The idea behind this blog is to educate/help/enlighten and not to create controversy or to incite. The opinions and views expressed on this blog are purely personal. Please be soft in your language, respect Copyrights and provide credits/links wherever possible.The blog team indemnifies itself of any legal issues that may arise out of any information/ views posted by anyone on the blog. E-mail:
Your Ad Here

Tuesday, February 2, 2010



In 1953, Telugu speakers of Madras Presidency wanted Madras as the capital of Andhra state including the famous slogan Madras Manade (Madras is ours) before Tirupati was included in AP. Madras, at that time was an indivisible mixture of Tamil and Telugu cultures. It was difficult to determine who should possess it. Panagal Raja, Chief Minister of the Madras Presidency in the early 1920s said that the Cooum River should be kept as a boundary, giving the northern portion to the Andhras and the southern portion to the Tamils. In 1928, Sir C. Sankaran Nair sent a report to the Central Council discussing why Madras does not belong to the Tamils. Although historically and geographically it is a part of the Andhra region[citation needed], the greater political dominance of the Tamils in 1953 at both Central and State level politics caused Madras to remain in the Tamil region. According to the JPC report (Jawahar Lal Nehru, Bhogaraju Pattabhi Sitaramayya, C. Rajagopalachari) Telugu people should leave Madras for Tamils if they want a new state.

In an effort to protect the interests of the Telugu people of Madras state, Amarajeevi Potti Sriramulu attempted to force the Madras state government to listen to public demands for the separation of Telugu speaking districts(Rayalaseema and Coastal Andhra) from Madras state to form the Andhra state. He went on a lengthy fast, and only stopped when Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru promised to form Andhra state. However, there was no movement on the issue for a long time. He started fasting again for attaining statehood for Andhra in Maharshi Bulusu Sambamurti's house in Madras on 19 October 1952. It started off without fanfare but steadily caught people's attention despite the disavowal of the fast by the Andhra Congress committee. The government of the day however did not make a clear statement about the formation of a new state despite several strikes and demonstrations by Telugu people. On the midnight of 15 December (i.e. early 16 December 1952), Potti Sreeramulu died and laid down his life trying to achieve his objective.

In his death procession, people shouted slogans praising his sacrifice. When the procession reached Mount Road, thousands of people joined and raised slogans hailing Sriramulu. Later, they went into a frenzy and resorted to destruction of public property. The news spread like wildfire and created an uproar among the people in far off places like Vizianagaram, Visakhapatnam,Vijayawada, Rajahmundry, Eluru, Guntur, Tenali, Ongole and Nellore. Seven people were killed in police firing in Anakapalle and Vijayawada. The popular agitation continued for three to four days disrupting normal life in Madras and Andhra regions. On 19 December 1952, the Prime Minister of the country Jawaharlal Nehru made an announcement about formation of a separate state for Telugu speaking people of Madras state. House no. 126, Royapettah high road, Mylapore, Madras is the address of the house where Potti Sriramulu died and it has been preserved as a monument of importance by the state government of Andhra Pradesh.

On the basis of an agitation, on October 1, 1953, 11 districts in the Telugu-speaking portion of Madras State voted to become the new state of Andhra State with Kurnool as the capital. Andhra Kesari T.  Prakasam Pantulu became first Chief Minister of thus formed Telugu State. Thus, Andhra State was a state created in India on October 1, 1953 from the Telugu-speaking northern districts of Madras Presidency. It comprised Coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema Regions.

The formation of linguistic states is the single most important event in the history of South Indian languages, as it provided an opportunity for these languages to develop independently, each of them having a state to support.

Coastal Andhra Region

Srikakulam District
Vizianagaram District
Visakhapatnam District
East Godavari District
West Godavari District
Krishna District
Nellore District
Prakasam District
Guntur District

Rayalaseema Region

Kurnool District
Kadapa District
Anantapur District
Chittoor District


In December 1953, the States Reorganization Commission was appointed to prepare for the creation of states on linguistic lines. The States Reorganization Commission (SRC) was not in favour of an immediate merger of Telangana region with Andhra state, despite the common language between the two. Para 382 of States Reorganization Commission Report (SRC) said "opinion in Andhra is over-whelmingly in favour of the larger unit, public opinion in Telangana has still to crystallize itself. Important leaders of public opinion in Andhra themselves seem to appreciate that the unification of Telangana with Andhra, though desirable, should be based on a voluntary and willing association of the people and that it is primarily for the people of Telangana to take a decision about their future".

Telanganas had several concerns.

