vineyards around the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad were entirely owned by the immigrant farmers. These farmers were attracted to Telangana by the relative cheapness of the land and agricultural wage rates. The Gentlemen’s Agreement provided for Telangana Regional Committee so as to control the sale of agricultural lands. The Committee was also authorized to look after the revenue and expenditure pertaining to Telangana region. As we already noted the Committee was made toothless and its suggestions fell on deaf ears. Justice Bhargava Committee was asked to ascertain the revenues from Telangana region.

Chenna Reddy's betrayal

However, the committees could not arrest the popular agitation. Mrs. Gandhi came to Hyderabad on 4th July 1969 and decided to impose President’s rule dismissing the Kasu Brahmanada Reddy’s government. Politics at the national level diverted the region’s attention and year long movement slowly started petering out. NGOs returned to work and students to colleges. In the 1971 general election Indira Gandhi won the Lok Sabha elections with a thumping majority. Though Telangana Praja Samithi won 10 out of 14 seats in Telangana region it was not in a position to exert any pressure on the ‘High Command’. Chenna Reddy again switched sides and in September 1971, Telangana Praja Samthi was merged with Congress. Chenna Reddy acted like a Trojan horse and betrayed the popular sentiments to advance his political career and to take revenge on his political adversaries. The deal he clinched with Mrs. Gandhi had some face saving assurances. The deal involved: Continuation of Mulki Rules, Separate budget and accounts for Telangana, Separate Pradesh Congress Committee for Telangana, and Resignation of Brahmananda Reddy in favor of a Chief Minister from Telangana. Thus P.V.Narasimha Rao, who was not affiliated to any faction in the state and loyal to Mrs.Gandhi became Chief Minister. It is apt to mention here that none of the three Chief Ministers from Telangana completed the full term of 5 years. The four terms of their Chief Ministership (one each by P.V. Narasimha Rao and T.Anjaiah, two by Marri Chenna Reddy) lasted for just about six years. On the other hand 11 Chief Ministers from coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema ruled for more than 45 years.

'Jai Andhra' Movement

The fallout of this deal between Chenna Reddy and Mrs.Gandhi was the challenging of continuation of Mulki Rules in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh. On 14 February 1972, a full bench of five judges by a four-one majority held that Mulki Rules were not valid and operative after the formation of Andhra Pradesh. The High Court judgment came as a rude shock to the people of Telangana and the then Chief Minister P.V.Narasimha Rao filed an appeal in the Supreme Court against the High Court judgment. On 3 October 1972 Supreme Court gave its verdict stating that Mulki Rules were valid and were in force. The judgment created political crisis in the coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema regions. Mrs. Indira Gandhi, on 27 November 1972, announced a Five Point Formula by continuing the Mulki Rules in the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad until the end of 1977 and in the rest of Telangana area until the end of1980. The people of Andhra who wanted complete abolition of Mulki Rules did not appreciate the formula. They felt ‘their dignity and honour can only be safeguarded in the separate state of their own’. As a reaction ‘Jai Andhra’ movement was started. Once again the central government stood firm and was against bifurcating the state. Jai Andhra movement spread like wild fire and paralysed the Administration and centre imposed President’s Rule on 18 January 1973. The Government of India of the time unfortunately yielded to the pressure of political might and money power of the majority region and forced an anti-Telangana compromise through Six Point Formula on September 20, 1973. Six Point Formula nullified the judgment of Supreme Court of India by an act of parliament (32nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1973, Article 371 D; passed on May 3, 1974), besides scrapping several safeguards (provided through Gentlemen’s Agreement) given to the people of Telangana as a precondition for the formation of Andhra Pradesh. Consequently, all irregular appointments were regularised, depriving local candidates of their rightful claim over those jobs. TPS leaders who now were part of the Congress government remained mere spectators.

