TRS-SKC...abt THE CAPITAL CITY

THE CAPITAL CITY
The legendary city of Hyderabad has a glorious past, spanning a period of nearly five centuries. It was the capital city of the erstwhile Hyderabad State of which the Telangana region was a major component. The blood and sweat of the people of this region have, over generations, gone into the effort of building this great city. It naturally continued to be the capital of the Hyderabad State after its liberation from the feudal regime in 1948. It was by then itself the fifth largest city of India endowed with all magnificent infrastructure facilities and other amenities required for the capital of a state.
The Grandeur of Hyderabad:
On the eve of conditional merger of Telangana with Andhra, Hyderabad was a centre of national attraction with a vast net work of well conceived, well planned, well developed and well maintained structures and institutions. They include --
Buildings required for running the business of the government such as the Raj Bhavan, Legislative Assembly, Legislative Council, Secretariat, High Court, offices of Heads of Departments, residential acco- mmodation for judges, ministers, legislators, officers, government employees and so on;
Premier institutions of health care like Osmania Hospital, Gandhi Hospital, Nilofer Hospital, Quarantine Hospital, Cancer Hospital, ENT Hospital, Maternity Hospital, Hospital for Chest Diseases, Hospital for Mental Diseases, NIMS, Ayurvedic Hospital, Unani Hospital, Homeopathic Hospital etc.;
Prestigious educational institutions such as Osmania University, Nizam’s College, Women’s College, Saifabad College, Secunderabad College, City College, Osmania Medical College, Gandhi Medical College, Ayurvedic Medical College, Unani Medical College, Homeopathic Medical College, Dental College, College of Physical Education besides a large number of Government High Schools and the like;
Civic amenities like protected water supply round the clock, underground drainage system, shopping complexes in Abids, Pattarghatti, Sultan Bazaar and Electricity Board;
Recreational facilities and places of tourist importance like Public Gardens, Tank Bund, Gandipet, Golconda Fort, Mecca Masjid, Charminar, Qutubshahi Tombs, a large number of palaces, Salarjung Museum, to mention a few;
A well developed rail, road and air transport system, including the Secunderabad Railway Station, Nampally, Railway Station, Kachiguda Railway Station, Begumpet Airport, Road Transport Corporation, well maintained cement and black top roads.
Such was the pride of Hyderabad – the heart and soul of Telangana.
The Pathetic Plight of Andhra:
On the contrary, the erstwhile Andhra state, formed on 1st October 1953, was in a pathetic plight without a suitable capital. It would be appropriate to recall the observation of Dr. BR Ambedkar in this regard:
The new Andhra State has no fixed capital. I might incidentally say that I have never heard of the creation of a state without a capital. Mr. Rajagopalachari [the then Chief Minister of Madras State] will not show the government of the proposed Andhra state the courtesy of allowing it to stay in Madras city even for one night… The new government is left to choose its own habitat and construct thereon its own hutments to transact the business. What place can we choose? With what can it construct its hutments? Andhra is Sahara and there are no oases in it. If it chooses some place in this Sahara, it is bound to shift its quarters to a more salubrious place.
Source: Writings and Speeches of Dr. BR Ambedkar, Vol. I
This situation also gets reflected in the agony given vent by several prominent political leaders of the Andhra state and also in the comments in the media. For instance:
Kadapa Koti Reddy, an influential leader of the Rayalaseema region, opined that,
In the Andhra State there is no proper place to locate even district level offices; where is the question of finding place for locating offices for the capital city of the state? (Andhra Patrika: 13-03-1953)
Tanguturi Prakasam, a former Chief Minister of Andhra State, felt that,
All our troubles will be resolved if we get Hyderabad. But how will we get it? We have to think as to how to work for it.
(Andhra Patrika: 02-06-1953)
Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy, the then Deputy Chief Minister of Andhra State, was more emphatic about the unsuitability of Kurnool as the capital of Andhra State and about his eagerness to move away out of it. He said:
People are enthusiastically waiting for moving to Hyderabad. Nobody is feeling the pinch of shifting the state’s capital from Kurnool.
We will assure the people of Telangana, if necessary, that their positions in the cabinet and jobs in the government will be protected.
There was a comment in Andhra Patrika on this statement of Sanjeeva Reddy:
This very gentleman threatened to remain in erstwhile Madras State itself if the capital city of Andhra State was not located in Rayalaseema. (Andhra Patrika: 09-08-1954)
Sanjeeva Reddy further said:
We faced many problems in the last two years. There are no facilities for offices. If we have to wait for five more years as recommended by Fazal Ali, Andhra State will have to face innumerable problems.
(Andhra Patrika: 03-02-1956)
Y. Suryanarayana Rao, a prominent congress leader of those days, aired similar views by observing,
We have already spent one crore rupees on the capital city, Kurnool. We are still spending. Even after spending so much, has Kurnool town got a shape suitable for a capital city? Absolutely not. (Andhra Patrika: 29-09-1954)
Andhra government employees are still in Madras as tenants. The officials are worried about providing residential accommodation to them. There is no hope of completing the construction of new buildings for the Secretariat. In addition, the government employees are worried about the educational facilities for their children in Kurnool. (Andhra Patrika: 01-09-1954)
In addition to the observations made by the political leaders, the comments made in the media too are very much revealing. For instance, Andhra Patrika, a leading Telugu daily of the times was categorical in pointing out the absence of even a single suitable place in Andhra for locating its capital city. It observed -
- Visakha: Where is a road on which two lorries can safely cross each other?
- Kakinada: Where are the buildings suitable in shape and number required for the capital city of the state?
- Rajahmundry: Doesn’t have the basic requirements.