The region had a less developed economy than Andhra, but with a larger revenue base (mostly because it taxed rather than prohibited alcoholic beverages), which Telanganas feared might be diverted for use in Andhra. They also feared that planned dam projects on the Krishna and Godavari rivers would not benefit Telangana proportionately even though Telanganas controlled the headwaters of the rivers. Telanganas feared too that the people of Andhra who had access to higher education, would have the advantage in government and educational jobs.

The commission proposed that the Telangana region be constituted as a separate state with a provision for unification with Andhra state, after the 1961 general elections, if a resolution could be passed in the Telangana state assembly with two-third majority. Chief Minister of Hyderabad State, B Ramakrishna Rao strongly believed majority of Telangana people were against the merger. Prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru initially ridiculed the idea of merging Telangana with the Andhra State, fearing a “tint of expansionist imperialism” in it. Later, he compared the merger to a matrimonial alliance having “provisions for divorce” if the partners in the alliance cannot get on well.
However, following"Gentlemen's agreement,the Central government, established a unified Andhra Pradesh on November 1, 1956. The agreement provided reassurances to both parties in terms of power sharing as well as administrative domicile rules and distribution of expenses of various regions. (Nehru merged Telangana with Andhra State irrespective of local peoples' wish and told if people do not want to continue they can be separated after 5 Yrs.)

From: Burgula Ramakrishna Rao
Chief Minister, Hyderabad

To: Shri U. N. Dhebar
President, Indian National Congress
New Delhi.

My dear Dhebarbhai,

What I am writing to you just now is in the nature of an interim report. Shri Bhargava is flying to Delhi tomorrow and I thought I should write to you lest the whole thing should be rather late. Yesterday and today I had the advantage of meeting a number of persons in individual and representative capacities. This morning both Shri Bhargava and myself had a little round of villages round about Hyderabad. It is not so very easy to assess the views of the people in any manner that can be called accurate. Besides the time at our disposal is so short that we have to do the assessment in a great hurry. Subject to these considerations I am giving below the assessment of the situation as I see it.

There is, no doubt, considerable agitation in Telangana on this important question. When I say considerable, it is of course nothing of the type we come across in Bombay. The agitation this side is spread over the whole province and not restricted only to cities. My estimate of the views of the people of Telangana is that the people by majority would desire Telangana to remain a separate state. There is a strong section of the people holding the other view, that is in favour of Vishalandhra, but the majority is decidedly in favour of retaining Telangana as a separate province as recommended by the S.R.C. The actual breakdown of views I shall try to give in a fuller report that I shall be sending from Bombay. There should, however, be no doubt in anybody's mind that the majority opinion is inclined towards a separate Telangana Province.

I shall now briefly summarise the pros and cons of the situation. Those who desire the formation of Vishalandhra support their view on the following considerations:

1. Many of them would have desired the retention of Hyderabad State as it is at present, but since this is broken in linguistic pieces and since the big two pieces have gone to their respective linguistic units, the third also, viz. Telangana, should go to the large Andhra province.

2. The slogan of Vishalandhra has been in the field for a long time. It had its emotional appeal. In Hyderabad it represented the urge to break away from the feudal system. Hence they believe that Vishalandhra be formed to satisfy that urge.

3. The supporters of the Cultural Integration feel that it is better that two Telugu-speaking people living in contiguous areas should come together. For them there is a great cultural advantage in a bigger province. This is entirely an emotional approach to which a section of the literary people attach considerable importance.

4. In a bigger province, the expenditure of administration becomes less. Duplication and overlapping can be avoided. This is one important point in favour of Vishalandhra. There can be one Governor, one High Court, one Public Service Commission and many other departments can be reduced as compared to their double strength just now for two provinces.

5. There is also a belief that in a larger province there may be a larger scope for industrial development etc. The enumeration of these points is rather illustrative than exhaustive.

Those who are strongly agitating for the retention of Telangana as a separate province do so for, amongst others, the following reasons:-

1. They believe that the emotional urge for Vishalandhra has been considerably weakened after the formation of the separate Andhra state. It will further weaken with the creation of Telangana which is purely a Telugu state. There is no agitation of a strong character in Andhra on this subject while there is a strong agitation in Telangana not to merge with Andhra.

2. If a separate Telangana is formed, it will not practically upset anybody. Ideologists and the people with emotional approach will be a little disappointed but there will be no agitation. On the contrar if Telangana is compulsorily merged with Andhra there will be considerable bitterness in Telangana with no adequate advantage on the other side.

