Why telangana, sridhar (ppt)


Published on

Why Telangana? Because..
Now, there is no integration - linguistic or social
Created Identity Crisis for people in Telangana
Lack of respect, acceptance or at least tolerance for language and culture of Telangana, instead, they hate without reason
Undue and continuous Diversion of Resources –water, funds, employment opportunities
Discrimination against – in education facilities, irrigation, employment etc.

Published in: News & Politics
  • Hello dear, My name is mariam nasrin, I know that this email will meet you in a good health and also surprisingly but God has his own way of bringing people together. Nice to Meet you I would appreciate if you can reply me back( mariamnasrin2@gmail.com ) So that i can explain you more about me. thank Yours mariam.
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • sunnyboy malli.. telangna state is forming.. now just say all neethi to your andhra people.. they are wasting life on samikyandhra udyamam .. mi udyamam gurinchi same akkada kuda adhey cheppuu..
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Its very good to know people are still fighiting for water etc.

    Soon India will be divided more and more, and it will have millions of State, and that will never help to develop India.

    It look similar, when sons divides the parental property and after that everybody knows.

    Keep fighting,and degrading India.
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Hi guyz,if you guyz think that we need telangana just because Andhra people have come and conquer the jobs,lands,high positions, markets that’s true.But did they do that secretely or where you sleeping all these days until KCR pockets and his seat is empty.and then he came up with the idea of stimulating the controversy.he tried his best with the farmers but was not much effective so he used the students to do it.with this topic his son is a MLA,his daughter is in politics earning is flowing in from central. He spoiled the students life their exams many lost their sons ,fathers in the battle.did u see kcr son or daughter attempting any risk,staying on the streets and waiting for them to come and then people start to say JAI TELANGANA ,JAI KCR,JAI SO SO SO ….HUH.guyz we need to wake up we cannot act stupid with this politicians.they know what they are doing.coming back to point.if you think that Andhra people occuly everything here ,I will tell you here in USA Indians are everywhere they have their business,their jobs,their houses ,we even have some politicians won in elections being Indians.so imagine if a day comes and they say that all the Indians must go out of USA,because we occupied everything.do you agree…..?will you leave your jobs the place where you live,huh.dont come back to the same policy as britishers ……DIVIDE AND RULE………..UNITED WE STAND…..SO GUYZ LETS WAKE GO BACK TO WHAT WE ARE WE HAVE OUR FAMILIES TO TAKE CARE .THEY have spent lot of money on us to study and get better prove yourself don’t just eat and go on strike and say hail to these fuckin politicians,i am from Warangal ,but I know what I am doing ,and I know where I can be ,I am not ready to waste my time on roads ,my father doesn’t know to read English but I got thru the govt school and now I am working for a software company in seattle USA.BUT STILL I BELIEVE IN UNITY………………………….ANY COMMENTS MOST WELCOME….DONT WASTE YOUR LIFE ON STRIKES..IF YOU CANNOT TAKE CARE YOUR FAMILY I DON’T THINK YOU WILL TAKE CARE THE STATE OR COUNTRY .BYE
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Dirty Polictics, Poverty, Corruption to People are common issues in a region even it has a new state. People should focus their time and energy in fighting against the above issues if they really want development. separate state will only benefit / favor political leaders or business people to achieve their goals like acquiring more land, more power, and more rich. Common man problems remains there on ground as it is there in any other part of our country. Don't use common people for some localized favors. Help them understanding the issue and fight for it if you really want development.

    The Only achievement of separate state would be localizing the problems like dirty politics, corruption, diluting the law and order. No other favors that i see here.
