Today is a day that will go down in infamy for centuries to come.

Telugu country was painstakingly put together piece by piece by the Kakatiyas in the past. However, Kakatiya King Prataparudra lost the Telugu Empire to Delhi. Unable to bear the burden of losing the country that was entrusted to him by his ancestors; he took his life on the banks of river Narmada.

Andhra Pradesh state was achieved after nearly a half century long struggle. Our elders learned about the glory of our ancestors. They were inspired by the accomplishments of the Telugu kingdoms of Satavahana, Kakatiya, and Vijayanagara. They fought to bring all Telugu territories under one state, to re-awaken the Telugu spirit. Alas, today all those efforts have gone futile. We have to carry the burden of our failure for a long time to come. Telugu people’s dream of living together, as of today stands shattered.

June2nd 2014 will be remembered as a day when Telugus were separated by the vested interests in Delhi that wanted to weaken us.

It is important that history records all those that have letdown the cause of Telugu unity. While some failed in their constitutional duties others sold us off for power. While some traded us for financial gains many just didn’t stand up for the fear of being attacked. But the most damaging forces are those that divided us to strengthen Delhi’s grip over India. These forces if let alone, will destroy India in the years to come.

Here is my personal list of those that have let Telugus down in our time of need. We should never forget, nor forgive these people and institutions:

1. Sonia Gandhi (The woman singularly responsible for the destruction of Telugu unity)
2. Supreme Court of India (Failed to deliver justice in the time of our need)
3. Pranab Mukherjee (A puppet President, who was more of a party agent and less of a constitutional head)
4. Meira Kumar (Put the nation to shame by cutting off video broadcast and acted as a ruling party agent all through the farce of division)
5. Kavuri Samba Siva Rao (He ranks higher than KCR in the list. A leader of the integrationist cause, who sold fellow Telugus off for a ministry. A traitor of the worst kind)
6. Daggubati Purandeswari (Daughter of late NTR, brought disgrace to Telugus as a minister, instead of fighting she accepted division. She too ranks above KCR for being a traitor to the cause)
7. K. Chandrashekhar Rao (The man who started the separatist movement after losing his ministry. Though he started the movement, the division became a reality because of the schemes of the two national parties. In the end he became a pawn used by our enemies to divide us)
8. N. Chandrababu Naidu (Leader of the party that stood for Telugu pride. He is a power monger for whom saving his party was a higher priority than saving the state)
9. Sushma Swaraj (Leader of BJP, who joined hands with separatists)
10. P. Chidambaram (A man who almost seemed to have held grudge against Telugus for their role in demanding a separate province from Madras presidency. He played the Shakuni role in the division)
11. Chiranjeevi (Another traitor and a consummate bum. His shallowness was evident during the course of agitation)
12. Panabaka Lakshmi (A traitor who openly said she is more loyal to Sonia than to the people of her state)
13. Killi Kruparani (A sold-off traitor)
14. J.D. Seelam (A sold-off traitor)
15. Pallam Raju (A sold-off traitor)
16. Botsa Satyanarayana(State Congress President whose loyalties remained questionable)
17. Venkaiah Naidu (A hard-core separatist, when the division bill came to Rajyasabha, he put up an act that deserved an Oscar)
18. Digvijay Singh (Part of Delhi’s evil ruling coterie that divided us)
19. Sushil Kumar Shinde (Part of Delhi’s evil ruling coterie that divided us)
20. Prof. Kodandaram (An incapable leader but was put in place by Maoists. He did his bit in promoting division)
21. K. Taraka Ramarao (part of KCR clan)
22. Harish Rao (part of KCR clan)
23. Kavitha (part of KCR clan)
24. Y.S. Jagan (A corrupt and an opportunist politician who first was indifferent to division, then for equal justice, then became an integrationist)
25. Jayaprakash Narayan (An intellectual by education, but a leader lacking vision or conviction. He saw evil of separatism, but lacked the courage to call a spade a spade)
26. Manmohan Singh (Probably the worse Prime Minister in India’s history, proved once again that he was a mere puppet)
27. Kishore Chandra Deo
28. Jaipal Reddy
29. Jairam Ramesh (Let down the region that sent him to Rajyasabha)
30. CPI Narayana (Party of Visalandhra, yet gave up its ideals for a few seats)
31. Dokka Manikya Varaprasad
32. Rosaiah
33. E.S.L. Narasimhan (Governor who gave an impression that he is against the division, but showed his true colors at the right time)
34. Kishan Reddy (In private he tells integrationists that he is an integrationist, yet stood for division)
35. Yerrabelli Dayakar Rao (Played a key role in coercing TDP to support division)
36. Vasantha Nageswar Rao (Separatist from Kosta that strengthened the voices of separatists)
37. Madhu Yashki
38. Gulam Nabi Azad 

Those who have known me for a while are well aware of my cynicism for democracy and collectivism. I hold the government to be an immoral system, whose role should be shrunk as much as we can. I despise the current Democratic form of government that robs the producers, and distributes the loot to those that vote for the rulers. I did not want to vote in this election as I refused to be a party to a system that is immoral and implicitly acquiesce to a constitution that I don’t agree with. I told myself that if I ever vote, it would be only to a libertarian party that acknowledges the immorality of taxation and regulation OR at least to a libertarian aligned party that agrees to put a leash on taxation and work towards deregulation and decentralization.

Over the last few years, my friends and I waged a tireless battle to keep the state united. We have put aside our caste, religion, region, and party loyalties for this crusade. We went after every political party that has let down the cause of Telugu unity including TRS, TDP, YSRCP, Congress, and BJP.

Today a dear friend of mine requested me to vote for TDP/BJP combine. He stood by me and the organization during the most difficult times. He offered unconditional support to our efforts. He also happens to be a libertarian. He is probably one of the nicest human beings that I have come across in my life.

I told my friend that I decided not to vote for philosophical reasons and because all the political parties have let down the cause of Telugu unity. He reasoned that TDP/BJP combine is the lesser of the evil for libertarians and even for integrationists. I disagreed with him. However, I have immense respect and admiration for my friend and I could not turn his request down. I told him that I have just finished a tour campaign against the two national parties- Congress and BJP and I couldn’t possibly vote for BJP. So, the compromise we reached was to vote for TDP for the Assembly and NOTA for the parliament.

With a heavy heart, during the last hour of polling, I rushed and voted for TDP for the Jubilee Hills Assembly constituency and NOTA for the parliament constituency.

After walking out I realized I made a mistake. If I was not in such a rush to vote, and had structured my thought process a bit more, I would have voted for Jai Samaikyandhra Party for the parliament. Though I was quite unhappy with Kiran Kumar Reddy for delaying his fight against the Union Government, he fought hard during the climactic phase of the division. Since I voted for TDP for the Assembly, it was only fair to vote for his parliament candidate- but I goofed up badly. My sincere apologies to Kiran Kumar Reddy, who has been supportive to our organization.

I am duty bound to apologize to all those friends who trusted me to stay apolitical, for letting them down. Today I swore never again to vote (not even NOTA)- unless there is a libertarian party or a libertarian aligned party in the fray.

ప్రజా పిలుపు!

కాంగ్రెస్, భా.జ.పా లకు రాజకీయ పుట్టగతులు లేకుండా చెయ్యండి

• విశాలాంధ్ర మహాసభ గత కొన్ని సంవత్సరాలుగా తెలుగు జాతి ఐక్యత, రాష్ట్ర సమగ్రత పరిరక్షణల కొరకు ఎన్నో విపరీత, ప్రతికూల పరిస్థితులను ఎదుర్కొంటూ విభజనకు వ్యతిరేకంగా ఉద్యమం నిర్వహించింది.
• విభజనవాదుల ప్రచారాల్ని నిరాధారాలుగా నిరూపిస్తూ పలు మీడియా సమావేశాలు, నిజానిజాలప్రదర్శనలు, కరపత్రాల-పుస్తకాల ప్రచురణలు, హైదరాబాద్ ఢిల్లీ పలు ఇతర ముఖ్య నగరాలలో నిర్వహించాం. సమైక్యతా ఉద్యమంలో మా వంతు పాత్ర పోషించాము.
• కాంగ్రెస్ వర్కింగ్ కమిటీ విభజనకు అనుకూలంగా జూలై 30, 2013న నిర్ణయం తీసుకున్న వెంటనే రాష్ట్ర వ్యాప్త సమైక్యతా యాత్ర నిర్వహించాము.
• వేలాది మంది కార్యకర్తలతో బస్సులలో నాలుగు రాష్ట్రాల మీదుగా పయనించి ఢిల్లీ ముట్టడి కార్యక్రమంలో భాగంగా రెండు జాతీయ పార్టీల కార్యాలయాల ముందు భారీ నిరసనలు చేపట్టాం.
• మా నిర్విరామ ప్రయత్నాలు, ఐక్యంగా ఉండాలన్న రాష్ట్ర ప్రజల సంకల్పం నెరవేరక పోవటానికి ఏకైక కారణం రెండు ముఖ్య జాతీయ పార్టీలయిన కాంగ్రెస్, భా.జ.పా., కుమ్మక్కు కావటం. తమ రాజకీయ ప్రయోజనాల కోసం ఈ రెండు పార్టీలు చేసిన ఈ కుట్ర తెలుగు ప్రజల మనస్సులను శాశ్వతంగా గాయపరిచింది. పార్లమెంట్ లో విభజన బిల్లు ఆమోదం పొందిన తీరు ప్రపంచవ్యాప్తంగా ఉన్న తెలుగు ప్రజలందరినీ తీవ్రమయిన ఆవేదనకు, అవమానానికి గురిచేసింది. తమ జాతి విచ్చిత్తికి కారకులందరిపైనా ప్రతీకార భావనలను రగిల్చింది.
• జాతీయ పార్టీలైన కాంగ్రెస్, భా.జ.పా.లకు తెలుగు గడ్డ మీద రాజకీయ పుట్టగతులు లేకుండా చెయ్యాలి. ఈ పార్టీలనుంచి పోటీకి నిలబడిన అభ్యర్థులకు డిపాజిట్ దక్కకుండా చూసే భాద్యత తెలుగు ప్రజలందరిది.
• విశాలాంధ్ర మహాసభ రాష్ట్ర విభజన నిర్ణయాన్ని నిరసిస్తోంది. మన రాష్ట్ర విభజనకు అవలంభించిన విధానం ఒక దుష్ట సాంప్రదాయానికి నాంది పలికింది. ఇటువంటి నియంతృత్వ అప్రజాస్వామిక తీరు ఇప్పటికయినా అరికట్టకపోతే అది దేశ విచ్చిత్తికి దారి తీస్తుంది.
• మన రాష్ట్ర విభజన జాతీయ పార్టీల కుట్రలో ఒక చెడు ఆరంభం మాత్రమే. రాజధాని, నీళ్ళు , నిధుల పంపకాల విషయాలలో తెలుగు ప్రజల మధ్యన విద్వేషాలు విభేదాలు సృష్టించి తెలుగు జాతిని మరింత బలహీన పరచటానికి జాతీయ పార్టీలు మరిన్ని కుతంత్రాలు పన్నటం తధ్యం. కాబట్టి తెలుగు ప్రజలందరూ అప్రమత్తంగా ఉండాలి.
• తెలుగు జాతి ప్రస్తుత దుస్థితికి కారణం కేంద్ర ప్రభుత్వానికి కట్టబెట్టబడిన అపరిమిత అధికారం అని గ్రహించి రాష్ట్ర పరిపాలనలో కేంద్ర ప్రభుత్వ భూమికను నియంత్రించాలి. కేంద్ర ప్రభుత్వం దేశ భద్రత, విదేశీ వ్యవహారాల వంటి మౌలిక పరిపాలనా అంశాలకే పరిమితం కావాలి. కాబట్టి, తెలుగు ప్రజలు స్వయం ప్రతిపత్తికై పోరాడాలి. మన పోరాటం ఇతర భాషా జాతులకు స్ఫూర్తి కావాలి.

