THE vast, undulating landscape of Telangana, the Telugu-speaking part of the Nizamat of Hyderabad, a princely state during the British Raj, has long been a scene of struggle. It saw a communist-led peasant uprising against feudal landowners between 1946 and 1951. In 1948, a clash between secessionists and nationalists set the stage for Telanganas violent accession to the nascent Indian Union.
Less than a decade later, lines blurred yet again when the demand for Vishalandhra, which meant the unification of all Telugu-speaking regions, resurfaced. The creation of Andhra Pradesh in 1956 marked the culmination of the political actions that followed, but it left some fears unheeded.
When demands for linguistic states first emerged after Independence, perhaps the most vociferous one came from the Telugu-speaking regions of Andhra in the Madras State of that time. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru reluctantly conceded to the demand after Potti Sreeramulu, who went on a fast making the demand, died in December 1952. When Andhra became the first State to be carved out on linguistic lines, it fuelled similar aspirations elsewhere, including that for a Vishalandhra.
However, the second States Reorganisation Commission (SRC, or the Fazal Ali Commission as it is known) voiced several concerns about the merger of all Telugu-speaking regions into Andhra Pradesh. Telanganas economy was less developed though it had a larger revenue base than the rest of the proposed state; there were fears that the dams planned on the Krishna and Godavari rivers would harm the interests of the Telangana region and that the people of Andhra would have an advantage in securing jobs because of their higher levels of education.
The commission recommended the status quo, with the option of merging the two States after the 1961 elections if the respective legislatures voted in favour of such a merger. But the recommendation was ignored and the political map was redrawn, with the State of Andhra Pradesh comprising the Telugu-speaking districts of Telangana and the State of Andhra. To protect Telanganas interests, however, a Gentlemans Agreement was signed. It provided for a Regional Standing Committee in the State Assembly with members from the region, which would include Ministers but not the Chief Minister. The committee could draft, advise and be consulted on proposals. The safeguards made it mandatory for either the Chief Minister or the Deputy Chief Minister to be a native of Telangana. Also, representation in the Cabinet was to be in the ratio of 60:40 for Andhra and Telangana respectively.
Predictably, Hyderabad as the State capital attracted large inflows of settlers from the coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema regions of the State. For the affluent and enterprising families migrating from the fertile delta, land was the most coveted investment. And it was easily acquired, given that Telangana had developed little under a feudal dispensation. As the region came to be peopled by non-natives, discontent spread, particularly among students, who were most concerned about unemployment. The settlers were seen as taking away much-needed jobs and grabbing valuable land.
The Gentlemans Agreement had clearly not helped. In 1968, the year the agreement was to be renewed, protests by students demanding its proper implementation engulfed Telangana. The call for government action soon morphed into a demand for a separate state.
The now famous Telangana agitation of 1969 found unlikely supporters in dissident Congress legislators from the region, led by Marri Channa Reddy, one of the founders of the Telangana Praja Samithi (TPS). Post facto narratives often see Channa Reddy as a Congress infiltrator and accuse him of dismantling students unions and womens committees to centralise the organisation. The TPS went on to win the midterm elections in 1971. But the victory was short-lived as Channa Reddy suspended the agitation and merged the TPS with the Congress. Meanwhile, P.V. Narasimha Rao, a native of Telangana, replaced K. Brahmananda Reddi as Chief Minister. The latter became the most common target of Telangana ire.
Even as the agitation petered out, another related issue reached boiling point. The Telangana agitation had demanded, among other things, the implementation of a 1919 firman by the Nizam, which said only Mulkis were eligible for public appointments in Telangana. A Mulki was one who was born in the region or had resided there continuously for 15 years and had given an affidavit abandoning the idea of returning to his/her native place. When the State government issued a government order (G.O. 36) in January 1969 repatriating nearly 25,000 non-local employees illegally appointed in Telangana, it applied to the city of Hyderabad.
After a full Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court held the Mulki rules to be invalid after the formation of Andhra Pradesh, the State government appealed to the Supreme Court. In 1972, the apex court declared them to be valid and in force. The ruling, which denied non-Mulkis government jobs in Telangana, including Hyderabad, spurred the Jai Andhra movement. Leaders claimed they preferred separation from Telangana to the humiliation of being denied jobs in their own State capital.
For 11 months in 1973, the State was under Presidents Rule in the face of a growing agitation. After the 1973 elections, Jalagam Vengala Rao succeeded P.V. Narasimha Rao as the third Chief Minister in less than five years. The Supreme Court judgment was nullified by an Act of Parliament, and a Six Point formula was drafted guaranteeing adequate preference to local candidates in admissions to educational institutions but subject to the requirements of the State as a whole. Similarly, local candidates would be preferred to specified extent in the matter of direct recruitment for certain posts. A tribunal was to be constituted to deal with grievances regarding appointments, seniority and promotion.
Much of the 1980s were taken up with N.T. Rama Raos political debut followed by the Telugu Desam Partys (TDP) heady rise to power. The actor-turned-politicians rhetoric of Telugu unity overshadowed, if not dulled, the demand for a Telangana state.
By 1996, when the TPS convention was held, Telangana slogans had become sharper, liberally using words such as colonisation and exploitation to describe the situation in the region. Five years later, K. Chandrasekhara Rao, a former TDP MLA, founded the Telangana Rashtra Samithi (TRS), which became the movements political platform. If nothing else, it ensured that Telangana remained an electoral issue. So much so that nearly every political party in the State has, at least in theory, accepted a separate Telangana.
Telanganas minimal share in the waters of the Krishna and the Godavari, despite its large catchment area, has emerged as a major issue. Tanks have given way to deep tubewells, accounting for 70 per cent of the irrigation in the region, where farming has become expensive and risky.
Rain-fed regions, highly dependent on groundwater, have seen a spurt in suicides by farmers. Lift irrigation is the only way to utilise river waters fully. Geography has been unfair to Telangana, and negligence by successive governments has added to the problem.
Yet, the Telangana movement today is not driven by economic grievances alone. It is about a people whose identity has been eroded by dominant narratives. Beyond the many misgivings is a culture smarting from decades of perceived insult. The Telangana tongue has been reduced to a deviation from the purer Telugu. Telugu cinemas classic theme of Telangana villain versus Andhra (lately even Rayalaseema) hero has made a parody of the regions culture. The demand is as much for recognition as it is for separation.
The latest episode in the Telangana movement goes back to a 1985 government order (G.O. 610), which sought to correct continuing illegal appointments. A 2004 report by the Girglani Commission on the irregularities finally led to the Congress governments decision in 2006 to repatriate close to 3,000 non-local policemen from Hyderabad. Ruling against non-local employees plea against repatriation, the High Court held Hyderabad to be under the sixth zone and not a free zone. But the apex court overturned the order on October 9 on a special leave petition. Once again, the status of Hyderabad returned to the centre of the Telangana agitation.