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Why telangana, sridhar (ppt)

  1. 1. Telangana, Because….. Madabhushi Sridhar Faculty NALSAR University of Law [email_address] (Presented to Sri Krishna Committee in 2010)
  2. 2. Why Telangana? Because.. <ul><li>Now, there is no integration - linguistic or social </li></ul><ul><li>Created Identity Crisis for people in Telangana </li></ul><ul><li>Lack of respect , acceptance or at least tolerance for language and culture of Telangana , instead, they hate without reason </li></ul><ul><li>Undue and continuous Diversion of Resources –water, funds, employment opportunities </li></ul><ul><li>Discrimination against – in education facilities, irrigation, employment etc. </li></ul>
  3. 3. ---Democratic wish <ul><li>Because 99 per cent people in Telangana wanted it. They have a legitimate right to ask for Telangana state. </li></ul><ul><li>Parliamentary Democracy accommodates demand for autonomy by separate state. </li></ul><ul><li>Integrity is not affected by creating another state for Telugu speaking people. </li></ul><ul><li>Living together depends on mutual consent, Telangana is not consenting to live with Andhra. There should be a social contract. </li></ul>
  4. 4. --- Separate Andhra demand is growing <ul><li>Even if all Andhras unanimously wish unity cannot stand because Telangana does not want it. </li></ul><ul><li>There is no unanimity among Andhras on United Andhra. </li></ul><ul><li>Rayalaseema does not want to go with Andhra </li></ul><ul><li>Separate Andhra demand is growing </li></ul>
  5. 5. ---People voted for it <ul><li>1971 people voted for Telangana by electing 11 of 13 seats to Parliament </li></ul><ul><li>2004 people of both Telangana and Andhra voted out TDP Government which went with manifesto of United State, gave a positive verdict for Telangana by electing Congress TRS with huge margin. </li></ul><ul><li>More than 33% People in Telangana in 2009. it is not possible to separate Telangana vote because every party including Prajarajyam supported Separate Telangana </li></ul>
  6. 6. ---Parties Stated it <ul><li>All opposition parties agreed to it on December 7, 2009 when CM Rosaiah convened a meet. </li></ul><ul><li>Congress Legislature Party supported it and said not opposed to Telangna and authorized Mrs Sonia Gandhi to decide. </li></ul><ul><li>Dec 9 Declaration of Telangana is based on these factual support and political backing for Telangana. Officially Declared Telangana in Parliament also. </li></ul>
  7. 7. ---Not a small state <ul><li>Separation of Telangana from not so integrated Andhra Pradesh is just a segregation and not destruction of integrity </li></ul><ul><li>It is switching back to pre-1956 identifiable, pre-existing, viable state, which is not new. </li></ul><ul><li>Telangana will not be a small state . This demand does not depend upon the advocacy for small states. </li></ul><ul><li>Those who oppose small states also can support Telangana because it will be a big state than many in India now. </li></ul>
  8. 8. ---Constitutional Demand <ul><li>Preamble, DPSP, Articles 37, 41 and 14 together impose an obligation on state to accord equal protection to citizens . Telangana is treated unequal and needs this protection. </li></ul><ul><li>Article 16(3): Parliament alone can prescribe residential qualification for jobs under the government of ‘a State’ or a local or other authority within ‘a State”. </li></ul><ul><li>Exception is an attempt to reconcile the conflicting claims of equality based on concept of single citizenship and justifiable local demands for local jobs. </li></ul>
  9. 9. ---Dr. BR Ambedkar said it <ul><li>Referring to criticizing the demands like Bengal for Bengalis and Madras for Madrasis, etc., Dr B R Ambedkar made the following remarks: </li></ul><ul><li>  … you cannot allow people who were flying from one province to another as mere birds of passage without any roots, without any connection with that particular province, just to come, apply for posts and, so to say, take the plums and walk away… (Constituent Assembly Debates at page 700) </li></ul>