Crores of Telugu people feel alienated, insulted, and unwanted by the Indian Union.  Actions of the Indian Government since July 30, 2013, when UPA made the decision to divide the Andhra Pradesh State, have deeply hurt the feelings of many. Union Government’s unfair, undemocratic, dictatorial, and unconstitutional methods have caused despair to millions of Telugu people around the globe.

Our sense of alienation is borne out of deeply troubling nature of Union Government’s assault on the unity of Telugu people. In order to gain a few MP seats in the upcoming elections, Union Government has adopted the divide-and-rule policy of the British era. Following are the reasons for our sense of deprivation:

• The Andhra Pradesh Reoganisation Bill, 2013 states that it will meet the long standing demand for the creation of a separate State of Telangana. While there are many long pending demands for state divisions such as Uttar Pradesh, Vidarbha, Gorkhaland, and Bodoland, why was Andhra Pradesh singled out for division? In fact, Uttar Pradesh State Assembly has even passed a resolution in favour of division, yet UP division was shelved, while Andhra Pradesh division is put on a fast track.
• When far stronger demands for division of Andhra Pradesh came up in the past, both Pandit Nehru and Indira Gandhi stood firmly for linguistic states in the larger interests of the nation. What compelled the Indian Government to change its mind this time? We deserve an explanation that goes beyond politics of votes and seats.
• Separatists for years have been making allegations of under development, discrimination and violation of agreements. Union Government appointed Srikrishna Committee report proved the separatist allegations to be false. The committee also said that not dividing the State is the most desirable solution. Why has this report’s findings and recommendations been shelved?
• Antony Committee was appointed by the UPA to study the concerns related to the State division. Why did the Union Government not wait for Antony Committee report and instead rushed to form a Group of Ministers (GoM) to oversee the bill preparation? Is it not true that Antony Committee report highlighted several problems that will come from State division?
• All the new states that have been formed in the recent history were formed after the respective State Assemblies passed a resolution favouring the division. After repeated promises made by ministers Chidambaram and Shinde, why has the Union Government backtracked on the State Assembly resolution?
• GoM, which was formed to decide the fate of crores of Telugus, did not have a single Telugu person in it. The GoM couldn’t carve out time to visit the state that they are dividing. Adding insult to injury, GoM asked people to submit their views via email. Did the Union Government expect farmers, taxi drivers, masons, and daily wagers to send their views via email?
• Why has the Cabinet took up the crucial reorganization bill that decides the fate of crores of Telugu people as a table item not once but twice? When Telugu cabinet members asked for a day to read the couple of hundred pages bill, their request was turned down. Are Telugu people outcastes in this nation?
• Union Government’s own Intelligence Bureau Chief has warned that division of the state will strengthen Maoist and sectarian forces. Why has the Union Government disregarded this advice and put the future of Telugu people at peril?
• When the State Government asked President Pranab Mukherjee for a month long extension to discuss the bill in the Assembly, while extending the deadline by a mere week, President  wrote: “After considering the need for the expeditious introduction of the Bill in Parliament, I hereby allow a further period till the thirtieth day of January, 2014”. Did the President think that this will be the last time Indian Parliament is ever going to meet? Why does the bill need to be rushed to parliament without giving the State Assembly sufficient time to discuss? Didn’t the President abdicate his constitutional responsibility while trying to assist the ruling Congress party pass a bill quickly that helps them in the upcoming elections?
• In the history of independent India, no new state was formed without the consent of State Assembly. Why did the state division process move at bullet speed, when Andhra Pradesh Assembly rejected the reorganization bill? 
• All three recent states reorganization bills were sent to Loksabha first. Why has the President first sent the reorganization bill to Rajyasabha? Why has Pranab Mukherjee failed to see the obvious legal flaw that Vice President Hamid Ansari saw right away? Hasn’t Pranab Mukherjee put the Congress Party interests ahead of his sacred Constitutional duties?
• For months Speaker Meira Kumar refused to introduce the no-confidence motion under the pretext that the house was not in order. However, she went ahead with the introduction of Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Bill, while hundred MPs were engaged in hand-to-hand combat in the Loksabha well. Isn’t it clear that the speaker abdicated her constitutional obligation and engaged in partisan politics of helping the Congress party?
• What can be more outrageous when the ruling Congress party employs MPs from other states to physically assault Telugu representatives right in the parliament? Is this not a declaration of war on Telugu people?
• Two national parties BJP, and Congress colluded and passed a bill that decided the fate of crores of people in less than half an hour in Loksabha. Conveniently the live broadcast of the proceedings ran into a technical glitch exactly as the voting began. Not to mention, speaker’s rent dues for her Delhi house to the tune of crores of rupees were waived by the ruling party. In addition, she has been rewarded with a second bungalow in Delhi rent-free for 25 years. Aren't these million dollar perks suspicious?
• In Rajyasabha, the main opposition party BJP vociferously claimed that the bill was unconstitutional and yet supported its passing.

Union Government broke every convention and violated the spirit of the constitution as it pushed the Andhra Pradesh State Reorganisation bill through the parliament.

The two national parties in India, Congress and BJP, are determined to destroy the identity of Indian tribes. Unless Indians don’t wake up to this stark reality, there will not be an India left. If India has to survive, we must bring Gandhi’s Gram Swaraj back. We must de-regulate, de-centralize and make states independent.  We must get rid of the system of Governorships, get rid of UPSC- no more IAS, IPS interfering in state affairs, Railroads should be owned by states, national airline must be scrapped, no more central security forces to maintain law and order in the states, income taxes should be collected by state governments and not by the Union Govt., we should not require Union government permission for establishing universities, medical and engineering colleges, we should manage our airports and seaports. Central government should be confined to basic functions such as national defence and foreign affairs. If we do not deregulate and decentralize, our nation is bound to disintegrate. The more power we give to the Union Government the more destructive their actions will be.

Telugu people must realize that we are victims of a wicked game played by those in Delhi. Union Government has instigated us against each other for their selfish motives. Let us try to resolve the state division disputes as amicably as possible. As the two new states come into existence, we should not repeat the mistakes of the past. Diminish the powers of Chief Ministers. Empower the Panchayat Raj system, and allow the districts to administer themselves.

I do anticipate that the feeling of alienation among regions will take several years to heal. But, I am confident that there will be a day when we will reunite and prosper together.

Regards,

Nalamotu Chakravarthy

Dear Friends,

I congratulate the Telangana Rashtra Samiti (TRS) and its leader K. Chandrashekhar Rao for realizing the dream for which he and his party has been fighting for over a decade. TRS and its leaders have fought a long drawn battle and today is the culmination of their diligent efforts.

I urge integrationists to exercise restraint during this period and accept the defeat gracefully. Today, both the national parties- BJP and Congress have supported the division bill in the parliament. We integrationists have lost the moral right to question the division that is now underway.

I also see many that are seething with anger against the Telangana leaders and people. I urge you to realize that the current state of affairs is a result of your own leaders who have claimed to be integrationists. Your “integrationist” leaders have sold the cause of unity for positions of power.

I unconditionally accept that I have failed in my fight to keep the state united. My fight will go on. Telugu unity will remain my goal and my dream till my last breath. I hope there will be a day, several years from now, when there will be a re-awakening of Telugus and we all reunite.

Regards,

Nalamotu Chakravarthy

ఆంధ్ర ప్రదేశ్ అసెంబ్లీకి ముసాయిదా బిల్లు వచ్చిన సందర్భంగా విశాలాంధ్ర మహాసభ రాష్ట్రపతిని పది ప్రశ్నలు అడుగుతోంది:

1)      రాష్ట్ర విభజన ప్రక్రియ రాజకీయావసరాల కోసం దుర్వినియోగం కాకుండా భారత రాజ్యాంగం రాష్ట్రపతికి ప్రత్యేక హక్కులను కల్పించింది. మీరు ఈ హక్కులను సద్వినియోగిస్తారా?

2)      రాజ్యాంగంలోని ఆర్టికల్ 3 అత్యవసర పరిస్థితుల్లో మాత్రమే వినియోగించబడుతుంది అని డా. అంభేద్కర్ చెప్పారు. ఆదరా బాదరాగా ముందుకు వెళ్తున్న విభజన ప్రక్రియకున్న అత్యవసర పరిస్థితులు ఏంటి?

