Using the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act as a justification for the lopsided 2024 Union budget allocation, has raised obvious concerns in Telangana.
Published Jul 29, 2024 | 3:00 PM ⚊ Updated Jul 29, 2024 | 3:00 PM
Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman and Andhra CM Chandrababu Naidu
Andhra Pradesh made headlines following the 2024 Union Budget, walking away with a good deal. Many attribute this focus to the fresh alliance of TDP-JSP and BJP, and the Centre used the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014 as justification.
Using this decade-old act as justification drew widespread criticism from the people of Telangana, most questioning the Centre’s hypocrisy in enforcing the act.
Following the bifurcation of the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh into Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, the Centre oversaw the settlements between both states, based on the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014.
The act primarily laid down the rules and regulations for the bifurcation and post-bifurcation functioning between and within the successor states. In the act, there is also a list of assurances that the central government provides to both states.
Under Part X of the act, Article 93 stated that the central government shall give both states what they are due within 10 years. On 2 June 2024, the Centre crossed this deadline.
The act enumerated a list of promises made individually to the successor states of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. These promises, listed in the 13th Schedule, range from improved policing, to key infrastructure projects for the states.
The act declared Hyderabad as a joint capital for 10 years. However, as per Article 94(3) under part 10, the central government was also responsible for supporting the construction of a new capital for the state of Andhra Pradesh.
After the then TDP government declared Amaravati as the capital, the work has only been partially completed after 10 years. Although the intervening YSRCP regime wanted to have three capitals, the lack of central support was also a primary reason.
The work for Duggirajupatnam port, with the deadline of 2018-end, is yet to begin in Andhra Pradesh. The development of the Vizag-Chennai Industrial Corridor also remains a slow process, only ramping up after the 2024 Union budget.
While Phase One of the NTPC Ramagundam thermal power plant is complete in Telangana, Phase Two dangles suspended in light of an unclear Power Purchase Agreement between the state of Telangana and NTPC.
In line with other incomplete projects, Telangana is yet to receive its railway coach factory despite the state government’s full support.
Metro works in Visakhapatnam and Vijaywada-Guntur-Tenali areas, promised under the act, are also yet to begin.
The expansion of Visakhapatnam, Vijayawada, and Tirupati airports into international airports is one of the fulfilled promises. Additionally, the establishment of the South Coast Railway Zone also fulfills the promise of a new railway zone for Andhra Pradesh.
The successor state of Andhra Pradesh is set to receive IIT, NIT, IIM, IISER, IIIT, a Central University, a Petroleum University, and an Agricultural University. Today, there are IIT, IIIT, and IISER in Tirupati, an NIT in Tadepalligudem, and an IIM in Visakhapatnam.
Additionally, there is a Central University at Anantpur and an Indian Institute of Petroleum and Energy at Visakhapatnam. The Agricultural University is the only one pending.
As promised, Andhra Pradesh also received AIIMS Mangalagiri in February 2024 alongside the National Institute of Disaster Management at Gannavaram.
The act also promised a Central Tribal University to each state. While the one in Andhra Pradesh is complete, the construction for the Telangana counterpart is yet to begin at Mulugu.
Talks of setting up the promised crude oil refinery and petrochemical complex, have only started post the 2024 polls. However, the Bayyaram steel plant in Khammam, Telangana, and the Kadapa steel plant in YSR district, Andhra Pradesh are yet to begin.
The act declared the Polavaram Irrigation Project as a national project. Under Article 90, the central government is responsible for the maintenance and development of the project for irrigation purposes. Additionally, it is also responsible for getting all the requisite clearances for its construction.
10 years later, the project is still incomplete despite multiple deadline extensions and budget escalations.
Similarly, the act also ensured the establishment of the Godavari River Management Board and the Krishna River Management Board. These Apex Councils would be responsible for approving and planning new projects along the rivers in tandem with the Central Water Commission.
Additionally, they were also responsible for resolving water disputes between the successor states. Although the bodies have been set up, there is recurring scepticism regarding their efficient functioning.
There was much clamour about Andhra Pradesh’s share in the 2024 Union budget. However, it is key to understand that the allocation from the central government is not special.
There is an obvious political angle to it, with Nitish Kumar of the JD (U), Bihar, and Chandrababu Naidu of the TDP, Andhra Pradesh playing kingmakers in the 2024 general elections. Yet, the Centre justified the allocation to Andhra as the fulfilment of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014.
The allocation of ₹15,000 crores is the fulfillment of Article 94 (3), while the special focus on Rayalaseema, Prakasam, and North Coastal Andhra is the fulfillment of 94 (2). Similarly, the benefits to Andhra Pradesh under the Purvodaya Plan are in fulfillment of Article 94 (1). However, the Rs 15,000 crore was not an actual allocation and the Union Finance Minister only said the centre would facilitate financial assistance from multilateral agencies.
That is exactly what it is. It is not virtuous of the central government to pay what is due, overdue even. Despite the gusto, the citizens would benefit from demanding their rights rather than celebrating appeasement. That is the spirit of federalism wherein the state is not subordinate to the centre.
As per the act, the Telangana to Andhra population ratio was at 58.32: 41.68 according to the 2011 Census. However, most of the promises under the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act of 2014 seem primarily disproportionately focused on Andhra Pradesh.
While some might argue that Telangana was set to inherit Hyderabad while Andhra Pradesh had no such capital, it still appears one-sided.
The very basis of the Telangana struggle was to secure the rights of the local population. This population found themselves sidelined from the mainstream pre-2014. Hence, the bifurcation was a welcome move towards progress for the region. However, there is still dissatisfaction with the central government’s apparent bias.
Using the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act as a justification for the lopsided 2024 Union budget allocation, raised obvious concerns from Telangana. Despite having a smaller share of central promises under the Act, it has far fewer fulfilled guarantees than its counterpart.
Additionally, Chief Minister Revanth Reddy’s allegations that Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan denied Telangana an IIM has added fuel to the fire. In a rare instance, amidst much deliberation, the Congress, BRS, and other parties passed a resolution in the Legislative Assembly against the ‘discrimination’ in the Union budget.
This is not a recent issue in India. Since 2014, the NDA’s undermining of state authority has slowly worsened, against the spirit of federalism.
Apart from Telangana, the state governments of Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, and Andhra Pradesh too, have criticised the Union budget recurringly during the past decade.
Notably, all these states were under Opposition except Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh.
(Edited by N Venugopal)
(South First is now on WhatsApp and Telegram)
