As former PM Jawaharlal Nehru tried to, literally, douse the fires ignited by Sriramulu's death, the state of Andhra was hastily carved out without a permanent capital.
Published May 03, 2025 | 4:00 PM ⚊ Updated May 03, 2025 | 4:00 PM
Prime Minister Narendra Modi lays the foundation stone — yet again — for Amaravati. (X)
Synopsis: Andhra Pradesh’s capital saga, rooted in its 1953 formation, reflects decades of political infighting, regional distrust, and shifting promises—from Kurnool to Amaravati, and later a three-capital plan. Leadership failures, protests, and policy reversals have stalled consensus. As Amaravati’s revival begins under PM Modi, hopes rise for a long-awaited, unified capital that truly represents all of Andhra.
Many people aren’t aware that present-day Andhra Pradesh is essentially the original Andhra State formed on 1 October, 1953, with a long struggle to find a suitable capital.
When Andhra separated from the Madras Presidency, there was a concerted demand from Andhra leaders to make Madras city the capital of the new state. A sustained campaign named “Madras Manade” was launched by Telugus to claim their rights over Madras city.
However, the Tamil leadership, including the then Tamil Nadu Chief Minister C Rajagopalachari, rejected it outright. The main reason behind Potti Sriramulu’s indefinite fast was to decide the fate of Madras city. Sadly, even Sriramulu’s tragic death after a 56-day fast could not settle the Madras issue.
As Nehru tried to literally douse the fires ignited by Sriramulu’s death, the state of Andhra was hastily carved out without a permanent capital.
C Rajagopalachari, who was annoyed with the “Madras Manade” movement, declared that not even for a single day would Andhra be allowed to have its capital in Madras. Thus, in a hurried compromise, the administrative offices were moved to Kurnool, and Andhra State was born —without the capital it initially demanded.
From the beginning, Rayalaseema (comprising four Telugu-speaking districts) leaders were lukewarm towards the idea of a separate Andhra state. Many preferred continuing with the Madras Presidency alongside the Tamils, feeling they had little in common with the Coastal Andhra leadership.
To placate them, leaders from both regions signed the Sri Bagh Pact, offering certain safeguards to Rayalaseema. The decision to make Kurnool the capital emerged from this spirit of compromise.
Yet, barely a month into the formation of Andhra State, the seeds of discord were sown again. On 5 November 1953, NG Ranga of the Krishikar Lok Party demanded that the capital be shifted to the Guntur-Vijayawada region. Andhra ministers like Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy and Gouthu Latchanna frequently clashed over the issue. Some leaders even began negotiating with the Hyderabad State government to move their offices there, citing the lack of amenities in Kurnool.
When the first session of the Andhra Legislative Assembly began on 23 November 1953, it was marked by bitter fights over the capital question. So fierce were the arguments that Chief Minister Prakasam Panthulu was prepared to resign if the government lost the vote.
On 27 November, four Congress ministers— Sanjeeva Reddy, Sanjeevayya, Koti Reddy, and Pattabhi Sitaramayya —resigned in protest against any move to relocate the capital. On the same day, 23 Rayalaseema MLAs warned they would resign if the capital was shifted from Kurnool.
Meanwhile, the streets of Kurnool erupted in protests. Demonstrators attacked MLAs and even the Speaker. Vehicles were stopped, spat on, and pelted with stones. MLA Vavilala Gopalakrishnayya suffered a head injury during one such attack.
The so-called debate in the Assembly on choosing a permanent capital exposed not just the lack of unity among Andhra and Rayalaseema leaders but also their deep-rooted mutual distrust. On 30 November, Tekkali MLA Rokkham Lakshminarasimham proposed Visakhapatnam as the permanent capital.
Rayalaseema members continued to oppose moving the capital from Kurnool. Minister Thimmareddy lamented that the very formation of Andhra State had brought only dishonor, sorrow, and destruction to the people of Rayalaseema, wiping out what little prestige the region once had.
Nellore MLA Vemayya insisted his town had all the necessary qualifications to be the capital. Communists and many Congress MLAs from Coastal Andhra pushed hard for the capital to be set up between Vijayawada and Guntur.
In the end, the Assembly did something absurd: it passed two contradictory resolutions. One declared Visakhapatnam as the permanent capital starting from 1 April 1956. The other demanded that all Andhra government offices in Madras be shifted to Vijayawada-Guntur by 2 April 1954.
What kind of logic designates one city as the capital while moving all offices to another? Needless to state the sheer absurdity of this resolution.
When this circus finally played out, it became clear there would never be consensus between Andhra and Rayalaseema leaders on the capital issue. It was at this point that Andhra leaders began to look toward Hyderabad.
Recent revelations from the biography of then Madras Chief Minister Rajagopalachari suggest that it was he who first planted the idea of Hyderabad as a capital in the minds of Seemandhra leaders.
One of the main reasons that spurred the Andhra leaders to merge their state with Hyderabad State in 1956 was to settle the debate about the capital city.
However, as the people of Telangana opposed this forced merger, the demerger became inevitable after almost six decades. And this demerger put the people of Andhra at the crossroads once again—without a proper capital city.
Fast forward to 2014. Telangana was demerged from Andhra Pradesh, and Hyderabad became the joint capital for ten years to give Andhra time to build a new one. This should have been an opportunity for a fresh start— an inclusive, rational, and visionary capital that respected the legacy and aspirations of all regions.
Instead, what unfolded was déjà vu.
The Chandrababu Naidu government in 2014 declared Amaravati as the new capital, placed in the fertile river delta between Vijayawada and Guntur, the heartland of Coastal Andhra. Land pooling began, farmers were promised world-class infrastructure, and dreams of a “Singapore of the East” were sold.
But what followed was partial implementation, incomplete infrastructure, and a growing sense of betrayal— particularly in Rayalaseema and North Coastal Andhra, which felt excluded once again.
When YS Jagan Mohan Reddy came to power in 2019, he threw another twist into the plot: a three-capital proposal — Visakhapatnam as the executive capital, Amaravati as the legislative capital, and Kurnool as the judicial capital. The logic was decentralization; the reality was deeper political fragmentation.
Protests erupted in Amaravati. Farmers who gave up their land felt abandoned. Rayalaseema and North Andhra watched carefully, hoping this time the promise would not dissolve into another betrayal.
But here too, clarity was sacrificed at the altar of political maneuvering. Legal battles, policy reversals, and political posturing stalled the process. Nearly eleven years after bifurcation, Andhra Pradesh still stands without a fully functioning capital.
From a temporary capital in Kurnool in 1953 to restarting Amaravati all over again in 2025, the capital saga of Andhra Pradesh reveals a sad truth: the state’s leadership has consistently failed to rise above regionalism and ego. Instead of vision, they’ve offered vendetta.
Instead of consensus, they’ve cultivated chaos. At every turn, the capital debate has exposed not just policy confusion but a deep-rooted failure to act in the collective public interest.
A capital is more than a set of buildings — it is a symbol of unity, identity, and hope. But for Andhra, it has become a monument to indecision, distrust, and division.
As Prime Minister Narendra Modi lays the foundation stone — yet again — for Amaravati, here’s hoping that the people of Andhra finally have a capital city they can call their own.
(Edited by Sumavarsha)