Six Point Formula - Suicidal for Telangana

The funniest aspect of Six Point Formula was the first five points were never implemented, but the sixth point, which removes the two earlier safeguards to Telangana, namely Telangana Regional Committee and Mulki Rules, on the plea that they become redundant if the earlier five points are implemented. Even as the first five points were violated, the sixth was implemented in letter and spirit. Article 371-D inserted to operationalise the Six Point Formula, authorized the President of India to make special provisions with respect to AP for equitable opportunities and facilities for the people belonging to different parts of the state in the matter of public employment and education. Consequent to the 32nd Constitutional Amendment, the Presidential Order i.e. AP Public Employment (Organisation of Local Cadres and Regulation of Direct Recruitment) Order, was issued on 20-10-1975 and was promptly ignored by the state government. Presidential Order conforming to the Six Point Formula divided the state into six zones:

Zone I - Srikakulam, Visakhapatnam and Vizianagaram
Zone II - East Godavari, West Godavari and Krishna.
Zone III - Guntur, Prakasam and Nellore
Zone IV - Chittoor, Cuddapah, Anantapur and Kurnool.
Zone V - Adilabad, Karimnagar, Warangal and Khammam.
Zone VI - Hyderabad, Ranga Reddy, Nizamabad, Mahaboobnagar, Medak and Nalgonda.

Six Point Formula advocated ‘institution of uniform arrangements throughout the State enabling adequate preference being given to local candidates in the matter of admission to educational institutions’ and ‘Subject to the requirements of State as a whole, local candidates should be given preference in the matter of direct recruitment’. On the face of it, it looks like a very good proposition. But deep down, there’s an attempt to create dissensions among Telangana people and this has been proved many times. The irony of the 1969 ‘Jai Telangana’ movement is that it started to seek the continuation of Mulki Rules which treats the entire Telangana (in fact entire Hyderabad state) as a single unit but ended up dividing the region into two zones. Now, people from the V zone can not enter the VI zone in which Hyderabad is located. Whenever the question of repatriation of coastal and Rayalaseema employees who entered the public services illegally is raised, the ruling class brings forth the argument that the repatriation will hamper the aspirations of the fellow Telanganites to enter Hyderabad. Worse still, as part of the implementation of G.O.610 these hapless Mulkis were repatriated and they started questioning the sanctity of the G.O. The policy of ‘Divide and Rule’ once again succeeded!

Clarificatory statement to Six Point Formula was issued on 22 October 1973. It clearly states the preference to local candidates can not be 100%. It should be 80 percent with respect to the Class-IV posts, 70 percent w.r.t non-Gazetted posts and 60 percent w.r.t Gazetted posts. The strange part is that in coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema this ceil was strictly adhered to. In fact, the residuary posts other than the reserved ones almost entirely filled by the locals. It’s vice versa in Telangana.Whereas the posts earmarked for the locals were encroached by non-Telanganites, the left over posts were also filled by the people from the coastal and Rayalaseena regions.

G.O No. 610 and mockery of Administration

These violations continued unabated and the Telanagana NGOs became restive at the step-motherly treatment of Government of A.P. Finally, owing to the pressure of TNGOs, at the behest of Chief Minister N.T. Rama Rao, G.O No. 610 was issued on 30.12.1985 stipulating, among other things, that the employees allotted after 18.10.1975 to Zones V and VI in violation of zonalisation of local cadres under Six Point Formula be repatriated to their respective zones by 31.3.1986 i.e. in three months’ time, by creating supernumerary posts wherever necessary. The disturbing fact is that the said G.O ignores those violations which took place before 18-10-1975, thereby validating them with a single stroke of pen and cruelly belittling Jai Telangana movement of 1969. Even then, Telangana people accepted the G.O and appealed for the strict implementation. They were disappointed yet again.A glaring lacuna in G.O No.610 is that no separate mechanism at the government level has been mooted to monitor the implementation of GO Ms 610. The onus of proving violations was completely rested on the TNGOs and indivduals who alleged that all the arrangements to safeguard the interests of Telangana employees and youth were blatantly abused. Consequently no action was taken for repatriation of the employees belonging to other zones allotted to zones V & VI.

