Telangana was completely absent from the speech and was not once mentioned in the 62-page Union Budget document alongside Karnataka, Kerala, and Tamil Nadu.
Published Jul 23, 2024 | 5:19 PM ⚊ Updated Jul 23, 2024 | 5:19 PM
File photo of Chief Minister Revanth Reddy with Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman. (X)
The newly formed NDA government’s 2024-2025 Union Budget has contrasting reactions from the Telugu states.
While Andhra Pradesh is rejoicing in its prospects, Telangana is reeling from disappointment after another year of dismal allocations.
Telangana is crying foul at the budget that seemingly favours Andhra Pradesh over it.
Telangana was completely absent from the speech and was not once mentioned in the 62-page budget document alongside Karnataka, Kerala, and Tamil Nadu.
The only mention of Hyderabad was from the announcement of road development at the Orvakal node in the Hyderabad-Bengaluru industrial corridor.
This is the fifth budget where Telangana wasn’t mentioned since the budget speech for FY 2019-2020.
Responding to the Union Budget, BRS working president, KT Rama Rao recalled the previous unfulfilled promises to the state.
“We have no problem with Andhra Pradesh getting the funds for its development. We have a problem with Telangana not getting a share,” the Siricilla MLA KTR stated. Adding that all the previous promises for Telangana are still immaterial, he expressed disappointment in the unfair treatment.
“The Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014, mentioned in the budget pertains to present-day Andhra and Telangana,” he asserted. Noting that Telangana always gets the short end of the budget, he opined that only regional parties can secure regional interests.
KTR further reiterating the importance of regional parties said “Andhra Pradesh, with 16 MP seats to their regional party — TDP—secured funds, while Telangana despite electing eight MPs each from both national parties got zero funds.”
తెలంగాణలో 8 బీజేపీకి, 8 కాంగ్రెస్ కు 16 ఎంపీ స్థానాలను జాతీయ పార్టీలకు ఇస్తే
ఈ కేంద్ర బడ్జెట్లో దక్కింది గుండు సున్నా.అందుకే స్వీయ రాజకీయ అస్తిత్వమే తెలంగాణకు శ్రీరామ రక్ష.
– బీఆర్ఎస్ వర్కింగ్ ప్రెసిడెంట్ @KTRBRS#UnionBudget24 pic.twitter.com/pkHod4Ag9L
— BRS Party (@BRSparty) July 23, 2024
Uttam Kumar Reddy, Civil Supplies and Irrigation Minister of Telangana, also expressed his displeasure with the budget. “We strongly condemn this discrimination towards Telangana,” he stated adding that the government of Telangana submitted numerous applications seeking funds in the last seven months.
“The BJP Government promised to fund the Polavaram project, but gave no assurance in her budget speech today of giving funds for Palamuru Ranga Lift Irrigation Scheme,” he said.
On the other hand, Andhra Pradesh got a good share of the budget pie this year.
Among a series of measures, the Union Budget promised to arrange ₹15,000 crore this fiscal and in future years for the development of the capital city of Andhra Pradesh.
The budget also promises to support the early completion of the Polavaram project.
In addition, Andhra Pradesh also bagged funds for development works alongside grants for backward regions.
In addition to the targetted allocations, the “Purvodaya Plan” also favours development in Andhra Pradesh over Telangana.
The plan covering Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Jharkhand, West Bengal, and Odisha aims to develop the Eastern Region. The plan will focus on human resource development, infrastructure, and economic opportunity generation.
It is to be noted that the ruling TDP in Andhra Pradesh is a key ally of the NDA government, and was instrumental in helping the BJP form government along with Bihar’s JD (U).
The Union finance minister justified the expenditure on Andhra Pradesh as being in line with the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014.
However, the sole focus on Andhra Pradesh does not align with the spirit of the act, which implies equivalence among the “successor States.”
Under part X, Article 94(1) stipulates that the centre shall push for development and growth in both states. Similarly, Article 94(2), stipulates that the central government shall support the upliftment of backward regions in both states.
The sole focus on Andhra Pradesh for industrial development, essential infrastructure, and economic growth is not in line with Article 94(1). Additionally, the grants to Rayalaseema, Prakasam, and North Coastal Andhra, sans mention of Telangana are against the spirit of Article 94(2).
(Edited by Sumavarsha Kandula.)