3)      వేర్పాటువాదుల ఆరోపణలు అసత్యం అని శ్రీకృష్ణ కమిటీ నిరూపించింది. అయినప్పటికీ, ఎలాంటి సహేతుక కారణాలు చూపించకుండా రాష్ట్రాన్ని విభజించటానికి కేంద్ర ప్రభుత్వం పూనుకోవటం, తెలుగు ప్రజలకు భారత దేశంపై వ్యతిరేక భావాలు కలిగించే విధంగా లేదా?

4)      ఆంధ్ర ప్రదేశ్ పార్లమెంట్ సభ్యులు అవిశ్వాస తీర్మానం పెడితే లోక్ సభ స్పీకర్ కుంటి సాకులతో చర్చ జరగనివ్వలేదు. ఈ అప్రజాస్వామిక పధతులు రాష్ట్ర అసెంబ్లీలకు తప్పుడు సంకేతాలు పంపట్లేదా?

5)      మాతృ రాష్ట్రం సమ్మతి లేకుండా రాష్ట్రాల విభజన చెయ్యకూడదన్న సర్కారియా కమిషన్ సిఫారసుతో మీరు ఏకీభవిస్తారా?

6)      ఈ మధ్యలో జరిగిన అన్ని రాష్ట్రాల విభజనలలో అసెంబ్లీ తీర్మానం పెట్టటం జరిగింది. అత్యంత వివాదాస్పదమయిన ఆంధ్ర ప్రదేశ్ రాష్ట్ర విభజన విషయంలో సమాఖ్య స్పూర్తికి వ్యతిరేకంగా ఆ సాంప్రదాయాన్ని విస్మరించటం ఎంత వరకు సబబు?

7)      రెండు రాష్ట్రాలకు ఉమ్మడి రాజధాని రాజ్యాంగపరంగా ఏ విధంగా సాధ్యం?

8)      హైదరాబాద్ నగర శాంతి భద్రతలపై గవర్నర్ కు ఇచ్చిన ప్రత్యేక హక్కులు రాజ్యాంగ విరుద్ధం కాదా?

9)      371 D&E అధికరణాలకు రాజ్యాంగ సవరణ తప్పనిసరి అని అటార్నీజనరల్ హెచ్చరించినప్పటికీ, కేంద్ర ప్రభుత్వం అవసరం లేదు అని పట్టుబట్టటాన్ని మీరు సమర్థిస్తున్నారా?

10)  విభజన జరిగితే ఆంధ్ర ప్రదేశ్ రాష్ట్రం తెలంగాణా రాష్ట్రానికి విద్యుత్తు అమ్మాలని నిర్బందించడం రాజ్యాంగ వ్యతిరేకం కాదా?

The October 3 decision of the Union Government to divide Andhra Pradesh and the subsequent developments raise important questions about federalism in India and the future of the nation.  Several states have been formed after 1950, but this is the first occasion when a major state is sought to be divided without the consent of the state legislature, and without a negotiated settlement among the stake-holders and various regions, and in the face of fierce opposition from vast sections of the public.

All major federal democracies have incorporated in their Constitutions the provision that a state cannot be divided or merged with another state without its prior consent.  This is the essence of federalism.  The United States, Australia, Germany, Canada and Switzerland follow this model.  Similarly Brazil, Argentina and Mexico follow the same pattern.  Even a unitary country like Britain, while dealing with regional assemblies of Wales and Scotland, follows such a federal principle in practice.

Indian Constitution-makers gave considerable thought to the issue of formation of new states and reorganization of states while drafting the Constitution.   Article 3 of the draft constitution prepared by Constitutional Advisor (Sir B N Rau) in Oct 1947 reads as follows:

“The Federal Parliament may, with the previous consent of the Legislature of every Province and the Legislature of every India State whose boundaries are affected thereby, by Act-

1. create a new unit;
2. increase the area of any unit;
3. diminish the area of any unit;
4. alter the boundaries of any unit;
5. alter the name of any unit;

and may with the like consent make such incidental and consequential provisions by such Act as it may deem necessary or proper.

2) When any such Act creates a new unit, then as from the date of commencement of the Act that unit shall be deemed to be included in the First Schedule to this Constitution, and when provision is made by any such Act for the alteration of the area or the boundaries or the name of any unit, then as from the date of commencement of the Act any reference in that schedule to that unit shall be construed as a reference to the unit as so altered.”

Later, The Drafting Committee revised it with the following proviso:

“Provided that no Bill for the purpose shall be introduced in either House of Parliament except on the recommendation of the President and unless –  

1. Where the proposal contained in the Bill affects the boundaries or name of any state or States for the time being specified in Part-I of the First Schedule, the views of the Legislature of the State, or as the case may be, of each of the States, both with respect to the proposal to introduce the Bill and with respect to the provisions thereof have been as ascertained by the President; and

2. Where such proposal affects the boundaries or name of any State or States for the time being specified in Part-III of the First Schedule, the previous consent of the State, or as the case may be, of each of the States to the proposal has been obtained.”

However, the Drafting Committee and Constituent Assembly were keenly aware of the circumstances prevailing in the country at that time.  India witnessed partition of the country, accompanied by unprecedented violence and bloodshed, and the largest forced mass migration in history.  In addition, there were several kinds of States – Part A, B and C, and there was need to reorganize all the states and fully integrate the 552 princely states.  If the consent of every State or Unit was a pre-condition for altering boundary of a State, reorganization of Indian States could easily have been mired in disputes, and would have been a prolonged and excruciatingly difficult exercise, delaying and hampering the nation-building efforts.  Therefore they wanted to prevent Parliamentary paralysis while reorganizing the States.  Consequently, the final text of Article 3 as promulgated provided for the President’s recommendation and ascertaining of the views of the State(s) concerned.

Subsequently, in 1955, on the eve of linguistic reorganization of States, Article 3 has been amended (5^th Amendment) to provide for a timeframe for expression of the views of the legislature, with a provision for the President allowing a further period of time on request.  Clearly, this timeframe was incorporated to ensure that the impending States’ reorganization could be carried out smoothly without unreasonable delays.

Experience has shown that our nation-builders were wise in drafting the Constitution to suit our requirements.   More important, successive governments have been very mature and wise in applying Article 3 and in dealing with States.  While prior consent of the State was not necessary under the Constitution, in practice every State has been formed with prior consent, and in most cases after a detailed, impartial examination of the issues by an independent commission and based on its recommendations.  Only in the case of the Punjab, there was no legislature at the time of dividing the State in 1966, but a broad consensus among all stake-holders was available and there was no opposition to division of Punjab.  Also the division was carried out based on the settled linguistic principle, and a Parliamentary Committee examined the issue of boundaries of the new states and other related issues, and gave recommendations which were implemented in their entirety. 

So far, the Parliament and Governments have acted with restraint and wisdom in dealing with boundaries of States and formation of new States. They rejected the notion that anything could be done to alter the boundaries of States provided it is not expressly prohibited by the Constitution.  While prior consent of state legislature is not mandatory, in practice care has been taken to obtain the consent of legislature, or to act only on the express request of the State.  The 1956 reorganization of States was based on the fundamental principle of language, and there was broad national consensus on the issue. 

The States’ Reorganization Commission in its report (1955) in Para 107 noted wisely:

“Any measure of reorganization which is likely to create tensions and disharmony must weaken the sense of unity among the people of India and should not, therefore be countenanced”

The SRC further stated in Para 111 (iii) as follows:

“But while the building of contented units, strong enough to bear their share of the burden, is an important objective, it is no less necessary that the links between the units and the nation should be equally strong so that under the stress of regional loyalties, the Union does not fall apart”.

The Commission went on to caution in Para 112 as follows:

“It follows that, while internal adjustments at State level are to be desired, it is imperative to ensure that these do not lead to maladjustments at the inter-state and national level. From the point of view of national unity, therefore, reorganization has to aim at a two-fold objective:

1. Firm discouragement of disruptive sentiments such as provincialism or linguistic fanaticism; and
2. Consistent with national solidarity, provision of full scope for the unhampered growth of the genius of each group of people”

It is this maturity and wisdom that served us well over the past six decades. As the Sarkaria Commission noted in 1987 in paras 2.29.06 and 2.29.07:

“In all, during the last 37 years, 20 Acts have been enacted by Parliament under Articles 3 and 4 to bring changes in the areas, boundaries and names of States ……

“It is noteworthy that these legislations were passed either with the consent of the States affected, or on the recommendations of a Commission or Committee set up for the purpose…. Questions relating to readjustment of boundaries of some states still remain unsettled. The need for Articles 3 and 4 in the present form has not disappeared”.

Clearly, Articles 3 & 4 in their present form are enabling provisions empowering the Parliament to act in an exceptional situation when national interest warrants it, or to settle marginal boundary disputes between States when they are recalcitrant and all efforts to reconcile their differences and arrive at a negotiated settlement have failed. The framers of the Constitution had not intended to give Parliament arbitrary powers to redraw boundaries of States at will; nor did successive Parliaments and Governments act unilaterally or arbitrarily without genuine consent, broad consensus or negotiated settlement.

Even after 1987, in every case of new State formation, the prior consent of the Legislature of the affected State was obtained, and only then did the Parliament act. Even in respect of Pondicherry and Goa when it was a Union Territory, the wishes of the people and their representatives were respected, though neither consent of the Union Territory is needed, not is it necessary to ascertain the views of a legislature of the Union Territory. The broader principle of federalism and willing consent of the constituent units and their people has always been deemed to be necessary before a state is formed or a territory is merged, unless overwhelming national interest demands action by Parliament. The same procedure has been scrupulously observed while creating the new States of Jharkhand, Uttaranchal and Chattisgarh in 2000.

Dr Ambedkar stated in his reply to the debate on States’ rights in the Constituent Assembly as follows:

“The second charge is that the Centre has been given the power to override the States. This charge must be admitted. But before condemning the Constitution for containing such overriding powers, certain considerations must be borne in mind. The first is that these overriding powers do not form the normal feature of the Constitution. Their use and operation are expressly confined to emergencies only”.