  10. 10. ---Guarantee from CA <ul><li>Guarantee from Constituent Assembly: </li></ul><ul><li>  &quot;the Constitution Assembly while guaranteeing fundamental rights in the matter of employment under the State, took notice of this vast disparity in the development of various States and felt it imperative to continue that protection in the matter of employment afforded on the basis of residence within the State and made provision under Article 35 (b) of the Constitution for the continuance of those laws.&quot; </li></ul>
  11. 11. ---Judicial justification to sons of soil <ul><li>In D.P. Joshi v Madhya Bharath AIR 1955 SC 334 exemption from capitation fee to native students (with 5 yrs of residence) was upheld </li></ul><ul><li>In Jayanthilal v Saurashtra (AIR 1976 Sau 54) a rule granting free education in government schools only to persons who were residents within jurisdiction of the old Limbdi State merged in Saurashtra, or who owned immovable property in that state was upheld as the property could be acquired by outside persons also. </li></ul>
  12. 12. ---No opportunities for Telangana <ul><li>Hyderabad State was one among the several other Princely States of India. Due to Political conditions and Historical reasons the State remained isolated. There were no adequate Educational facilities afforded to the People of the State, in the result, there were very few opportunities available to the people of the Region to enter public service in competition with others from outside the State. </li></ul><ul><li>  Another contributing factor in this behalf was the use of Urdu, which was not the language of nearly ninety per cent of the people, as the Official Language in the entire administration of Hyderabad state. Similar conditions prevailed in a few other States as well. So much so, that these people were not in a position to compete with others in the matter of employment even in their own State, if no protection was afforded to them in this behalf on the basis of residence within that State (extracted from judgment of Madhava Reddy J of AP High Court) </li></ul>
  13. 13. DOZEN TIMES DISHONORED, BREACHED AND DENIED <ul><li>Telangana </li></ul>
  14. 14. 1. Andhra Assembly Resolutions <ul><li>Andhra Assembly Resolution dated 25th November 1955 para 3 stated: </li></ul><ul><li>  “… they would have due reservation in respect of appointments and on par with their population and that we have absolutely no objection to concede to them their due share in other respects also.” </li></ul><ul><li>  Another Resolution on February 1, 1956 essentially said that “we would not touch your 1/3 share in employment”. </li></ul>
  15. 15. 2. Gentlemen Agreement <ul><li>Due share in employment to Telangana </li></ul><ul><li>No Telugu exam as qualifying exam for T employees </li></ul><ul><li>Deputy Chief Minister to Telangana </li></ul><ul><li>Telangana Regional Development Council TRC on the lines of autonomy council with devolution of powers and funds. </li></ul><ul><li>Clearance by TRC for purchase of lands in Telangana (each is breached) </li></ul>
  16. 16. 3. Mulki: Reservation for sons of soil <ul><li>Domiciliary qualifications were felt needed in princely States where there was no all round development. </li></ul><ul><li>Mulki Rules existed in Nizam and 13 other similar dominions in pre-Independence era. Ambedkar suggested a uniform law made by Parliament to protect the interests of natives. </li></ul><ul><li>Mulki rules were truncated from 15 to 12 years </li></ul>
  17. 17. 4. Public Employment Act <ul><li>Public Employment (Requirement as to Residence) Act, 1957, The Preamble reads: &quot;An Act to make in pursuance of clause (3) of Article 16 of the Constitution special provisions for requirement as to residence in regard to certain classes of public employment in certain areas and to repeal existing laws prescribing any such requirement.&quot; </li></ul><ul><li>PEAct made a provision for five years for residential rules of a similar character for three Union Territories and the Telangana Region as per Section 2 from 1959. </li></ul>
  18. 18. 5. G.O. 36 <ul><li>On 21st January 1969 GO Ms 36 was passed assuring relieving of non-Mulkies from Mulki posts and filling them with or waiting till the qualified Mulki candidates come up. All those relieved non-Mulkies have to be accommodated in their respective regions. This GO Ms 36 was challenged in AP High Court as unconstitutional. </li></ul>