3. Telanganites feel that apart from being Telugus they have built up their own way of life during the last 175 years. This way of life is in many respects different from the way of life of the Telugus in Andhra. The merger, they fear, will destroy this way of life. That is why they are worried.

4. Quite a large number of Telanganites are Urdu-knowing and Urdu-speaking people. For more than a hundred years Urdu has had its place in the life of the people. The administration is carried on in Urdu, records are maintained in Urdu, courts conduct their proceedings in Urdu, lawyers and other professionals carryon their work in Urdu. They are, naturally afraid that the merger would take away the importance of Urdu in their life. They do not like this prospect.

5. Educationally Telangana is very backward as compared to Andhra. They are particularly backward in the study of English for which there are either no facilities or very poor facilities. They are, therefore, afraid that in the matter of service in a bigger province, they will be at a terrific disadvantage. While there are thousands of graduates and M.A's in Andhra, there are not even a few hundreds in Hyderabad. No guarantees can level up this great deficiency. Services, therefore, are afraid of an adverse effect of the merger.

6. Economically, Telanganites are afraid that they will be sufferers in Vishalandhra. On an average, Telanganites are poor people. They have no money reserves as some people in Andhra have. They are afraid there would be an immediate exploitation in land and even in trade, small and big. They have got many instances where Telugus from Andhra do not hesitate to exploit the Telugus from Telangana economically when they get an opportunity to do so. This is by far their biggest fear.

7. Although the language is common, there are instances that there is no love lost between the Telugus in both the states. The classical example of this mutual dislike can be found in the attitude of Andhra officers during the Razakar agitation and immediately after the accession of Hyderabad. While, they say, the Marathi, Kannads and other officers were comparatively kind to the people of Hyderabad, Andhra officers were particularly harsh and unrelenting. There are bad memories left. These memories are so fresh in the minds of the Telanganites that they do not want to be at the mercy of their brethren in Andhra.

8. The Communists and the Communalists, as in similar cases in other parts of India, having made common cause in demanding Vishalandhra, the other sections are rather doubtful whether it would lead to the happiness of the people on both sides. They believe that for the Communists and Communalists, it is a political game. They are not sincere in their support of a larger province.

9. Those who desire a separate Telangana as recommended by the SRC are prepared, as they say, for any test to ascertain the wishes of the people. They claim that in a test it can be found that a larger majority of Telanganites are opposed to the merger. They also claim that if elections are held on this issue they would not yield even a single seat either to the Communists, the Communalists or even the sponsors of Vishalandhra.

I have sketchily summarised some of the pros and cons of the situation. It would be wrong on my part to give any opinion of mine. I have kept my mind open on the subject. I have summarised the situation in an objective and dispassionate manner. I shall write more about this in my fuller review of the situation from Bombay. I may however, add one thing that in case Telangana is kept a separate unit there is no harm in having common aspects of the administration common. For example, the Governor, High Court, and the public service commission can be common for both units. I write this subject to the decision of the high command in this respect.

With my kindest personal regards

Yours sincerely,
Sd/- B. Ramakrishna Rao

The Gentlemen's agreement of Andhra Pradesh (1956) refers to a gentlemen's agreement that was signed between Telangana and Andhra leaders before the formation of the state of Andhra Pradesh in 1956. The agreement provided safeguards with the purpose of preventing discrimination against Telangana by the government of Andhra Pradesh. The Text of the same is reproduced below:-

A. Regional Standing Committee.

1. There will be one legislature for the whole of Andhra Pradesh which will be the sole law making body for the entire state and there be one Governor for the State aided and advised by the Council of Ministers responsible to the State Assembly for the entire field of Administration.

2. For the more convenient transaction of the business of Government with regard to some specified matters the Telangana area will be treated as one region.

3. For the Telangana region there will be a Regional Standing Committee of the state assembly consisting of the members of the State Assembly belonging to that region including the Ministers from that region but not including the Chief Minister.

4. Legislation relating to specified matters will be referred to the Regional committee. In respect of specified matters proposals may also be made by the Regional Committee to the State Government for legislation or with regard to the question of general policy not involving any financial commitments other than expenditure of a routine and incidental character.

5. The advice tendered by the Regional Committee will normally be accepted by the Government and the State Legislature. In case of difference of opinion, reference will be made to the Governor whose decision will be binding.