It is precisely this spirit that informed the actions of Union Government and Parliament over the past six decades. Such admirable wisdom and restraint have been evidence in respect of formation of states on every occasion. There were certainly blemishes in application of Article 356 earlier. But over the past two decades Indian federalism has matured a great deal more. The Supreme Court verdict in Bommai Case (1994) made Article 356 more or less a “dead letter” as Ambedkar hoped. Though the Finance Commission’s recommendations are not binding on the Parliament and Government, the recommendations of every Finance Commission in respect of devolution of resources have been accepted and implemented fully over the past six decades. Since the report of the Tenth Finance Commission, there has been greater transparency in devolution, with most of the tax revenues of the Union being treated as the divisible pool, and a fixed proportion of it is shared with states, and this proportion is decided by the Finance Commission from time to time. With liberalization and expansion of economic freedom, States are now more in control of their economic future. With the decline in importance of new public sector investments and reduced political control of such investments, there is little scope for discrimination or favouritism in the Union’s dealings with States. As a result of all these developments, India is moral federal in nature today than ever before in our history as a Republic.

These developments do not mean that states can act as they please; nor does it mean that their territorial integrity is inviolable. Clearly, there is one nation and one citizenship, and territorial integrity of the nation is paramount. However, within that overarching framework, States too exercise limited sovereignty, and federal spirit informs the operation of our Constitution. The Constitution never intended to make India a unitary country with States functioning as municipalities, and their very survival as political entities dependent on the will and whim of the Union Government. Nor did the actual operation of our Constitution over the past 63 years suggest a de facto unitary State. In fact, federalism has been deepening in India. This is in keeping with global trends. Even a unitary country without written Constitution like the UK is becoming a federal country, with regional legislatures in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland exercising considerable power. Even Sri Lanka is now attempting to institutionalize a federal model to accommodate the aspirations of Tamil-speaking people. Pakistan, despite decades of turbulence and dictatorship, preserved its federal structure.

Our settled constitutional law practice in respect of States’ formation can be summed up as follows:

New States are formed, or boundaries of existing states are altered only with the consent of the affected States. Only in exceptional situations of national emergency or overwhelming national interest would Parliament be called upon to act on its own without the consent of States. When there are strong popular demands for division of a state or altering the boundaries of a state, consent must be the guiding principle as a general rule. However, when there is polarization and serious divergence of views, patient negotiation and adjustment and fair reconciliation through a process of give and take should be the norm.  The Parliament would ordinarily act only after such a consensus and negotiated settlement are arrived at.  Only in extreme and compelling circumstances, when unity of India or its security is at stake, or overwhelming national interest demands adjustment of boundaries, would Parliament act without the consent of States affected. In redrawing boundaries of any State, Parliament would act at all times with great restraint and circumspection.

The Punchi Commission on Centre-State Relations in its report (2010) in para 4.2.02 stated as follows:

“In practice it is rarely possible for the Parliament to ignore the views of the States.  The Central government, in effect, cannot concede to the demands of regional groups/communities for a separate State unless such a proposal is received from the State(s) in which these groups are currently located.”

This principle can be slightly amended based on the experience relating to Uttar Pradesh.  On Nov 23, 2011, a few months before the State Legislative Assembly elections were due, the Uttar Pradesh Legislature passed a resolution seeking trifurcation of the State.  Despite the State’s consent, the President, the Union Government, and the Parliament chose not to act, and for good reason.  The Assembly resolution was clearly for reasons of political expediency to gain short-term electoral advantage, and was passed weeks before the general election was due.  Clearly, States cannot be divided for temporary electoral advantage of one party or the other.  If there is no informed consent, and if broad consensus among all regions is not clearly manifest, division of States for short-term electoral gains will lead to anarchy, and will seriously undermine our federalism, and indeed the unity and integrity of the nation itself. 

The UP episode demonstrates that the settled principle now is that the Union will not ordinarily act without the State’s consent.  Even when the affected State consents to altering its boundaries, the Union reserves the right to reject it on broader national considerations.  In other words, in order to alter the status quo in respect of boundaries of States, ordinarily consent of affected states would be necessary.  But a State’s request for altering the status quo need not be granted unless the Union is convinced that the broader national interest is served by such a decision. 

Even colonial rulers paid a heavy price by acting precipitately without the consent of all stake-holders.  The partition of Bengal was effected by the then Viceroy Lord Curzon, against the wishes of large segments of population. There might well have been sound administrative reasons for such a partition; but the consent of people affected was not obtained, and a consensus was not arrived at.  People suspected that it was a deliberate ploy to divide the national movement and sow seeds of communal disaffection, and rebelled against it.  As a result, the national movement gained great momentum, the chasm between the colonial government and the people widened, partition had to be annulled in 1911, and that bitter episode led to many lasting consequences. 

In the light of these historical and constitutional developments and the evolution of federalism in the Indian context, the determined efforts of the Union Government and its oft-repeated declarations that Andhra Pradesh will be divided irrespective of the State Legislature’s views pose a grave danger to federalism and unity of India.  Andhra Pradesh was formed with the prior consent of the then Andhra State Legislature, and the then Hyderabad State Legislature.  When two popular movements for division of the State were launched in the three regions – in Telangana in 1969-70, and in Coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema in 1972-73,  – it was the Union Government which encouraged all regions to arrive at a negotiated settlement.  Corresponding Constitutional provisions were put in place to safeguard the interests of all regions.  An explicit and implicit compact was made by the Union with the people of Andhra Pradesh to the effect that the State would remain united.  It is on this basis that people migrated on a large scale to the other regions and to the capital city of Hyderabad, and built their lives, livelihoods and the State’s economy.  In this backdrop, any redrawing of the boundaries would need another agreement arrived at by the affected parties through patient negotiation, and the Union has a seminal role in helping reconcile conflicting interests harmoniously.  Parliament can act only on the basis of such an agreement, consensus and consent of the State.  Any other approach would be ham-handed, arbitrary, uneven and runs counter to the principles and practice of federalism as they have evolved under Indian conditions.

The circumstances of October 3, 2013 resolution of the Cabinet and subsequent developments make it abundantly clear that the Union is acting arbitrarily, contrary to past precedent and practice, in haste, and with short-term electoral considerations in mind.  There is not even the minimum effort to genuinely ascertain the State Legislature’s views and to accommodate them, let alone obtain its prior consent. There has been no honest effort to encourage detailed discussion and negotiation among all stake-holders, and no effort to arrive at a negotiated settlement satisfactory to all regions.

It is such arbitrary actions with short-term electoral calculations in mind that created grave crises for the unity and integrity of the nation in the Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir in the 80’s.  Fundamentalist religious groups prone to violence and bloodshed were encouraged in the Punjab for partisan political gains, and Punjab and India paid a heavy price for  such a folly. Similarly, the elected Government was dismissed by engineering defections and on spurious grounds in Jammu and Kashmir in 1984, and subsequently an electoral alliance was forced on the unwilling regional party, National Conference, in 1987. As a result, terrorism reared its ugly head, and the nation continues to pay a heavy price.

If now, a new precedent is established by dividing Andhra Pradesh without the consent of the State Legislature, and without a negotiated settlement reached by all regions, it could lead to serious disaffection and maladjustment at the inter-state and national level. Such a precedent may eventually lead to division of any major State without the willing consent of the State and negotiated settlement of the stake-holders. The resulting linguistic disaffection, regional stresses, and maladjustment will eventually threaten national unity and integrity, and there is every danger that the Union will fall apart within a generation.

The way the President and Parliament handle the Andhra Pradesh issue will, in a fundamental sense, shape the future of the Union itself. This is a defining moment not for Andhra Pradesh alone, but for our federal Constitution and India itself.

Undoubtedly there is large support for the formation of Telangana state in the Telangana region outside the Greater Hyderabad city. Equally certainly, there is overwhelming opposition to division of the State in Coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema regions, and in Hyderabad city. It cannot be anybody’s case that status quo ante should, or can, be restored. But what is needed is not precipitate and arbitrary action by the Union, but pains-taking efforts to assist negotiated settlement reconciling all conflicting interests.  In a highly polarized situation like this, when about 30# people fervently want division, and about 70% of the people are vehemently opposed to division of the State, there  has to be a negotiated settlement satisfying all, or at any rate minimizing dissatisfaction to all. The Union cannot create a group of winners, and a much larger group of losers. That will be a recipe for disaffection, disharmony and threat to national unity.

If such a arbitrary decision by the Union becomes a precedent, any and every State could be divided or boundaries altered without the State’s consent, and without a negotiated settlement.  That will effectively convert States into municipalities, and India into a unitary State. Neither the Constitution makers, nor nation builders intended such an outcome. And India’s future will be in peril if such an effort is made to make the nation effectively unitary at this stage.

It is in critical moments like this that the President and Parliament have to act with great restraint, foresight and wisdom. The President is not only the head of the Republic, but he is also a part of the Parliament. The President is elected by members of both Houses of Parliament as well as members of State Legislative Assemblies. In a fundamental sense the President represents the nation – both Union and States – and is the final defender of the Constitution and federalism along with the Supreme Court. This is therefore a fit case where the President should exercise his constitutional duty independently before recommending introduction of any Bill to divide the State of Andhra Pradesh.

The leaders of Parliamentary parties too should act with clarity and wisdom, and with the knowledge that division of a State without the State’s consent and a negotiated settlement among all stake-holders converts the nation effectively into a unitary one, and every State of the Union will, in future, be vulnerable to unilateral action for short-term electoral expediency.

The Constitution, the President, the Parliament and the political parties will be put to a severe test in this case, and the way they respond to this challenge will shape the future of our Republic, and the future of federalism in India.

* * *

In today’s world, linguistic nations are common. Italy, France, Greece, Japan and many other countries around the world have formed on a linguistic basis. When the Soviet Union disintegrated, it broke apart along linguistic lines. Unlike much of the world, India is a unique experiment. Our country has people speaking many different languages, cultures, food habits, and lifestyles.

During India’s freedom struggle, when the desire for linguistic identity emerged on the Indian sub-continent, Mahatma Gandhi chose to solve this problem by agreeing to the formation of linguistic states. In 1938, he wrote: “I have always aimed at redistribution of Provinces on a linguistic basis. The cue was taken from the Andhra movement. I should therefore be more than glad if Andhra could have its status as a Province recognised even now.”