- Bezawada: There are more people than the available open place.

- Guntur: Just sufficient for the people there.

- Hyderabad: The one and the only way out.
(Andhra Patrika: 07-03-1956)
Further, the States Reorganisation Commission also was conscious of all these facts. It may be recalled that the SRC recommended retention of Telangana as a separate state, listing out a variety of reasons there for. Referring to the arguments put forth by the votaries of Visalandhra, the Commission observed,
This will also solve the difficult and vexing problem of finding a permanent capital for Andhra, for the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad are very well suited to be the capital of Vishalandhra.
(SRC Report: Para 371)

Such was the pathetic plight of Andhra which the present political leadership of that area pretends to forget!

Distortion of Facts:

While these are the facts of history on record, an impression is sought to be created by a section of Andhra leadership that the development of the city of Hyderabad took place only after it became the capital city of Andhra Pradesh.

Can there be a bigger false and absurd claim than this?

The fact is that the plight of erstwhile Andhra state in locating its capital city was mitigated only because of the formation of Andhra Pradesh and giving this fabulous city to it, literally on a silver platter, absolutely free of cost.

The development that has taken place in and around the capital city after the formation of Andhra Pradesh is natural and is comparable to the development that has taken place in other major cities of the country. It is to be realized that at the time of formation of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad was the fifth largest city in the country and even now, it continues to be in the same position. On the other hand, the growth of Visakhapatnam has been far higher and faster than the growth of Hyderabad. Quite often, the per capita income of Visakhapatnam surpasses the per capita income of Hyderabad.

False Claims:

A section of Andhra leadership and big business argue that the city of Hyderabad has been developed by investing here most of the revenue income of the Andhra area. It is therefore to be established as to who has invested here and which money it is. In this regard expenditure incurred by the State Government in the government sector and the investments made by the private sector have to be looked into separately.

Regarding Government’s spending, is there any evidence of diverting Andhra area’s revenue income for spending in the capital city? The facts are quite to the contrary. It was initially established in 1969, by the Lalit and Bhargava Committees, constituted by the Government, to look specifically into this question. Further, the details of region-wise Income and Expenditure furnished to the State Assembly by the then Finance Minister, K. Rosaiah, in March 2007, reestablished this fact.

Further, whatever developmental expenditure is incurred in Hyderabad, it is always reckoned as a part and parcel of the expenditure on Telangana. If the relative positions among the regions regarding the developmental expenditure are to be evaluated, then why not the details of expenditure incurred on all the sectors in all the regions be looked into? Why talk only about Hyderabad?

Coming to the private investment in Hyderabad, it is not any new development that has taken place after the formation of Andhra Pradesh. Hyderabad has always been the hub of economic activity for ages, attracting investments from all parts of the country. There are Gujarathees, Maharashtrians, Punjabees, Bengalees, kannadigas, Malayalees, Tamilians, Kayasthas, and also Andhras. All of them came and settled down here, much before the formation of Andhra Pradesh. This trend continued even after the formation of Andhra Pradesh. To facilitate their business, they were given quite a few incentives, including vast areas of land, which entirely belong to Telangana, almost free of cost. They have flourished and made fortunes because of the concessions and facilities provided here. They can always continue their business in Hyderabad, under the law of the land, as in any other part of the country. Therefore, the argument that the city of Hyderabad owes its premier position to the contribution of Andhra region is fallacious.