6. The Regional Committee will deal with following matters:

i) Development and economic planning within the framework of the general development plans formulated by the State Legislature.

ii) Local Self Government, that is to say, the Constitutional powers of Municipal Corporations, Improvement Trusts, District Boards and district authorities for the purpose of Local Self Government or Village Administration.

iii) Public health and sanitation, local hospitals and dispensaries.

v) Primary and secondary education.

v)Regulation of admission to the educational institutions in the telangana region.


vii) Sale of agricultural lands.

viii) Cottage and small scale Industries, and

ix) Agriculture, Cooperative Societies, Markets and Fairs.

Unless revised by agreement earlier this arrangement will be reviewed after ten years.

B. Domicile Rules : A temporary provision be made to ensure that for a period of five years, Telangana is regarded as a unit as far as recruitment to subordinate services is concerned; posts borne on the cadre of these services may be reserved for being filled up by persons who satisfy the domicile conditions as prescribed under the existing Hyderabad Mulki Rules. ( 12 years of Stay in Telangana area).

C. The position of Urdu. The Government of India would advise the state Governement to take appropriate steps to ensure that the existing position of Urdu in administrative and judicial structure of the State is maintained for a period of five years.

D. Retrenchment of surplus personnel in the new State. The Government of India do not anticipate any retrenchment. the intention is that so far as possible, the service personnel from the Hyderabad State should be automatically integrated into the services of the Andhra Pradesh without any process of screening. Should, however, any retrenchmentbe found necessary, the entire personnel of the services of the enlarged State will be treated on equal footing.

E. Distribution of expenditure between Telangana and Andhra Regions. Allocation of expenditure with the resources of the state is a matter which falls within the purview of the State Government and the State Legislature.. Since , however, it has been agreed to the representatives of Andhra and Telangana that the expenditure of the new state on central and general administration should be borne proportiona-tely by the two regions and the balance of income should be reserved for expenditure on development of Telangana area, it is open to the state government to act in accordance with the terms of agreement in making budgetary allocations. The Government of India propose to invite the attention of the Chief Minister of Andhra to this particular understanding and to express the hope that it will be implemented.

F. The existing educational facilities including Technical Education in Telangana should be secured to the students of Telangana and further improved.

G. The cabinet will consist of members in proportion of 60:40 percent for Andhra and Telangana respectively, out of 40 % of Telangana ministers, one will be a Muslim from Telangana. If the Chief Minister is from one region the other region should be given Dy Chief Ministership.

Signatories - Andhra region Telangana Region

B. Gopal Reddy
Chief Minister, Andhra State

B. Rama Krishna Rao
Chief Minister, Hyderabad state

N. Sanjeeva Reddy
K.V. Ranga Reddy
M. Channa Reddy
Alluri Satyanarayana Raju
J.V. Narsing Rao

The States Reorganization Commission was constituted by the Central Government of India under the States Reorganization Act and consisted of Hon. Fazal Ali, K.M. Panikker, & H.N. Kunzru. The Report submitted by the Committee in 1955 known as SRC Report went among other things into the problems of Telangana and Andhra regions, and the arguments for and against the merger of two regions.

The Case for Vishalandhra

369. The next question which we have to consider is the future of the Telugu speaking areas of the existing State of Hyderabad, with particular reference to the demand for creation of Vishalandhra.

370. It is unnecessary for us to trace the history of the Andhra agitation in any great detail, because the Andhra State is now in existence, having been established on 1st October, 1953. In point of fact, however the arrangements which were made in 1953 have not been regarded by the Andhras in the new State, especially in the Circars, as final and the case for the creation of Vishalandhra has remained substantially un-examined.

371. The advantages of a larger Andhra State including Telangana are that it will bring into existence a State of about 32 millions with a considerable hinterland, with large water and power resources, adequate mineral wealth and valuable raw materials. This will also solve the difficult and vexing problem of finding a permanent capital for Andhra, the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad are very well suited to be the capital of Vishalandhra.

372 Another advantage of the formation of Vishalandhra will be that the development of the Krishna and Godavari rivers will thereby be brought under unified control. The Krishna and the Godavari projects rank amongst the most ambitious in India. They have been formulated after prolonged period of inactivity, during which, for various technical and administrative reasons, only anicuts in the delta area have been built. Complete unification of either the Krishna or the Godavari valley is not, of course, possible. But if one independent political jurisdiction, namely, that of Telangana, can be eliminated, the formulation and implementation of plans in the eastern areas in these two great river basins will be greatly expedited. Since Telangana, as part of Vishalandhra, will benefit both directly and indirectly from this development, there is a great deal to be said for its amalgamation with the Andhra State.

