By: J R Janumpalli
Congress party and Andhra congress appear to be conspiring to create another pestering ulcer for Telangana in Hyderabad city by making it ‘Hyderabad Capital Region (HCR)’ on the lines of ‘Delhi Capital Region(DCR)’.The following CWC resolution appears to be the foundation for it.
The resolution of CWC:
“To declare that Hyderabad will be the common capital of both states for a period of 10 years after the formation of the state of Telangana and to put in place legal and administrative measures to ensure that both state governments can function efficiently from the common capital during the said period of 10 years.”
It seems the resolution is intended to appease the seemandhra looters of Telangana from whose ‘kabanda hastalu’ the region is trying to extricate itself for the last 57 years. Congress Party has been the patron of this politico-corporate mafia for long, for obvious reasons and is being extorted by them in this situation of its political compulsion. The idea is so gross that it is totally devoid of any rationale and does not have a compulsive need for it. It is quite clear that this resolution is conjured up expressly to protect the fraudulent appropriation of Telangana resources by seemandhras in and around Hyderabad and regularize them under the cover of a special status for the city. We may now look in to the implications of the resolution.
If we analyse the statements made by some of those seemandhra predators and the observations of congress honchos in charge of Telangana issue after CWC resolution, we can surmise their stratagem. Sri Madabhushi Sridhar, Professor, Nalsar University of Law examines pros and cons of it and sums up the possibility of the following gambits in his article ‘T State without powers over Hyderabad?’
1. Hyderabad will be Union Territory for 10 years, accommodating Capitals of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh.
2. Present Greater Hyderabad will be separate distinct terriory considered as Hyderabad Capital Region (HCR) on the lines of NCR -National Capital Region).
3. HCR also might have a Legislative Assembly like that of Delhi. (They may call it with a different name). The Assemblies and CMs of HCR, Telangana and AP will not have any executive or legislative power on ‘Public Order, Police and Land, which are very crucial subjects’.
4. If Hyderabad does not have Assembly, Telangana Assembly might be given all administrative controls over Hyderabad, except ‘Public Order, Police, Land and powers of controls, fee and other aspects over these three, which means even revenue, which might go to Center.
He avers that, it is against the constitution to give a state without powers over Law & Order, Police and Land along with revenue, and entrusting them to Center. Except as UT, Hyderabad cannot be considered as joint capital. Without amending Constitution it is not possible to divert the key powers to center, even after Hyderabad is made a UT. If Telangana remains a state with Hyderabad as its capital, there is no way that such state can be deprived of power to deal with public order as Constitution cannot approve such a scheme.
At the outset it may look to us that the above schemes are not possible as they require constitution amendment. We also believe that the BP may not agree to the amendment. But, the very proposal of 10 year long period for common capital in the CWC resolution , the hankering attitude of seemandhra politicians on Hyderabad and luke warm reaction to it from T-congress pre supposes the likelihood of the scheme becoming a reality in one form or other. If it was only for the use of infrastructure, there is no exigency to have more than 2-3 years’ time as common capital. The recent attempts of BJP cozying up to TDP and partisan attitude of Venkayya Naidu for seemandhra suggest that we cannot rule out the support of BJP to at least HCR scheme without UT status. If it comes along by giving them 10 year tenure as common capital ;denying Telangana government the law and order authority; sharing the city’s revenue in that period ; entrenching the inordinately excessive number of seemandhra employees in Hyderabad city till their retirement(which appears to be the wish list of seemandhras in the event of demerger) tantamount to infringing on the sovereign authority of states in a federal setup and is against the very spirit of federalism in our constitution.
It is paradoxical to think that seemandhra people’s safety and fundamental rights are different from other people in Hyderabad city. Even more enigmatic is to countenance a scheme like HCR to address these fabricated fears. As we understand the constitution, the law of the land is same for Telangana government or Central government or Telangana people or any people from other states in Telangana and allover India. Delhi as the seat of the national government as it needs to deal with many countries of the world and with several international matters, the central government needs to have a capital region like that of NCR with a special status. Where is the comparison between Delhi and Hyderabad?
The law of the land can adequately address the fictitious apprehensions of seemandhras. There is no need to create a new precedence which was not made in case of cities like Madras and Mumbai for the sake of the protection of questionable interests of seemandhras. It is a restriction on the sovereign authority of Telangana government in their own capital city. It also casts aspersion on the integrity of the government of Telangana people. It is undemocratic, and an unscrupulous political gamesmanship making mockery of our constitution.
Even if it is agreed to, for some specious reason, given the crafty and covetous nature of seemandhras, where is the guarantee that it will end at the end of 10 year period?
In this context, it may be useful to know the opinions from people from outside our state on this matter.
1. Saying Yes to Telangana – Praful Bidwai (Kasmirtimes.com)
“The 10-year interval would merely prolong the inevitable divorce. Worse, it would open up the dangerous possibility that Coastal business interests with enormous money power will exploit discontent among Seemandhra politicians and foment violence to sabotage Hyderabad’s separation.”
2. Chandigarh lends a clue to Hyderabad future – Dr. Pramod Kumar, Director, Institute for Development and Communication (IDC), Chandigarh.
“Chandigarh was awarded to Punjab in February 1970 with a promise to transfer it back after five years. It did not happen.
….. Again, the Punjab accord was signed in 1985 between the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and Sant Harchand Singh Longowal with a promise to transfer Chandigarh to Punjab by January 1986. Owing to political dithering, this award is yet to be implemented.
.…. In the tri (bi) furcation of Andhra Pradesh, the political leadership is guilty of the same perverse wisdom witnessed in the mid-1960s when Punjab was trifurcated and the state capital of Chandigarh was given the status of a union territory.
….The Punjab problem has persisted and Chandigarh has been the bone of contention. The people of Andhra Pradesh can do very well by learning from the Punjab experience.
..Another lesson is that states without a capital city lose a space that can act as a driver of growth.
….. For instance, Punjab’s growth has suffered a major setback for having no control over its own capital. It could not build another one because of ongoing dispute. It missed the IT revolution because it did not have advantages of its own growth pole. In other words, in the absence of its own central business capital it has suffered a major setback in the neoliberal globalized economy.
.….Similarly, without their own capital city and little control over Hyderabad both the states-Telangana and Andhra Pradesh- may suffer a development lag.
Congress party after decades of angst of Telangana people, because of TRS and TJAC caught in the cleft stick of political compulsion has decided to grant Telangana State. But the party wants to garner all the importance to itself. It is keeping TRS and TJAC at arm’s length. The T-Congress is subservient to it. Andhra Congress with its unscrupulous politics is trying to call the shots on the terms of division of the state. Congress Party appears to be obliging them by its unequivocal stand on Hyderabad city.
Hyderabad city is the icon of history and culture of Telangana. It is not negotiable. Its umbilical relation with Telangana region cannot be compromised in any way. The congress party or UPA has no right to arbitrate and adjudicate unilaterally on the status of Hyderabad without the consent of Telangana people. A straightforward and unencumbered capital city of Hyderabad to Telangana is in the best interest of the people from both the regions.