Posts Tagged ‘andhra mahasabha’

Sunday, February 28th, 2010

Mallik Garu sent me Chapters 22 and 23 of Late Sri K. V. Ranga Reddy’s recently published autobiography in English language. As soon as I read the excerpts, I could not resist but write this quick note. Here is another classic case of hate-mongering being indulged by the separatists.

K.V. Ranga Reddy was the first Deputy Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh and the current Rangareddi district was named after him. He was also a signatory of the Gentlemen's agreement.

Sri Ranga Reddy titled his book “An Autobiography” when he published it in 1967. His book has been renamed by the separatists, in their infinite wisdom, to: “From the Struggle and the Betrayal: The Telangana Story”.

I doubt if there is any precedence to changing an author’s book title after his death. This is even more profound considering that this is an autobiography- which is a book of very personal nature written by an author about himself.

If this is not enough, the separatists have inserted a brand new Chapter-23 to the autobiography a full 40 years after Sri Ranga Reddy’s death. I am sure you can guess the nature of the title by now: “Origins of Telangana discontent – Telangana agitation”. The translator claims that Chapter-23 was constructed based on the notes left by Ranga Reddy before his death in 1970. Interestingly, K.V. Ranga Reddy said he could not write his autobiography due to his poor eye sight and hence he dictated his autobiography to Sri Subba Rao, a relative of Andhra Pitamaha.

K.V. Ranga Reddy in 1967 wrote: “Had I given this to any other writer, I was afraid he would make it more ornamental and flowery, which was not my intention. Because of my poor eye sight, I dictated the information in a fact by fact manner, without any exaggeration, to my friend Sri Kommavarapu Subba Rao. My word and his pen flowed smoothly from the beginning to the end. Sri Subba Rao ensured there were no errors of language“

So how would K.V. Ranga Reddy, who was so keen about accurate representation of his views, if he were alive, feel about changing the title of his autobiography and blatant insertion of a new chapter to the book?

I found a couple more fascinating aspects in the two chapters.

Separatists have been extensively citing Lucien D. Benichou’s book Appendex 12 where it is written: “The ‘Gentlemen’s Agreement was violated in 1956 itself when Sanjiva Reddy, the first Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh refused to name any Telangana minister as Deputy Chief Minister saying that the Deputy Chief Ministership is like the unwanted sixth finger of the hand.”

Reading the excerpts of autobiography I was surprised to learn that it is in fact Sri Ranga Reddy, when asked by press correspondents why he was not given the Deputy CM said: “What is there in Deputy Chief Ministership, more than what I have now? It is like ‘angushth-e-sheshum’ (sixth finger).”

When Ranga Reddy said “more than what I have now”, he was referring to the powerful cabinet portfolios he was holding including Home, Revenue, and Prohibition.

Let me say this in unambiguous terms- not creating the Deputy Chief Minister position was a blatant violation of Gentlemen’s agreement. However, there seems to be behind the screens consensus, as there was no major outcry by the Nizam leaders against the violation of the agreement. The issue of Deputy CM was rectified starting 1960 when Sri K.V. Ranga Reddy became the Deputy CM under Sri Damodaram Sanjeevaiah, J.V. Narasing Rao under Kasu Brahmananda Reddy, and B.V. Subba Reddy under P.V. Narasimha Rao. The Deputy Chief Minister requirement became void with Indira Gandhi’s six-point formula of 1973.

In conclusion, I found Chapter 22 more interesting as it clearly explains the healthy working relationship between the #2 man in the cabinet K.V. Ranga Reddy and the #1 man N. Sanjiva Reddy. It provides insights into the decision making process between Ranga Reddy and Sanjiva Reddy, wherein over 75% of the recommendations made by the former were approved by the latter.

K.V. Ranga Reddy was keen on not making his autobiography ornamental and flowery and wanted to avoid all exaggerations. Sadly, the separatists have blatantly flouted the wishes of Sri Ranga Reddy in order to further their agenda of hate.

Save Andhra Pradesh!

Nalamotu Chakravarthy

http://www.myteluguroots.com

http://www.facebook.com/people/@/226703252445

http://twitter.com/nalamotu

http://www.amazon.com/My-Telugu-Roots-Telangana-Bhasmasura/dp/0984238603/

Saturday, February 13th, 2010

1) What is the source of 33 crore rupees shown as balance of funds?

 

I've scanned the copy of the news paper I have from from June 16th 1968:

http://www.myteluguroots.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/33-Crores-2.jpg (please download and view it in an image editor for better resolution)
 

33 Crores Balance of Funds

 

2) Investments in Hyderabad from other regions
 

This should be welcomed. Every developed country welcomes those that want to establish businesses in their cities/states with open arms. Even A.P. welcomes investments from other states and countries.
 