When K Chandrasekhar Rao, who had quit Telugu Desam Party earlier, raked up the issue of non-implementation of G.O No. 610 and started Telangana Rashtra Samithi to fight for the cause of separate Telangana state, the then Telugu Desam regime had no option but to sit up and take notice.The government constituted the One Man Commission with Shri J M Girglani, retired bureaucrat, in June 25, 2001 to enquire into the implementation of G.O No. 610 and to suggest follow-up action for rectification of defects, anomalies and deviations. A House Committee was also constituted for looking into the same issue. The House Committee, headed by the then Telugu Desam member R Prakash Reddy, in its interim report submitted on 17-3-2003, pointed out several violations of Six Point Formula in the matter of recruitments to the zonal posts in Excise, Police, Stamps and Registration, Education, Housing, Panchayat Raj, Irrigation and Industries Departments. In its second report, the House Committee recommended repatriation of 4,700 constables of the city police who were identified as “non-locals.” In fact, the second report was submitted days before the dissolution of the Assembly on November 14, 2003 and hence it could not be pursued. The House Committee unanimously recommended that the non-locals, who were appointed to the posts earmarked for the locals, against the Six Point Formula, should be repatriated to their respective zones with immediate effect. Prakash Reddy later admitted that the legal adviser to the government had misled the House Committee on the violations.

Girglani Commission's 'indictment'

The Girglani Commision’s Final Report, was handed over to the government on September 30, 2004. Four-and-a-half months later the Report was laid on the table of the Assembly on February 16, 2004. The only follow-up action that the government has taken is the nomination of a group of ministers and dispatching the copies of the reports to the departments at the Secretariat level. This explains the callousness and casual approach of the then Congress government, which promised in the poll manifesto on the eve of 2004 Assembly elections to implement the G.O No. 610 in letter and spirit.Except for the Home Ministry, all other ministries and departments have maintained stoic silence on the issue and not taken any action on the Girglani Commission report. TNGOs Union allege that as many as 60,000 non-locals from other regions are working in various departments in Telangana region in violation of Six Point Formula, Presidential Order and G.O No. 610( from 1975 onwards). The Joint Action Committee of Unions of Telangana Employees, Teachers and Workers puts the figure at two lakhs(from November 1, 1956). Girglani Commision did not endorse or disapprove these figures. But the fact that not even one-third of the 134- odd departments furnished data to Girglani Commission tells the gravity of the neglect and discrimination Telangana people were meted out. If all the departments had extended their full cooperation, the Commission would have brought to light startling facts on the injustice meted out to Telangana since the formation of Andhra Pradesh. The Commission has brought out as many as 150 different types of deviations or ‘maladies’ which have occurred over the years, covering the tenures of many regimes. Moreover, the Commission has given its findings and suggested appropriate remedial action for each specific deviation. The Commission has suggested that there should be a system of fixing responsibility and taking disciplinary action, including initiating criminal proceedings against the violators, in the case of deviations from the Presidential Order. Though the government approved the Report, its recommendations were never taken seriously to initiate any concrete action. Once again people of Telangana could not help but feel betrayed.

Revival of Telangana - the only way out!

It became evident time and again that in united Andhra Pradesh the rights of Telanganites are not protected. Their long-drawn struggle for reviving the Telangana part of erstwhile Hyderabad state got a major breakthrough on 9th December 2009 when Union Home Minister P.Chidambaram announced that “the process of forming the state of Telangana will be initiated. An appropriate resolution will be moved in the state assembly.” Those who remained silent even while agreement after agreement got violated and promises were broken and now speak of unity of Telugus and samaikyandhra are late by at least 53 years! One need not be a political analyst to understand what this empty rhetoric is all about and is all for!!


Refernces:

1. TELANGANA: The State of Affairs - AdEd VALUE VENTURES
2. A COMPREHENSIVE HISTORY OF ANDHRA - Dr. Gopal Reddy - VICTORY PUBLISHERS
3. FIFTY YEARS OF ANDHRA PRADESH 1956-2006 - CDRC
4. INDIA SINCE INDEPENDENCE - BIPIN CHANDRA - PENGUIN BOOKS
5. The Constitution of India - P.M.Bakshi - Universal Law Publishing Co.
6. www.Telangana.org
7. http://ahssan.wordpress.com/category/andhra-pradesh
8. Some other web sites