                Today, credible surveys done by Nielsen and CNN show that more than 70% of the people in Andhra Pradesh are against the division of the state. Decades of separatist propaganda claiming under development, deprived political power, lack of opportunities, stolen government jobs, violation of agreements have all been conclusively proven wrong. The study done by Justice Srikrishna Committee has shown that almost all the separatist allegations are untrue. The Committee also showed that, since the formation of the state, Telangana region has developed the most when compared to the other two regions of the state.

• A large majority of the people in Andhra Pradesh are against division. Then, why is the UPA going forward with this undemocratic division?
• Telangana Rashtra Samiti (TRS) fighting for a separate state has 17 MLAs in an assembly of 294 members. Why is UPA yielding to their demand?
• When almost all the allegations of separatists are proven false- why is the UPA adamant about dividing the state?
• Is it right to divide a large state like Andhra Pradesh to gain a few seats in the upcoming general elections? Won’t this “divide and rule” policy dangerous to India’s unity?
• Anthony committee was appointed to receive feedback on the division process. Why is the central government not waiting for the report and instead rushing to divide the state?
• Group of Ministers have refused to come to A.P. and seek public opinion. They are asking people of Andhra Pradesh to give their input via emails. Does the government expect farmers, weavers, fishermen, and laborers to write in English and send their views via email? Is this how fate of nearly ten crore Telugu people decided?
• When Mahatma Gandhi, Pandit Nehru, and Indira Gandhi stood firmly for linguistic states, why is Sonia Gandhi against linguistic states?

To protest against Congress Party led UPA government’s dictatorial, undemocratic, divisive, opportunistic politics- thousands of activists are heading to Delhi in a rally of buses. We will go from Hyderabad to Delhi via Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, and Haryana. We will travel nearly four thousand kilometers. We will hold public meetings in Nagpur on the 7^th and in Bhopal on the 8th. On November 9^th 2013, we will hold a meeting in Jantar Mantar from 12 noon till 5PM. We request you to support our cause.

కేంద్ర మంత్రిమండలి ఇటీవల తీసుకున్న మన రాష్ట్ర విభజన నిర్ణయ నేపధ్యంలో విశాలాంధ్ర మహాసభ రెండు రోజుల పాటు సుదీర్ఘ కార్యవర్గ సమావేశం నిర్వహించింది. ఆ సమావేశ తీర్మానాలు కింద పొందు పరుస్తున్నాము.

• విశాలాంధ్ర మహాసభ భారత దేశ కేంద్ర కాబినెట్ నిర్ణయాన్ని తిరస్కరిస్తోంది.
• పది కోట్ల తెలుగు ప్రజలకు భారత ప్రభుత్వం ద్రోహం చేసింది.
• తెలుగు ప్రజలు అన్ని జాతీయ పార్టీలను, వాటితో పొత్తు పెట్టుకున్న పార్టీలన్నిటినీ బహిష్కరించాలని విశాలాంధ్ర మహాసభ పిలుపునిస్తోంది.
• నిన్నటి కుట్రపూరిత కేంద్ర ప్రభుత్వ నిర్ణయం భారత దేశానికి తెలుగు ప్రజల అవసరం లేదు అనే విధంగా ఉంది.
• ఇప్పుడున్న రాజకీయ పార్టీలన్నీ తమ శక్తి మేర తెలుగు ప్రజలకు ద్రోహం చేసినవే అని విశాలాంధ్ర మహాసభ భావిస్తోంది.
• ఈ రోజు తెలుగు ప్రజల భవిష్యత్తు విషయంలో కేంద్ర, రాష్ట్ర మంత్రులు, ఎం. పీ. ల, ఎం. ఎల్. ఏ. ల పాత్ర నిరర్ధకం, శూన్యం అయిపొయింది. వారందరినీ సాంఘికంగా బహిష్కరించి వారి ఉనికిని గుర్తించటానికి నిరాకరించాలి.
• తమ పార్టీలను వ్యతిరేకించి నాయకులు బయటకు రావడాన్ని విశాలాంధ్ర మహాసభ స్వాగతిస్తోంది. వారిని విశాలాంధ్ర మహాసభతో కలిసి పనిచేయాల్సిందిగా ఆహ్వానిస్తోంది.
• ఢిల్లీతో మంతనాలు, బేరసారాలు, చర్చలు, వేడుకోళ్ళు తక్షణం నిలిపివేయాలి.
• జాతీయవాద సంస్థలని చెప్పుకొనే ఆర్. ఎస్. ఎస్., బి. జే. పీ. ల విశ్వసనీయతను ప్రశ్నిస్తున్నాం.
• తెలుగు ప్రజలు మాత్రమే చెప్పినట్లు వినే స్థానిక పార్టీలనే ఆదరించాలని కోరుతున్నాము.
• నిన్నటి కాబినెట్ నిర్ణయం తరువాత కేంద్ర ప్రభుత్వం, జాతీయ పార్టీలు మన రాష్ట్ర వ్యవహారాల్లో కలగచేసుకునే హక్కును కోల్పోయ్యాయి.
• కేంద్ర ప్రభుత్వం, జాతీయ పార్టీలు చేస్తున్న ఇలాంటి స్వప్రయోజన చర్యల వల్ల అన్ని భాషా సమూహాలకు ముప్పు పొంచివున్నదన్న వాస్తవాన్ని అందరూ గ్రహించాలి.
• తెలుగు ప్రజలు సహాయ నిరాకరణ ఉద్యమం చెయ్యాలి. అందులో భాగంగా కేంద్ర ప్రభుత్వానికి పన్నులు చెల్లించటం తక్షణం నిలిపెవేయాలి.
• జాతీయ పార్టీల ఆలోచనలు దేశంలో సమాఖ్య స్పూర్తిని పూర్తిగా తుంగలో తొక్కుతున్నాయని, దీని వల్ల దేశ సమగ్రతకు కలిగే విఘాతానికి వారే బాధ్యత వహించాలని విశాలాంధ్ర మహాసభ స్పష్టం చేస్తోంది.
• ఉద్యమకారులందరికీ అవసరం, అవకాశం మేరకు విశాలాంధ్ర మహాసభ నైతిక మద్దతు న్యాయ సహాయం ఎల్లప్పుడూ అందిస్తుంది.
• ప్రజలందరూ ఆందోళనలు నిరసన కార్యక్రమాలను శాంతియుతంగా దృఢ చిత్తంతో కొనసాగించాలి.

BELOW IS THE TEXT OF THE LETTER GIVEN TO SMT. SUSHMA SWARAJ ON HER VISIT TO OUR STATE LAST WEEK.

==============

To,

Smt. Sushma Swaraj

Leader of the Opposition, Lok Sabha

Bharatiya Janata Party

Dear Sushma ji,

Welcome to the great state of Andhra Pradesh. We are a proud Telugu tribe that have been a source of inspiration to Chatrapati Shivaji and his guru Samartha Ramdas. Vijayanagara Empire, one of the greatest Telugu Empires to have ruled South India inspired Shivaji to fight for “Swarajya”.

India is a melting pot of cultures, languages, and lifestyles. Thanks to our founding fathers, India preserved its national integrity by acknowledging the existence of diversity within its boundaries. Sympathising with Telugu people’s desire for self-identity Mahatma Gandhi in 1938 wrote to Sri Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan: “I have always aimed at a redistribution of Provinces on linguistic basis. The cue was taken from the Andhra movement”

Reorganisation of States along linguistic lines has been a boon to the Indian Republic. It gave regional cultures their desired recognition and identity, while strengthening the Indian Union.

It would be unwise to divide linguistic states for political reasons or on small states principle. This will destroy the cultural fabric of many a states and will eventually undermine India’s national integrity.

We would like to pose a few straight forward questions:

1. Separatists for many years have been alleging that their jobs have been looted, river waters are stolen, and revenues are misused. Hence, give us a separate state. Are you in agreement with these allegations?
2. While your party supports division of Andhra Pradesh, why doesn’t it support division of Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, West Bengal, and Maharashtra with the same vigour?
3. Your party stands for small states? If Telangana state is formed it would be the 12^th largest state in the country. What is your barometer for a small state?
4. Is BJP taking cognisance of 60 day old spontaneous, non-political agitation that is going on in the state, where millions of people are on the road every day?
5. Why does your party want to donate nearly 15MP seats to the Congress Party?
6. Why has your party gone back on the stance taken by the then Home Minister Advani?

I hope your party will re-consider its decision on the division of Andhra Pradesh state in the interest of our nation.

Regards,

Nalamotu Chakravarthy

President

Visalandhra Mahasabha

It is a little late, but I haven't gotten a chance to post my Vijayawada speech. Probably one of the finest, most disciplined, and determined audience I have seen in the last couple of months. At one point drizzle turned into pouring rain. People held nearly 100,000 chairs over their heads to cover themselves, and they refused to leave the grounds. Instead they demanded the guests to speak. It was a memorable scene.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1eDi9NhnJY

                                నిరసన పత్రం

గౌరవనీయులు శ్రీ కావూరి సాంబశివరావు

కేంద్ర మంత్రివర్యులు

ఆర్య,

ఆంధ్ర ప్రదేశ్ రాష్ట్ర విభజన ప్రతిపాదన అమలయితే అన్ని ప్రాంతాల తెలుగు ప్రజలు నష్టపోతారు. మన రాష్ట్ర విభజన దేశవ్యాప్తంగా ఎన్ని విపరిమాణాలకు, విభజనలకు, విద్వేషాలకు, విధ్వంసాలకు, దారి తీస్తుందో మీకు ప్రత్యేకంగా వివరించనవసరం లేదు.

