The general perception of the people of Andhra Pradesh is that the announcement made by the Congress on 30.7.2013 to bifurcate the state of Andhra Pradesh is purely aimed at political gains at the cost of welfare of the state and the people. This view takes support from the following facts.
On 9 December 2009, Union Minister of Home Affairs Sri.P.Chidambaram announced that the Indian government would start the process of forming a separate Telangana state, pending the introduction and passage of a separation resolution in the Andhra Pradesh assembly without doing any basic home work.
This resulted in protests across both Andhra and Rayalseema and, keeping in view of these reactions of people of other regions; the Government of India announced on December 23rd 2009 that no action on Telangana will be taken until a consensus is reached by all parties and groups in the state.
However, contrary to the above statement, leave alone consensus, but even without attempting for any interaction with the groups from the state suddenly the Congress party on 30.7.2013 announced the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh. Reacting to the agitation in both the Houses on this announcement the Hon'ble Finance Minister Sri.P.Chidambaram made a statement that this issue was the most discussed in his career and the said decision was taken on the basis of home work done through Justice Srikrishna Committee and no political angle involved. If this claim is a fact, the people are demanding answers for the following:
The UPA government remained silent on Telangana for the last nine and half years without doing any precious little. If that being an undisputable fact is it ethical to suddenly announce such a major decision of bifurcating the state just before ensuing general elections?
The media reports indicated that on 30.7.2013 a meeting of UPA partners took place and immediately after which a decision to divide Andhra Pradesh was announced. People of Andhra Pradesh wonder whether any agenda and supporting documents were given to UPA Partners in that meeting on the bifurcation of the state, and if so, they should be made public.
Assuming that some documents were given to UPA partners can anyone believe that the time of 40 minutes spent by about eight UPA partners was sufficient enough on a major issue like division of a state?
As on the day the decision was taken to bifurcate Andhra Pradesh the UPA was in clear minority and its present government survives on outside support from some political parties. If that being a fact, whether it is ethically and morally correct for the UPA partners to decide the issue of such a magnitude?
Is it not fact that the UPA partners are facing similar demands for separation of regions in their home states and those demands are still pending? If that being a fact, the enthusiasm and eagerness shown by the UPA partners in taking a decision to bifurcate Andhra Pradesh in just 40 minutes can only demonstrate their moral bankruptcy. Can anyone deny this?
The Congress tried to justify its decision to bifurcate Andhra Pradesh on the grounds that the demand for Telangana is long pending. If long pending demands are to be given priority, it needs to be explained as to why demand for separate Goorkha Land, which originated as far back as 1907 is left un-answered? What are the impending reasons for singling out Andhra Pradesh by departing from the principle stand of the Congress to take up long pending demands on priority?
Sri.P.Chidambaram claimed that their decision to bifurcate Andhra Pradesh was based on home work done through Justice Srikrishna Committee. If that being a fact, is it not necessary for the UPA government to place its home work on such a major issue before the Parliament and Assembly of the state concerned for appreciation of all issues raised in the said report, especially when government spent more than Rs.25 Crore for the same? What are the circumstances in which the said report could not be taken up for wider discussions involving the legislature, immediate stake holders and social groups?
If the said report is taken into consideration the Congress and UPA might have definitely had an opportunity to visualize the steps needed to be addressed in the eventuality of the bifurcation of the state, but unfortunately no respect was shown to the findings of Justice Srikrishna Committee before announcing bifurcation of the state.
Is it a fact that the said committee annexed a chapter said to be confidential to its report and what are the circumstances in which the said chapter claimed to be confidential was kept away from the Parliament?
Whether the said chapter claimed to be confidential was considered by the UPA partners in their meeting on 30.7.2013? If yes, how a document can be accessed by UPA partners, which was kept away from the Parliament on the grounds of confidentiality? If not, how a major decision of dividing the state could be taken without considering the report in its entirety?
Majority of the Congress leaders from the Andhra Pradesh including the Chief Minister expressed publicly that the decision to bifurcate Andhra Pradesh was hasty and certain critical issues like sharing of resources, status of Hyderabad etc should have been addressed before announcing the same.
Caught in the web of public fury the Congress is advising the stake holders to express their apprehensions and views before an informal Anthony Committee, which in fact their internal committee. Is it not amounting to initiation of deliberations again on the issue?
What happened to the promise made by Sri.P.Chidambaram on December 23rd 2009 that no action on Telangana will be taken until a consensus is reached by all parties and groups in the state?.
In democracy the deliberations always precede decisions and not vice versa. Is it not clear from these evidences discussed that the decision taken by the Congress and UPA to bifurcate Andhra Pradesh is clearly politically motivated?