  19. 19. Injustice by AP High Court <ul><li>AP High Court held GO 36 unconstitutional. quashed by 4:1 majority. </li></ul><ul><li>Indira Gandhi Govt responded with 8 point formula and then 5 point formula to reserve posts for domiciles in Telangana. </li></ul><ul><li>Justice by SC (five JJ) upheld the validity of safeguards to Telangana by GoMs 36, totally agreeing with dissent of one judge in AP HC (Madhav Reddy, only one belonging to Telangana) 1973 SC 827 </li></ul>
  20. 20. Justice by SC , denied by Andhra <ul><li>Not to allow the benefit of this judgment, Andhras agitated for separate Andhra , which led to removal of safeguards. </li></ul><ul><li>Constitution is amended to dilute the safeguards, Art. 371 was altered and 371D is added </li></ul>
  21. 21. 6. Ridiculous Regional Committees Article 371 <ul><li>Art. 371 has provided for the constitution of the Telangana Regional Committee. The Constitution (Seventh Amendment) Act, 1956, substituted new 371 for the old. </li></ul><ul><li>(i) Not withstanding any thing in this Constitution , the President may by order made with respect to the state of Andhra Pradesh provide for the constitution and functions of regional committees of the Legislative Assembly of State, for the modifications to be made in the rules of business of the Government and in the rules of procedure of the Legislative Assembly of the State and for any special responsibility of the Governor in order to secure the proper functioning of the regional committees. (This clause is omitted by 32 nd Amendment 1973 wef 1.7.1974) </li></ul><ul><li>Before removed, Andhra Rulers breached the mandate. Neither constituted Regional Committees nor gave powers </li></ul>
  22. 22. 371D, Why? <ul><li>Pursuant to Six Point Formula agreed upon by various political leaders of the State, by Constitution 32nd Amendment Act, the Parliament introduced Article 371D for the State of Andhra Pradesh with the object to ensure equitable opportunities in the matter of Public Employment for persons coming from various parts of the State. </li></ul>
  23. 23. Employment Order 1975 <ul><li>President issued the order known as Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Organisation of Local Cadres and Regulation of Direct Recruitment), Order 1975, Para 3 provides for organisation of Local Cadres. </li></ul>
  24. 24. 7. 371D: Safeguards for Telangana Reduced & Diluted <ul><li>Special Provisions with respect to the State of Andhra Pradesh, inserted by the Constitution (Thirty-second Amendment) Act 1973 wef 1.7.1974. Gives powers to the President to make different provisions for various parts of state for people belonging to different parts of state in the matter of public employment and in the matter of education. </li></ul><ul><li>Telangana special provisions are removed and residence based reservations are made for different regions. Regional Committee for T is removed. Safeguards available for Telangana gained by 1969 agitation were removed by counter agitation by Andhras . </li></ul>
  25. 25. 8. President’s order GO 674 1975 <ul><li>Constitution was amended in 1973 changing 371-D pertaining to public employment in AP, authorizing the President to make special provisions . </li></ul><ul><li>President issued order with GO Ms No 674 on 18-10-1975 outlining the modalities for the implementation of 6 point formula . </li></ul>Dr. Madabhushi Sridhar
  26. 26. 9. Go Ms 675 <ul><li>AP Public Employment Order made Presidential Order not applicable to the posts above the rank of LDC in Government offices with state-wide jurisdiction such as secretariat etc. </li></ul><ul><li>In Andhra and Rayalaseema zones (I to IV) the quota for non-locals were filled by locals of that region. (violations in practice) </li></ul>Dr. Madabhushi Sridhar
  27. 27. 10. Violation of Presidential order <ul><li>AP Govt invented a new zone “free zone” designating as Zone VII where non-locals could be appointed. Not in tune with 6 points formula </li></ul><ul><li>In respect of the posts above LDC the ‘principle of fair share ” proportionate to the region wise population has to be followed. But not followed. </li></ul>Dr. Madabhushi Sridhar