కేంద్రంలో మంత్రి పదవి చేపట్టక ముందు, తమరే సహీతుకంగా చాటి చెప్పిన సమైక్య వాదనలు ప్రజలు మరిచిపోలేదు. సమైక్యవాద ప్రవక్తగా, ఐక్యతా ఆశాజ్యోతిగా, మిమ్మల్ని నిన్న మొన్నటి వరకు, నెత్తిన పెట్టుకున్న ప్రజలే నేడు ఎందుకు కత్తి దూస్తున్నారో, ఎందుకు దూషిస్తున్నారో మీరు గుర్తించాలి. మీ వర్తమాన ప్రవర్తన, పదవీ వ్యామోహం, గతంలో మిమ్మల్ని  అభిమానించిన వారందరిలో మీ పట్ల విముఖతను ఆగ్రహాన్ని పెంచాయి.

దళపతిగా వ్యవహరించిన మిమ్మల్ని బుట్టలో వేసుకుంటే సమైక్య ఉద్యమం చతికిలబడిపోతుందని అంచనా వేసారు ఢిల్లీ పెద్దలు. ఆ కుట్రలు నేడు వమ్ము అయ్యాయి. ఈ రోజు నాయకులు లేకుండానే కోట్లాది సామాన్య ప్రజలు సమైక్య సమరంలో అలుపెరుగని వీరుల్లా పోరాడుతున్నారు.

కాబట్టి కావూరి వారు, ఇప్పటికయినా తమరు అంతరాత్మ ప్రబోధానికనుగుణంగా తక్షణం కేంద్రంలోని మంత్రి పదవికి రాజీనామా చేసి రాష్ట్ర సమైక్యతకు పాటు పడవలసిందిగా అభ్యర్ధిస్తున్నాం. మీ రాజీనామా ఇతర సహచర తెలుగు కేంద్ర మంత్రులకు, పార్లమెంట్ సభ్యులకు మార్గదర్శకం అవుతుంది. రాజీనామా చేసి రాష్ట్ర  సమగ్రతను తద్వారా దేశ సమైక్యతను కాపాడండి.

సమైక్య ఉద్యమానికి మీ పెదవి సానుభూతి చాలదు. మీ పదవీ త్యాగం కావాలి. చేయని పక్షంలో ప్రజలు మీలాంటి వారందరికీ రాజకీయంగా పుట్టగతులు లేకుండా చేస్తారు.

నలమోతు చక్రవర్తి

అధ్యక్షులు

విశాలాంధ్ర మహాసభ

                                నిరసన పత్రం

గౌరవనీయులు శ్రీ కె. చిరంజీవి

కేంద్ర మంత్రివర్యులు

ఆర్య,

మీతో సహా ఎవరూ కాదనలేని కొన్ని కఠోర వాస్తవాలను క్లుప్తంగా పేర్కొనటం సముచితమనుకుంటున్నాం.

మన రాష్ట్ర విభజన జరిగితే:

1. అన్ని ప్రాంతాల మతాల ప్రజలకు ఎప్పటికీ తీరని తీవ్రమయిన కష్ట నష్టాలు వాటిల్లుతాయి.
2. దేశ వ్యాప్తంగా ఎన్నో విపరీత పరిణామాలు, విభజనలు, విధ్వంసాలు సంభవిస్తాయి.
3. మాతృభాషల వికాసానికి మాత్రమే కాదు, యావత్ దేశ సమైక్యతకు సమగ్రతకు భంగం కలుగుతుంది.
4. హింసాయుత ఆందోళనలు, అసత్యాలు, అకృత్యాల ద్వారా అల్పసంఖ్యాకుల స్వార్థ పూరిత ఆకాంక్షలు నెరవేర్చుకోవచ్చన్న ధోరణులు దురాశలు దేశవ్యాప్తంగా ప్రబలి పోతాయి. ప్రజాస్వామ్యం బలి అయిపోతుంది.
5. ఈ రాష్ట్ర విభజనను ఏ రూపంలోనైనా పరోక్షంగానైనా దోహదపడే వారెవరయినాసరే, మాతృభాష, మాతృదేశ ద్రోహులుగా చరిత్రలో మిగిలిపోతారు.

మీకు తెలుగు భాషలో నచ్చని పదం “రాజీనామా”, అతి ప్రియమయిన పదం “పదవి” అని ప్రజలు అనుకుంటున్నారు. చీలిక ప్రదేశానికయినా ఏలిక కావాలన్న కోరిక మీకుందేమోనని ప్రజలు అనుమానిస్తున్నారు.

కాబట్టి ఇప్పటికయినా మేల్కొని తక్షణం కేంద్రంలో మంత్రి పదవికి రాజీనామా చేసి సమైక్య ఉద్యమం చేస్తున్న కోట్లాది సామాన్య తెలుగు ప్రజల వెంబడి నడవాలని అభ్యర్తిస్తున్నాం.

సమైక్య ఉద్యమానికి మీ పెదవి సానుభూతి చాలదు. మీ పదవీ త్యాగం కావాలి. చేయని పక్షంలో ప్రజలు మీలాంటి వారందరికీ రాజకీయంగా పుట్టగతులు లేకుండా చేస్తారు.

కార్యవర్గ సభ్యులు

విశాలాంధ్ర మహాసభ

యూ.పి.ఏ. జూలై 30 2013న మన రాష్ట్ర విభజనకు అనుకూలంగా నిర్ణయం తీసుకున్న నేపధ్యంలో విశాలాంధ్ర మహాసభ తెలుగు జాతి ఐక్యత కోసం ప్రజల్లో చైతన్యం కలిగించటానికి రాష్ట్ర వ్యాప్త సమైక్యత యాత్రకు ఆగష్టు 6, 2013న  శ్రీకారం చుట్టింది. మొదటి దశలో రాయలసీమ ప్రాంతంలో, రెండవ దశలో కోస్తా ప్రాతంలో పర్యటించింది. రాష్ట్ర ప్రభుత్వం అడ్డుకోకపోతే, మూడవ దశలో నైజాం ప్రాతంలో పర్యటించాలన్నది మా కోరిక. సమైక్యత యాత్ర కోస్తా, రాయలసీమలోని పదమూడు జిల్లాలలో మూడు వేల కిలోమీటర్లు దూరం సాగింది. ప్రజలు ఊరు ఊరు వాడ వాడ ముక్త కంఠంతో కోరుకుంటున్నది 23 జిల్లాలతో కూడిన హైదరాబాద్ రాజధానిగా ఉండే సమైక్యాంధ్రప్రదేశ్ రాష్ట్రము. దీనిలో ఎట్లాంటి బేరసారాలకి తావులేదని స్పష్టంగా చెపుతున్నారు ప్రజలు.

తెలుగు జాతి ఐక్యత ఒక పవిత్ర లక్షంగా మన పెద్దలు భావించారు కాబట్టే 1956లో మన రాష్ట్ర ఆవిర్భావం జరిగింది. 1953లో మద్రాస్ ప్రెసిడెన్సీ నుంచి విడిపోయి ఆంధ్ర రాష్ట్రం ఆవిర్భవించినప్పుడు, వెనుకబడ్డ రాయలసీమ ప్రాంత ప్రజలు కర్నూల్ రాజధానిగా ఉండాలని కోరారు. కోస్తా ప్రాంత ప్రజలు పెద్ద మనసుతో కర్నూల్ ని రాజధానిగా అంగీకరించారు. 1956లో ఆంధ్ర ప్రదేశ్ రాష్ట్రం ఆవిర్భవించినప్పుడు, హైదరాబాద్ రాజధానిగా ఉండటానికి అనుకూలమయిన నగరం. వెనుకబడ్డ ప్రాంతమయినప్పటికీ రాయలసీమ ప్రజలు కర్నూలు రాజధాని వదులుకొని, సమైక్య తెలుగు రాష్ట్రానికి రాజధానిగా హైదరాబాద్ ఉండటానికి అంగీకరించారు. ఇక ఆంధ్ర ప్రదేశ్ రాష్ట్ర ఆవిర్భావానికి మార్గం సుగుమం చేయటానికి బూర్గుల రామకృష్ణ రావు ముఖ్యమంత్రి పదివిని త్యజించారు. అన్ని ప్రాంతాల ప్రజలు నాయకుల నిస్వార్ధ త్యాగాల ఫలితం ఆంధ్ర ప్రదేశ్ రాష్ట్ర ఆవిర్భావం.

దురదృష్టవశాత్తు మన రాష్ట్ర ఆవిర్భావం వెనుక ఉన్న నూరు సంవత్సరాల చరిత్రను మరిచిపోయి, మన రాష్ట్రంలోని మూడు ముఖ్య రాజకీయ పార్టీలు తెలుగు జాతికి వెన్నుపోటు పొడిచాయి. ముందు రెండు కళ్ళ సిద్ధాంతం అన్న తెలుగు దేశం పార్టీ, తరువాత ఒంటి కన్ను సిద్ధాంతంగా రూపాంతరం చెందింది. ఈనాడు ఆ పార్టి అంధకారంలో మునిగిపోయింది. వై.ఎస్.ఆర్ కాంగ్రెస్ పార్టీ తెలంగాణా సెంటిమెంట్ పై మాకు గౌరవముంది అని గత కొన్ని సంవత్సరాలుగా చెప్తూ వచ్చింది. ఇన్ని రోజులు గోడ మీద పిల్లిలా కూర్చున్న ఆ పార్టీ, యూ.పి.ఏ ఇక రెండు మూడు రోజుల్లో విభజనకు నిర్ణయం తీసుకుంటుంది అనగా గోడ మీద నుంచి దూకి ఇప్పుడు సమైక్యం అంటుంది. ఇండియన్ నేషనల్ కాంగ్రెస్ ని బ్రిటిషు వారు స్తాపించారు. బ్రిటిష్ వాళ్ళ “విభజించు పాలించు” సిద్ధాంతాన్ని బాగా వంట పట్టించుకున్నట్టు ఉంది కాంగ్రెస్ పార్టీ. మన రాష్ట్రాన్ని ఎన్ని ముక్కలు చేస్తే తమకు ఎక్కువ వోట్లు, సీట్లు వస్తాయనే ఆలోచనే తప్ప రాష్ట్ర, దేశ ప్రయోజనాలపై దూరదృష్టి లేదు.

