Home » Subject » Essay » What is the proper path for the Central government to take on the Telangana Issue.

India is a federation of states with a strong emphasis on central character. Constitution makers believed that this will not only stop the individualism but also put check on the separatist tendencies. Therefore they empowered center to take decisions about states, their welfares and their reorganization.

Though center-state relations have been subject to debate and discussion, state legislatures have mostly obliged to the center's decision.

Article 3 of constitution empowers center to create, reorganize a new state provided such a bill has the concurrence of the state and has expressed the view in its favor.

However, the article does not mention whether center is obliged to accept the amendments suggested by the concerning state.

So far whenever a new state had been formed, state assemblies had supported the bill with some minor amendments. But in case of creation of Telangana, the state assembly not only opposed the bill but actually rejected it.

This rejection becomes more important because in Andhra Pradesh the ruling party is same as that in center i.e Congress. This proves that not only there are concerns but also strong disapproval from the majority of people in the state.

Discarding these vehement opposition from the state, the central government remained adamant on its decision of creating a new state.

The demands of the people of Seemandhra to first resolve their concerns were put aside and the bill was passed.

This not only invoked discussions but also had serious implications on the federal structure of the country.

The concerns of the Seemandhra people were not about moving a mountain, they only demanded to resolve a few normal things. But government seemed to be in such a hurry that it did not take into account any of their concern.

The correct path should have been to resolve the concerns of the local people first. Te benefactor should have been convinced about being benefitted.

In this scenario, it was duty of the government to bring all the concerned parties on same the platform. However it was not done.

An embarrassing situation emerged when no confidence motion was moved by the member of the ruling party in the state assembly. This put entire process in the background and it killed the basic purpose of creating a new state.

The process of creating new state specially that of first linguistic state of the country should have been smooth. It should have taken into considerations the problem of businessmen, distribution of water etc of Seemandhra region.

If all these issues had been addressed, it could have won the faith of the local people. But the government bypassed all those necessary steps and passed the bill in order to take the credit for it in the upcoming elections.

Had the bill been discussed in the Andhra Pradesh assembly first, had government tried to explain the pros of creating new state, had it discussed the issues with the Seemandhra people, all those problems could have been minimized.

The purpose of fifth constitutional amendment was to make the process of creating a new state smooth and not to take any decision on behalf of the states. However, nothing of that sort happened in case of the creation of Tlengana state

Here one important thing needs to be notes. If the discussions and talks and proper meetings between different political parties, concerned people and different agencies had been taken place, all these problems could have been sorted out. Also government could have won the faith of people not only in affected state; but also from all over India.

Whenever a state is created on recommendation of state reorganization committee, it involves lot of discussions, meetings and back and forth communication. There is no use of doing something if many dislike it to happen.

Rahul Bajpayi