  28. 28. Principle of Fair share <ul><li>According to the statement of TNGOs to the Officers Committee in 1983-84, around 58 thousand non-locals were appointed in posts reserved for local people. </li></ul><ul><li>NTR Govt. appointed an enquiry committee to study violations of 6points, with Jaya Bharath Reddy, Kamalnadhan, Umapathi. </li></ul>Dr. Madabhushi Sridhar
  29. 29. 11. GO Ms 610 <ul><li>The committee appointed by NTR pointed out lapses and departures from six point formula and suggested rectification. </li></ul><ul><li>The Govt. issued GO Ms No 610 on 30.12.1985. It ordered repatriation of employees from different regions to their own, action against bogus registrations in employment exchanges. </li></ul>Dr. Madabhushi Sridhar
  30. 30. 12. Amendment to Presidential Order also violated <ul><li>In 2000 the Presidential Order was amended by an order of Ministry of Home Affairs. </li></ul><ul><li>These amendment were given effect to with retrospective effect from 1.1. 1994, legitimizing all lapses in direct recruitment and allocation. This is impact of lobbying of Andhra to pre-empt any litigation. </li></ul><ul><li>Mr Girglani was appointed to reexamine the lapses in implementation of 610 GO </li></ul>Dr. Madabhushi Sridhar
  31. 31. Hyderabad is not Free Zone! <ul><li>Andhra Pradesh HC Full Bench (S.B. Sinha, C.J., S.R. Nayak and Goda Raghuram, JJ.) in G Anantha Reddy v APAT, MANU/AP/0734/2001, said: no separate cadre has been organized for the City of Hyderabad within the meaning of paragraph 3(6) of the Presidential Order. </li></ul><ul><li>Nuti Rammohanrao argued same </li></ul>
  32. 32. Full Bench AP HC <ul><li>They (Inspectors of police) do not fall within the provisions of para 14 of the Presidential Order. The transfers from and to the establishments and units of Hyderabad City Police therefore fall within the parameters of para 5(2)(c) to (d). A person once allotted to one zone and attached to his post must be said to be belonging to the same zone and he has no right to come to any other cadre, which is not organized one. </li></ul><ul><li>Conclusion (c) No recruitment to the post of a police officer as defined in Section 3(b) of Hyderabad City Police Act 1348 Fasli has been made and there is thus factually no incumbent of the post of police officer under para 14(f) of the Presidential Order. </li></ul>
  33. 33. 371D <ul><li>Clause (10) of Article 371-D: provides that the provisions of the Article and of any order made by the president thereunder shall have effect notwithstanding anything in any other provision of the Constitution or any other law for the time being in force. Therefore, the Presidential Order prevails over any other law existing or made in future. </li></ul>
  34. 34. Presidential order prevails <ul><li>Presidential Order prevails over any provision of the Constitution or any other law for the time being in force. In this Constitutional position, while the provisions of the Act 1985 are plenary within that sphere would nevertheless require to be construed in harmony with the provisions of the Presidential Order. The liability of a member of the police force to be transferred to any part of the State and the concomitant power of the State Government to so effect a transfer is thus subject to the limitations enjoined in the Presidential Order. (Transfer is challenged) </li></ul>
  35. 35. Grave Injustice by Supreme Court <ul><li>SC gives primacy to Hyderabad Police Act over and above the Presidential Order , which was issued after two agitations of the people. </li></ul><ul><li>When validity of treating Hyderabad is challenged, SC validated because it is treated as Free Zone, saying “in capital all eligible officers should get opportunity”. </li></ul><ul><li>SC judged this against the constitutional provision under 371D. </li></ul>
  36. 36. SC visualize a separate zone <ul><li>We, however, visualize that the State as a whole may consist of five or six divisions, the twin cities including the cantonment being constituted into a separate division. -GS Singhwi, J </li></ul><ul><li>What is the basis for it? </li></ul>