3) Discrimination in irrigation projects
 

The most controversial aspect of the current separatist movement is canal irrigation. Despite the tens of thousands of crores that government invested in this area, since the formation of the state, our government succeeded in adding a mere 3.3 lakh hectares to canal irrigation as of 2006-07. Of these 3.3 lakh hectares, 1.6 lakh hectares are in Nizam Telangana, 1.3 in Kosta, and 39 thousand hectares in Seema. Now, compare that with the 14 lakh hectares brought under irrigation using tube-wells. Please note that I am not talking about ayacut area, as that does not mean much, because we can build all the canals we want, but if there is no water they are useless. We have a canal going through our lands in Nalgonda and we haven't seen a drop of water in it till today. I am talking about actual area under canal irrigation as published in the Statistical Abstract published by the government.

We can argue till the cows come home about how projects are favoring one region or the other. Bottom line, government failure in implementing projects is across the regions and the data does not support that one region was neglected at the expense of other. Also, the current separatist movement precedes Jalayagnam when TRS aligned with the Congress.

Lastly, I personally am not in favor of Polavaram as I think the investment doesn’t justify the returns it will yield. A large number of people are being displaced due to Polavaram. Also, there are credible scientists arguing that it will have the same silt problem that Sriramsagar is having- which is typical to Godavari basin. Lastly, if we build Polavaram, we will lose some of the Krishna water to other states as per Bachawat ruling.

If there is one lesson we can learn from 5 decades of mis-investments into irrigation, mega irrigation projects are a colossal failure in terms of return on investment. The best mode of irrigation is tanks and unfortunately they continue to deteriorate by day.
 

4) "Because, both the major rivers krishna and godavari flow through telangana, the region has the right to first utlize its share of water. This is the rule everywhere in the world".

 

No, this NOT an international norm. If Karnataka and Maharashtra adopt this logic, they can use all the river waters they want. Bachawat did extensive study on this subject. He studied both the American and the International models. The internationally accepted rule is “protection of existing uses”. In other words, if there is a project already built, you cannot take water from that project and give it to other projects. Karnataka has 43.7% of the Krsihna river catchment area, while our state has 29.4%. Despite it, Bachawat awarded 700 TMC to Karnataka and 800 TMC to Andhra Pradesh.

 

5) Potti Sriramulu
 

Amarajeevi’s fast was not for Madras. His death was the culmination of 50 years of Telugu’s struggle for a state. I delved into this in my book. Yes, people during his funeral shouted “Madras Manade’, but that is looking at the history through a narrow prism.
 

6) Raavi Narayan Reddy, Komaram Bheem and other legendaries not in history books
 

Rudrama Devi is a Telangana icon and can be found in all history books. I remember reading about Andhra Pitamaha Madapati Hanumanth Rao, Suravaram Pratap Reddy, Sarojani Naidu and others when in school. I haven't seen an objective study showing discrimination by region in history books. If that in fact is the case, let’s fight for it- separate state is not the solution. I personally am very fond of Raavi Narayan Reddy and believe that he should be cited prominently in our school books.

 

 “Veera Telangana Naadhi, Veru Telangana Kaadhu”
- Raavi Narayan Reddy

 

Save Andhra Pradesh!

 

Nalamotu Chakravarthy

http://www.myteluguroots.com

http://www.facebook.com/people/@/226703252445

http://twitter.com/nalamotu

http://www.amazon.com/My-Telugu-Roots-Telangana-Bhasmasura/dp/0984238603/

Thursday, January 21st, 2010

Some of the bloggers and my close friends raised objections for giving credit to Nizam Andhra Mahasabha for organizing the armed resistance against Nizam. One of the bloggers even claimed that I was re-writing history. The confusion on this subject probably stems from the exact same name used by two very different organizations.

 

The organization that represented Telugus’ interests in Kosta and Seema was “Andhra Mahasabha”. Whereas, the organization that represented Telugus interests in Nizam Telangana was “Nizam Andhra Mahasabha”.

 

Andhra Mahasabha of Kosta-Seema convened for the first time in the year 1913 in Bapatla. About 2000 visitors and 800 delegates attended this conference. In addition to Kosta and Seema delegates, there was representation from Nagpur, Warangal, and Hyderabad. Andhra Mahasabha was closely affiliated with the Congress Party. When the Quit India movement took off in 1943, the organization was banned by the British government.

 

Now to Nizam Andhra Mahasabha. The organization held its first conference in 1930 and was led by none other than the great historian Suravaram Pratap Reddy. Other leaders that led the organization in the later years included Andhra Pitamaha Madapati Hanumanth Rao and Raavi Narayana Reddy. In 1941, under the leadership of Raavi Narayana Reddy, Nizam Andhra Mahasabha changed its strategy and decided to face Nizam’s atrocities aggressively. As a result, moderate members of Nizam Andhra Mahasabha left the organization in 1944. From this point on, communists dominated Nizam Andhra Mahasabha and led the peasants towards an armed uprising against Nizam.

 

No, I was not re-writing history when I mentioned Nizam Andhra Mahasabha as the organization that led the fight against Nizam. I was merely stating a historic fact.

 

Save Andhra Pradesh!

 

Nalamotu Chakravarthy

http://www.myteluguroots.com

http://www.facebook.com/people/@/226703252445

http://twitter.com/nalamotu

http://www.amazon.com/My-Telugu-Roots-Telangana-Bhasmasura/dp/0984238603/