The votaries of united state of Andhra Pradesh very often exhibit their antipathy towards Telangana by suggesting segregation of Hyderabad city from the rest of Telangana under the untenable pretext that the city was developed by them. They want Hyderabad to be made a joint capital in the event of bifurcation of the state or make it a union territory. It is a fantastic nonsense, to say the least. In this context the questions that need to be answered are:

What is the purpose of a capital city?

Is it for the convenience of the people or comforts of the political elite or profits of the businessmen?

If the primary objective is to ensure the convenience of the people, how will a common man from Andhra come to the capital city, situated outside the territory of his own state? From any direction the distance between Hyderabad and the Andhra State is not less than 250 kilometers. Where is the corridor to travel through this distance? In the event of any disturbance or emergency, will not the capital city become inaccessible to the citizens of Andhra area? Then why create such an anomalous and hazardous situation for the common citizens of Andhra area? The aspect relating to the comforts of political elite does not need any discussion. They will be quite comfortable and happy wherever they are.

Now the main argument centers round the business men. They include real estate brokers, big business mafia and the sharks of corporate houses. Is it the interest of these sections that the capital city of a state is meant for?

Dr. BR Ambedkar’s Views

It may not be out of place to recall that a similar claim was put forth by the Gujaratees on the Bombay city when the erstwhile Bilingual Bombay State was bifurcated into the present Maharashtra and Gujarat States. No less a person than Dr. Ambedkar ridiculed the idea by saying that the investors have, no doubt, a right to set up their business in any part of the country; but by doing so, they cannot become owners of that place. He described them as “mortgagees”. This logic naturally applies to any business house, anywhere in the country, including Hyderabad.

Dr. Ambedkar further asked that if the Bombay city was made a separate state or union territory, where from would it get water and power supply? Will not this logic be applicable to Hyderabad city as well?

He further argued that before entertaining any idea of making Bombay a union territory, one should think of first conferring such status on Madras and Calcutta. The same argument is valid for Hyderabad too.

Cultural Onslaught:

The strategy of Andhra leaders and investors to grab the city of Hyderabad is twofold: one, putting forth fictitious claims on the development of Hyderabad city, for which they are not responsible; and, two, erasing the cultural identity and symbols of heritage forcibly foisting on Hyderabad the symbols of their region.

The identity of Telangana -- its history, culture, language, polity etc.- is eroded because of the deliberate and constant Andhra onslaughts.

One finds, at important places, innumerable statues of only Andhra personalities like N.T. Rama Rao, Kasu Brahmananda Reddy, Damodaram Sanjeevaiah, Puchalapalli Sundaraiah, Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy, Jalagam Vengal Rao etc.. Strangely statues of some more persons who never had anything to do with Hyderabad or Telangana, or even Andhra Pradesh for that matter, are a plenty. They include Tanguturi Prakasam, Potti Sri Ramulu, Alluri Sitarama Raju, Tripuraneni Ramaswamy Chowdary, Raghupati Venkataratnam Naidu, L. V. Prasad, Kattamanchi Ramalinga Reddy etc.

Re-christening places and institutions as Sanjeeva Reddy Nagar, Vengal Rao Nagar, Potti Sri Ramulu Nagar, Sanjeevaiah Park, Brahmananda Reddy Park, Sundaraiah Park, NTR stadium, NTR Ghat, Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy Sagar, Potti Sri Ramulu Telugu University, N.G. Ranga Agricultural University, besides naming structures after Ayyadevara Kaleshwar Rao, Balayogi, Vijaya Bhaskara Reddy is yet another example.

The ruling classes never cared to remember the Telangana stalwarts like K. V. Ranga Reddy, Dasarathi Krishnamacharya, Vattikota Alwar Swamy, Komuram Bhim, Ravi Narayana Reddy, Turrebaz Khan, Shoebulla Khan, Baddam Yella Reddy, Arutla Kamala Devi, Kaloji Narayan Rao and a host of others. Even Burgula Ramakrishna Rao, who was primarily responsible for the merger of Telangana with Andhra state, was also forgotten for a long time. The ongoing debate on Telangana seems to have influenced the State Government to erect his statue recently -- 35 long years after his death. But the place chosen for that is not commensurate with the stature of Burgula and his contribution to the State.

These are the facts of history, geography and polity clubbed with the emotions and sentiments of the people of Telangana!

People of this region, therefore, will never tolerate even the very idea of separating Hyderabad from the rest of Telangana. It will turn out to be an eternal source of friction and unrest with unpredictable consequences.