  37. 37. Contradictory stand of state <ul><li>State Government and Commissioner of Police presented consistent stand that Hyderabad City Police has been treated as free zone and the vacancies in City Police are notified separately. </li></ul><ul><li>At the end state changed the stand and said there was no free zone. “ Contrary stand taken by the State afterwards is inexplicable and is liable to be discarded”, said SC. </li></ul>
  38. 38. Dubious role of state in SC <ul><li>State argued : Exclusion clause contained in paragraph 14(f) could operate only if a separate cadre had been carved out for Hyderabad City and submitted that in the absence of any recruitment having been made for Hyderabad City Police, the Full Bench rightly treated the Inspectors of Police working in Hyderabad City Police establishment as belonging to Zone VI in the zonal cadre. (SC observed this as strange change of stand by state) </li></ul>
  39. 39. Held <ul><li>SC held: ….for the sake of convenience , was described as Zone VII or free zone” (in the advertisements, 1985, 1991,1994) and because appointments were made by commissioner of police). </li></ul><ul><li>SC judgment is based on advertisements, and support of state in its counters, though it was changed later. </li></ul><ul><li>Who represented state in SC served the interests of Andhra, and court ignored the spirit behind safeguards and validated wrongful practice. </li></ul>
  40. 40. Socio-economic backdrop ignored <ul><li>The Supreme Court (Kami Reddy v. State of A.P. AIR1988SC1626 )observed that reasonableness or otherwise of the restrictions imposed by the Regulation has to be tested with reference to socio-economic landscape in the backdrop of which the Regulation was made. </li></ul><ul><li>Supreme Court totally ignored it in Hyderabad case . </li></ul>
  41. 41. SABOTAGE BY CHIEF MINISTER <ul><li>Telangana </li></ul>
  42. 42. Rajsekhar Reddy’s sabotage <ul><li>Besides blocking the Union’s promise to form Telangana, Chief Minister Rajsekhar Reddy deliberately chose non-state Advocate to represent State, who did not bring relevant issues before SC to give a wrong judgment on Hyderabad free zone </li></ul><ul><li>Without proper study of the problem Supreme Court gave baseless judgment. </li></ul><ul><li>Strong Andhra lobbyists & strategic CM misled SC to do injustice to Telangana </li></ul>
  43. 43. Who caused Political vacuum? <ul><li>1. Clever Andhra leaders , both Congress and TDP diverted resources, </li></ul><ul><li>2. Telangana ministers of those parties remained mute spectators , they lacked in commitment </li></ul><ul><li>3. Corrupt Bureaucracy who also support corrupt Andhra political leaders </li></ul><ul><li>4. Telangana bureaucrats – less in number and very few with commitment, some saleable, or silent suffering minority in every office. </li></ul>
  44. 44. … Rivers hijacked from Telangana <ul><li>Constitution provided reddress to Interstate river water disputes </li></ul><ul><li>But, No mechanism for intra-state river water allocation, or resolution, left totally to executive discretion which favoured Andhra at cost of Telangana for decades. </li></ul><ul><li>No solution for deprivation of Telangana by diversion of rivers, within AP under the Constitution. </li></ul>
  45. 45. WHY SHOULD PEOPLE SUFFER? <ul><li>Telangana </li></ul>
  46. 46. Why people should suffer? <ul><li>Ultimately people are victimized by both Andhra and Telangana leaders. </li></ul><ul><li>Why should they suffer because of these politicians? </li></ul><ul><li>Why not their identity as distinct state as before 1956 is restored ? </li></ul><ul><li>It is not going to be a small state, a fairly big state, viable and resourceful . </li></ul>
  47. 47. … Hyderabad for who? <ul><li>Hyderabad as a capital is not viable for many distant districts in AP. </li></ul><ul><li>Concentration of so called development in Hyderabad not benefitted Telangana, even in generating employment for them. </li></ul><ul><li>Hyderabad alone should not be center of development among 23 districts </li></ul><ul><li>There should be decentralization, by creating another capital separately </li></ul>
  48. 48. … Telangana insecure in capital <ul><li>Real minority in Hyderabad is Telangana people. Old city drives Hindus out, new city is dominated by Andhras. Andhra houses in Hyderabad prohibited Telangana tenants, now in this atmosphere. </li></ul><ul><li>Telangana is insecure in Andhra dominated Hyderabad. </li></ul>