రాజకీయ పార్టీలు తమని మోసం చేశాయని గమనించిన ప్రజలు పార్టీలకి అతీతంగా రోడ్లేక్కారు, ఉద్యమిస్తున్నారు. ఈ ఉద్యమానికి నాయకులు లేరు. మన నాయకుల లాగ ఉద్యోగాలు, నిధులు, నీళ్ళ గురించి పెద్దగా పట్టించుకోవటం లేదు జనాలు. ప్రజలు ఒకే ఒక లక్షంతో ముందుకు సాగుతున్నారు- ఆ లక్షం సమైక్యాంధ్ర!

అయితే ప్రజలకు తమ లక్షం స్పష్టంగా ఉన్నప్పటికీ, వాళ్ళు మమ్మల్ని ఎక్కడికి వెళ్ళినా అడిగింది ఉద్యమ తక్షణ కర్తవ్యాలు ఏంటి అని, ఈ ఉద్యమాన్ని లక్ష్య సాధన దిశగా ఎట్లా తీసుకెళ్ళగలం అని. ఉద్యమానికి ఒక రోడ్ మ్యాప్ తీసుకు రావాలి అన్నది వాళ్ళ భావన.

సమైక్యాంధ్ర ఉద్యమ తక్షణ కర్తవ్యం సమైక్యానికి కట్టుబడి ఉన్నామని చెబుతున్న కేంద్ర మంత్రులు, ఎం.పి.లు, ఎం.ఎల్.ఏ ల రాజీనామాలు. మన ప్రజా ప్రతినిధులు చెప్పే కుంటి సాకులు నమ్మే స్థితిలో ప్రజలు లేరు. డిసెంబర్ 9 2009 ప్రకటన వచ్చి మూడు సంవత్సరాలు దాటింది. ఈ కాలంలో సమైక్యానికి కట్టుపడి ఉన్న మంత్రులు, ప్రతినిధులు సాధించింది శూన్యం. పులుల్లా గాండ్రించే మన నాయకులు ఇవ్వాల్టికి కూడా సోనియా గాంధీ గుడ్లు ఉరుమితే పిల్లుల్లా అయిపోతున్నారు. వీరు తెలుగు జాతి ఐక్యత కొరకు పోరాడుతారనుకోవటం అవివేకం. కేంద్రంలో యూ.పి.ఏ. ప్రభుత్వం బొటాబొటి మెజారిటీతో నడుస్తుంది. సమైక్యానికి కట్టుపడి ఉన్నామని చెపుతున్న మంత్రులు, ఎం.పి. లు రాజీనామా చేస్తే కేంద్రంలో రాజకీయ సంక్షోభం వస్తుంది. ప్రభుత్వం పడిపోయి ఎన్నికలు వచ్చే అవకాశం కూడా ఉంది. యూ.పి.ఏ. తలపెట్టిన దుష్కార్యాన్ని ఆపటానికి ఇంతకు మించిన మార్గం లేదు. మన రాష్ట్రానికి చెందినా మెజారిటీ ప్రజా ప్రతినిధులు లేని చట్ట సభలలో రాష్ట్ర విభజన నిర్ణయం తీసుకోవటం అసాధ్యం. అలా చేయటానికి కేంద్ర ప్రభుత్వం సాహసిస్తే రాష్ట్రం అగ్నిగుండం అవుతుంది.

సమైక్యానికి కట్టుబడి ఉన్నామని చెబుతున్న కేంద్ర మంత్రులకి ఎం.పి. లకి ఒక గమనిక. మీ నియోజకవర్గ ప్రజలు కెసిఆర్ కన్నా కూడా మిమ్మల్ని ఎక్కువగా ద్వేషిస్తున్నారు. కళాకారులు రాసే గేయాలలో విమర్శలు, దూషణలు విభాజనవాదుల కన్నా సమైక్యవాద మంత్రులు, ప్రజా ప్రతినిధుల మీద ఎక్కువగా ఎక్కుపెడుతున్నారు. ఉదాహరణకు ఏలూరులో ఒక రోడ్డుపై ఉన్న ఫ్లెక్సి బ్యానర్ పై ఈ విధంగా రాసారు: “గాండ్రించని పులులెందుకు, గర్జించని సింహాలెందుకు, ఘీంకరించని ఎనుగులేందుకు, బుసకొట్టని నాగులెందుకు, గొంతు విప్పని నాయకులెందుకు?ఎందుకు? ఎందుకు?”

లగడపాటి రాజగోపాల్ వంటి సమైక్యవాద నాయకులు ఉద్యమాన్ని చిన్నబుచ్చే మాటలు ఆపి తక్షణమే రాజీనామా చేయాలి. ఆయన ఉపయోగించబోయే బ్రహ్మాస్త్రం ఏంటో తెలియదు కాని అది పిచ్చుక పైన కూడా పనిచేయదని ప్రజలకి తెలుసు. మీరు డిసెంబర్ 9 ప్రకటన వచ్చిన తరువాత మీ తప్పిదాలు గ్రహించి మీ ధోరణి మార్చుకుంటారని అనుకున్నాము. ఒక పక్క విభజనవాదులు రోడ్లేక్కి ఆందోళనలు చేస్తుంటే , గత మూడు సంవత్సరాలుగా మీరు ఏసి గదుల్లో కూర్చుని రెండు వారాలకి ఒక సారి మీడియా వాళ్ళని మీ దగ్గరకి పిలింపించుకొని టివిలలో రంకెలు వేయటం ద్వారా ఉద్యమాన్ని నడిపిస్తున్నామని మీరనుకున్నారు. ఇక నైనా యూ.పీ.ఏ. తీసుకున్న నిర్ణయానికి నైతిక భాద్యత వహించి మీ రాజీనామా ద్వారా రాష్ట్ర ప్రజలికి క్షమాపణలు చెప్పండి. ఈ విజ్ఞ్యప్తి అందరు కేంద్ర మంత్రులు, రాష్ట్ర మంత్రులు, ఎం. పి. లు, ఎం. ఎల్. ఏ. లకు కూడా వర్తిస్తుంది.

ప్రభుత్వ ఉద్యోగులు, ఆర్.టి.సి. కార్మికులు, ఉపాధ్యాయులు, విద్యార్థులు, కోట్లాది మంది సామాన్య ప్రజలు ఉద్యమ బాట పట్టారు. ఉద్యోగులకి నెల జీతాలు రాని పరిస్థితి. సమ్మె మూలంగా ఆర్.టి.సి. ఉద్యోగులకి జీత భత్యాల నష్టమే కాకుండా సంస్థ మనుగడకే ప్రమాదం ఏర్పడింది. విద్యార్థులు ఉపాధ్యాయులు చదువులని పక్కన పెట్టి సమైక్యాంధ్ర కొరకు రోడ్డెక్కారు. ఉద్యోగుల, కార్మికుల, విద్యార్ధుల త్యాగాలకు తెలుగు జాతి ఎప్పటికి రుణపడి ఉంటుంది.

చివరికి బిచ్చగాళ్ళు కుష్టు రోగులు కూడా జే ఏ సి లు పెట్టుకొని ఉద్యమ బాట పట్టారు. కాని మన మంత్రులు, ఎం.పి. లు, ఎం.ఎల్.ఏ. లు  మాత్రం జిడ్డులా పదవులని పట్టికొని వేలాడటం చాల విడ్డూరం. పదవుల కొరకు మీరు తెలుగు జాతి ఐక్యతను తాకట్టు పెడితే చరిత్ర మిమ్మల్ని క్షమించదు. నాయకులారా చరిత్ర హీనులు కాకండి, రాజీనామాలు చేయండి ఉద్యమంలో మమేకం కండి.

ఉద్యమ తక్షణ కర్తవ్యమ్ ప్రజా ప్రతినిధుల రాజీనామా అయితే, ఉద్యమ లక్ష సాధనకి ఒక ఐక్య కార్యాచరణ అత్యవసరం. రాష్ట్రంలో వేలాది జే.ఏ.సి. లు ఉన్నాయి. ఈ సంస్థలు చేసే కార్యక్రమాల మధ్య సమన్వయము తీసుకు రావటం చాల ముఖ్యం. ఈ సంస్తలన్నిటిని ఒకే గొడుకు కిందకి తీసుకు రాలేము, తీసుకు వచ్చే ప్రయత్నం కూడా చేయకూడదు. ఈ ఉద్యమం ప్రత్యేకత నాయకులు లేకపోవటం. దానిని మనం స్వాగతించాలి, అలాగే కొనసాగించాలి. అయితే వచ్చే రెండు మూడు నెలల పాటు ఏ కార్యక్రమాలు చేయాలి, ఏమి చేస్తే కేంద్ర ప్రభుత్వం పై ఒత్తిడి తీసుకు రావచ్చు అని అలోచించి ఒక క్యాలెండర్ తయారు చేసుకోవలసిన అవసరం ఎంతో ఉంది. ఈ ఐక్య కార్యాచరణని రాష్ట్రవ్యాప్తంగా అన్ని జే.ఏ.సి. లని సమన్వయపరిచి అందరం ఒకే తాటిపై నడవటానికి కృషి చేయాలి.

నలమోతు చక్రవర్తి

అధ్యక్షులు

విశాలాంధ్ర మహాసభ

Millions of Telugu people in Andhra Pradesh and across the globe are in a great deal of anguish tonight. Congress Party and the UPA have officially announced that they would like to divide the great state of Andhra Pradesh for their myopic political gains. Congress Party in one master stroke checkmated TRS, TDP, and the BJP. Sadly crores of Telugu people have become victims to this vicious poitical one upmanship.

Our state came into existence in 1956 after half a century of struggles and sacrifices of our forefathers hailing from all three regions of the state. Today that state is at the risk of being shattered to pieces. After Satavahanas, Telugu country was resurrected by the Kakatiyas after a century long struggle. Today, we yet again risk losing everything we fought for. We cannot let this atrocity happen.

Unlike the December 9^th 2009 announcement by the central government and the subsequent retraction on December 23^rd, this time a similar course of action will not work. Congress Party was shell-shocked by the mass uprising in December 2009. However, they are better prepared this time.

So, how can we stop this?

First and foremost Integrationist MPs and MLAs should NOT resign. There are two important battles coming up- one in the state assembly and the other in parliament. Resignation of our representatives is simply suicidal to our cause.