  49. 49. … Asking for Autonomy <ul><li>Demand for self rule and autonomy is genuine and democratic. </li></ul><ul><li>Autonomous council is better answer to separatist demands, eg. J & K and North-east </li></ul><ul><li>Decentralization is federal character, and essential for a vast country like India. </li></ul>
  50. 50. IF TELANGANA FORMED…. <ul><li>Telangana </li></ul>
  51. 51. If Telangana is formed <ul><li>Telugu people tolerate each other , and be friends, with animosities disappearing </li></ul><ul><li>All resources of ten districts will be used within the ten districts </li></ul><ul><li>Both Andhra and Telangana states will be rich and there is a wide scope for harmony and brotherhood among separated brothers </li></ul><ul><li>Water can be objectively divided and scientifically used to irrigate both states. </li></ul>
  52. 52. Water for Telangana <ul><li>Telangana needs water for drinking and irrigation which was denied so far </li></ul><ul><li>Water disputes are common and need to be tackled either between AP and other states or Andhra, Telangana and other states . </li></ul><ul><li>When two hostile countries can share water of international rivers, it is not impossible for two Telugu states to share interstate rivers. </li></ul>
  53. 53. Decongestion <ul><li>Will help decongestion of Hyderabad and decentralization of power </li></ul><ul><li>Help decentralization of urbanization and many destinations for migration </li></ul><ul><li>Creating more resource centers and development centers in 23 districts. </li></ul><ul><li>Faith in Parliamentary democracy, credibility for promise in parliament will increase. </li></ul>
  54. 54. Peaceful <ul><li>Problems of extremism and communalism can be effectively tackled </li></ul><ul><li>Development is the major answer to naxalism, and lack of it is reason. </li></ul><ul><li>Communalism is sponsored by treacherous politicians , for instance, to unseat a congress CM old city was set to flames of riots in 1979 and recently in 2010 to bring down present CM. </li></ul>
  55. 55. Baseless apprehensions <ul><li>To say that Maoists gain strength in Telangana is baseless, because it is common to big or small, combined or separated state. </li></ul><ul><li>To say Islamic fundamentalism in old city will increase is meaningless because pampering policies are the reasons for it. It depends on objective rule of parties and not the size of the state. </li></ul>
  56. 56. IF TELANGANA NOT FORMED… <ul><li>Telangana </li></ul>
  57. 57. If Telangana is not formed <ul><li>As each and every party, group and profession is vertically divided and animosities deepened, mutual distrust will grow and might lead to several unnatural disturbances . </li></ul><ul><li>It will caste doubts on democratic and non-violent process and strengthen non-democratic, violent and extremist forces. </li></ul><ul><li>Suppressing a demand for self rule and autonomy will lead to separatist tendencies and create atmosphere conducive for balconization. </li></ul>
  58. 58. STRENGTHEN INDIA <ul><li>Give Telangana and </li></ul>
  59. 59. Will Strengthen India <ul><li>Denial of autonomy is the root cause of separation. </li></ul><ul><li>Federalism believes in distribution of sovereignty </li></ul><ul><li>Experience shows solution for problems in North-East, Jammu & Kashmir lie only in granting more autonomy and decentralization </li></ul><ul><li>By decentralization and devolution of more powers to viable groups, separatism can be answered. </li></ul><ul><li>Giving Telangana strengthens integrity of India. </li></ul>
  60. 60. No alternative <ul><li>Agreements, Constitutional safeguards, Justice by Supreme Court, Political alliances with manifesto commitment to Telangana….all failed. </li></ul><ul><li>Even after all the parties (except CPM) agreed, Andhras in all parties denied Telangana what is genuine, legitimate, democratic and constitutional demand. </li></ul><ul><li>Union conceded, Andhras stopped… </li></ul>
  61. 61. … hence… <ul><li>Telangana </li></ul><ul><li>Shouldn’t be forced </li></ul><ul><li>to live with </li></ul><ul><li>Andhra </li></ul>