CM and ministers should NOT resign. Integrationist MLAs should rally across the party lines to keep the current administration in power. Kiran Kumar Reddy is a staunch integrationist. He should be in power and defy Congress Party diktats that come from Delhi. If integrationists across parties covertly support the current government, keeping Kiran in power is a piece of cake.

Lastly and most importantly, the responsibility of stopping the division squarely rests on people’s shoulders. Integrationist movement is suffering from a leadership void. We need an organization that will be at the forefront of the movement. This platform should have representatives from Congress, TDP, YSRCP, Students, Farmers, and Government employees.

The division can be stopped if people agitate, but they must agitate peacefully. A violent agitation is unsustainable and will be quickly quelled by force. We can learn a lesson or two from Mahatma Gandhi. You want a bandh? Convince people to voluntarily shut their businesses in solidarity. Yes, this method is harder than threatening the business owner with a stick. But the former method is the only way a sustainable movement can be built.

Want a rail-roko? Do not sit on the tracks and get arrested. Convince the engine drivers to call in sick or urge the passengers to postpone their travel. This is far more impactful than forcing the trains to stop.

Need financial help to conduct activities? Do not turn fund collection into a chandha-dandha. Go to donors and show them your plan of action and convince them to donate.

Building a movement like this is difficult? Yes, of course. But Gandhiji has shown us the way. He has done it and it is imperative that we walk in the path he has shown us.

The only way state division can be stopped, is via a peaceful people’s agitation that paralyzes the entire state’s economy. Add to this a sympathetic state government that defies Delhi’s diktats. We must adopt civil disobedience and political disobedience.

If we stop this atrocity in Andhra Pradesh, the nation will be grateful to us. Delhi sultans will learn a lesson and never again wreak this kind of havoc on other states in the Indian republic.

Congress Party is caught between the devil and the deep blue sea. If a decision to divide the state is taken, the party may have to face the ire of the people of Coastal Andhra, Rayalaseema, and Greater Hyderabad where the desire for integration is strong. Whereas, a decision taken against division would affect the electoral prospects of Congress Party in 3-4 Telangana districts. It is certain that both the decisions could potentially jeopardize Congress Party’s electoral prospects in the state.

There are a total of 294 Assembly constituencies in Andhra Pradesh. Out of which 175 seats are in the Coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema regions. Hyderabad, Secunderabad, and Ranga Reddy districts have 28 Assembly seats where the desire for separation is non-existent. In the Telangana districts surrounding Hyderabad there are roughly an additional 20 Assembly seats where the sentiment for separation is muted. Therefore, the separate Telangana issue is in intense play in about 70 ACs.

These numbers clearly indicate that a large majority of the population in the state does not want the state divided.

The quandary that the Congress is facing in Coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema regions is the Jagan factor. YSRCP is perceived to be a strong contender in the upcoming elections in these two regions. Some in Congress Party think that dividing the state would help them win seats in the Telangana region, and that will offset their losses in Coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema regions. Unfortunately, there aren’t enough seats in Telangana to overcome the losses that the party will endure in the other two regions.

So, how can Congress get out of this difficult situation and still be a winner?

It is undeniable that there is a strong sentiment against division in nearly 200 Assembly seats in the state. Unfortunately, no major party is catering to this people’s desire for integration. TDP, BJP, CPI, TRS are all for division. YSRCP is playing truant being a cat on the wall. CPM pays lip service for integration. That leaves MIM as the only party staunchly standing against division of the state.

If Congress Party, in Smt.Indira Gandhiji’s footsteps, takes an unequivocal stand against division of Andhra Pradesh, it will become the party of choice for millions of voters that have a burning desire to keep the state united. Combine this decision with an alliance with MIM, and there emerges the winning strategy. The Muslim vote bank, energized by anti-Modi sentiment, could be a tie-breaker in many constituencies in the state in the upcoming elections.

Now, what happens in the Telangana region? Will the Congress Party have to pay a steep price in the region? Not necessarily… Following steps will mitigate the hurt sentiments of the people in the region.

Those who are demanding the division of the state mainly allege that- injustice was done in government jobs, education, river waters and political power.

Over the last few years, with the implementation of 610 GO and other policy changes brought in by the state government, the issue of government jobs is for all practical purposes a mute issue. Now, the separatists allege under representation in state level offices such as the State Secretariat. An amicable solution to this is to adopt a quota system by district and by zones to hire employees even to the state level offices.

Education is another controversial sector. This could also be resolved by allocating funds equitably to each district based on population or other relevant socio-economic indicators. In addition, empower districts to manage their own education system. This kind of decentralization will no longer give scope for allegations of step-motherly treatment towards one region or the other.

River waters have been contentious issues for decades. Though inter-state river water allocations are done as per the Central Government appointed tribunals such as the prior Bachawat tribunal or the current Brijesh Kumar tribunal, allocation of river water within the state is under the state government’s purview. This gives rise to a great deal of suspicion and creates misunderstanding among regions. Therefore, the power to allocate or re-allocate river waters to different projects in the state should be given to the state legislature via a simple or a 2/3^rd majority.

Lastly, separatists allege that the political power is often in the hands of leaders from Coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema. Though evidence suggests that this is not true, these misgivings can be addressed via decentralization of power to the district level.

73^rd constitutional amendment allows State Government to empower Panchayats to become self-governing institutions. Today the Panchayat system in Andhra Pradesh is not independent, but is tightly controlled by the State government. Indian constitution allows Panchayats to acts as units of self-government. According to the 73^rd amendment, Panchayats can prepare and implement ‘plans for economic development and social justice’. In addition, the state legislature can authorize the Panchayats to “levy, collect, and appropriate such taxes, duties, tolls and fees…”

A truly autonomous Panchayat Raj system, with little to no interference from the State government, along with the power to pool its own finances, plus a lion’s share of state budget allocated to Zilla Parishads will bring about a meaningful decentralization of power to the state of Andhra Pradesh. This will permanently put to rest apprehensions held by the separatists with regards to denial of political power.

An unequivocal commitment to linguistic states principle, in the footsteps of Smt.Indiraji, clubbed with meaningful steps taken to allay the apprehensions held by those that are demanding the division of the State will offer a win-win solution for the Congress Party. This approach will win over the hearts of a majority of the people in Andhra Pradesh and will better Congress’ electoral prospects. In the end, Congress Party will gain respect as a party that stuck to its principles while refusing to play politics on a sensitive national issue.

Rumour mills are working overtime.

The story doing the rounds is that the division of Andhra Pradesh is imminent.

There are several variants to the story, depending on from whom you hear it. But the main theme runs like this:

Sonia Gandhi has taken a decision to divide Andhra Pradesh.

The basis for this decision is the parting advice given by Gulam Nabi Azad who, until about a few days ago, was in charge of congress affairs in the state. He is believed to have given her the following formula: divide the state in such a way that the two parts will have 21 Lok Sabha seats each. That would mean adding two Rayalaseema districts – Anantapur and Kurnool – to the Telangana districts to form a state with Hyderabad as its capital.

Azad’s formula is supposedly a political master stroke, these rumour mongers will want us to believe. It would in one shot finish off KCR and TRS in Telangana and also undermine the strength of Jagan Reddy by distributing his regional base between two states. Congress will, in the process, gain considerably in Telangana region as the ‘giver’ of Telangana, and because of weakening of Jagan, will also be in the reckoning in the Coastal and Rayalaseema regions in the 2014 elections.

This, according to rumours, is the basis for the Congress decision to divide the state.

Some mills added a bit of spice to the story. They say that the TRS chief is completely sidelined in this saga. It is Prof Kodandaram, the chairman of T-JAC, who was taken into confidence and Rahul Gandhi supposedly had an hour long chat with him on the proposal to divide the state.

Some divine that the 30 June public meeting organised by the Congress leaders in Hyderabad was done at the behest of their high command. The intention of the central leadership is to position the Telangana congress leaders to take credit for the creation of a separate state of Telangana. Some others say it was not the high command which directly asked them to hold the rally, but told Jaipal Reddy who in turn told his camp follower Jana Reddy to organise the show. The rally ensured, our mills suggest, that the credit for dividing the state would go to Congress and not to the TRS.

Sonia Gandhi’s refusal to meet the AP Chief Minister Kiran Reddy during his recent trip to Delhi is a loud enough indication that in her mind the state is already divided, these rumour mills aver.

These mills tell us that the political leaders from the coastal area are silenced with the promise of hefty civil works contracts to build a new capital for the other residual state. The real estate boom that’s likely in the event of division in the coastal districts will mitigate the opposition from the general public, these rumours want us to believe. It seems the centre has already bought the consent of Rayalaseema leaders who matter for the division of their region, the purveyors of these rumours have come to know for sure.

Rumour mills have a way of ensuring that a small escape route is available in the very likely eventuality of their stories not coming true. In this case, however, the escape route actually lends some nail biting suspense to the narration.

Although Sonia Gandhi decided to divide the state and in this project she had the backing of Chidambaram, Azad, and Moily, the plan has formidable opposition. The decision is not going to be easy, they caution. The rumour mills want us to believe that Anthony, Digvijaya Singh, the Prime Minister, and even Rahul Gandhi are dead set against the division plan. President Pranab Babu is also not in favour of division.

This, therefore, is a cliff hanger. There would be a car chase, a shoot out, and a heavy pumping of adrenaline before the climax is unveiled. These rumour mills promise us.

In Gandhi Bhavan, in NTR Trust Building, and in TRS Bhavan, this or some variant of this is the topic of conversation. News papers run stories along these lines. TV channels busy themselves collecting talking heads to discuss this, and as the tempo of the shows build the panelists shout and get at each other’s collars to provide some serious comedy to the viewers.

The agenda for political discourse in Andhra Pradesh is set for at least the next ten days.

Serious matters of policy with far reaching and grave consequences to our Republic are thus subjected to mindless rumour mills and comic commentaries.

Enjoy this circus until they dish out another one. Till recently this sort of comedy was provided by the TRS chief. Now it seems it is the turn of the Congress leaders and some media outfits to entertain us and give us our daily dose of stimulants.

Don’t be anxious. There’s no danger to the unity of Andhra Pradesh.