373. The economic affiliation of Telangana with the existing Andhra State are also not unimportant. Telangana has in years of scarcity a sizable deficit in food supplies. The existing Andhra State, however, has normally a surplus which Telangana may be able to use. The existing State of Andhra has likewise no coal, but will be able to get its supplies from Singareni. Telangana will also be able to save a great deal of expenditure on general administration in case if it is not established as a separate unit.

374. The creation of Vishalandhra is an ideal to which numerous individuals and public bodies, both in Andhra and Telangana, have been passionately attached over a long period of times, and unless there are strong reasons to the contrary, this sentiment is entitled to consideration.

The Case for Telangana

375. The case of Vishalandhra thus rests on arguments which are impressive. The considerations which have been argued in favour of a separate Telangana State are, however, not such as may be lightly brushed aside.

376. The existing Andhra State has faced a financial problem of some magnitude ever since it was crated and in comparison with Telangana the existing Andhra State has a low per capita revenue. Telangana, on ther other hand, is much less likely to be faced with financial embarrassment. The much higher incidence of land revenue in Telangana and an excise revenue of the order of Rs.5 crores per annum principally explain this difference. Whatever the explanation may be, some Telangana leaders seem to fear that the result of unification will be to exchange some settled sources of revenue, out of which development schemes may be financed, for financial uncertainty similar to that which Andhra is now faced. Telangana claims to be progressive and from an administrative point of view, unification, it is contended, is not likely to confer any benefits on this area.

377. When plans for future development are taken into account, Telangana fears that the claims of this area may not receive adequate consideration in Vishalandhra. The Nandikonda and Kushtapuram (Godavari) projects are, for example among the most important which Telangana or the country as a whole has undertaken. Irrigation in the coastal as of these two great rivers is, however, also being planned. Telangana, therefore, does not wish to lose its present independent rights in relation to the utilization of the waters of Krishna and Godavari.

378. One of the principal causes of opposition of Vishalandhra also seems to be the apprehension felt by the educationally backward people of Telangana that they may be swamped and exploited by the more advanced people of the coastal areas. In the Telangana districts outside the city of Hyderabad, education is woefully backward. The result is that a lower qualification than in Andhra is accepted for public services. The real fear of the people of Telangana is that if they join Andhra they will be unequally placed in relation to the people of Andhra and in this partnership the major partner will derive all the advantages immediately, while Telangana itself may be converted into a colony by the enterprising coastal Andhra.

379. Telangana, it has further been urged, can be a stable and viable unit considered by itself. The revenue receipts of this area on current account have been estimated at about Rs. 17 crores, and although the financing of the Krishna and Godavari projects will impose a recurring burden on the new State by way of interest charges, the probable deficit, if any is unlikely to be large. In favorable conditions, the revenue budget may even be balanced or indicate a marginal surplus. This fairly optimistic forecast can be explained or justified by a variety of reasons.

380. One important reason is, of course, that the existing Hyderabad State and Telangana as part of Hyderabad have benefited considerably from the implementation from April, 1952, of the Finance Commissions' recommendations. The increase in central payments from out of the divisible pools of income-tax and Central excise which has been possible under the present arrangements and the reduction in police expenditure for which credit can be taken, as the situation in Telangana improves, more or less offset the loss on account of the abolition of internal customs duties; and if the scope which exists of raising the yield of certain State heads of revenue is fully explored, the financial position of Telangana need not cause anxiety.

The State of Hyderabad

381. The advantages of the formation of Vishalandhra are obvious. The desirability of bringing the Krishna and Godavari river basins under unified control, the trade affiliations between Telangana and Andhra and the suitability of Hyderabad as the capital for the entire region are in brief the arguments in favor of the bigger unit.

382. It seems to us, therefore, that there is much to be said for the formation of the larger State and that nothing should be done to impede the realisation of this goal. At the same time, we have to take note of the important fact that, while opinion in Andhra is overwhelmingly in favour of the larger unit, public opinion in Telangana has still to crystallize itself. Important leaders of public opinion in Andhra themselves seem to appreciate that the unification of Telangana with Andhra, though desirable, should be based on a voluntary and willing association of the people and that it is primarily for the people of Telangana to take a decision about their future.

383. We understand that the leaders of the existing Andhra State may be prepared to provide adequate safeguards to protect the interest of Telangana in the event of its integration in Vishalandhra. These safeguards may take the form of a guarantee (presumably on the lines of Sri Baug Pact between Rayalaseema and Coastal Andhra) of opportunities for employment for Telangana in the public services of the new State at least to the extent of one-third, that is to say, roughly in the proportion, and an assurance that particular attention will be paid to the development plans of this area.

384. We have carefully gone into the details of the arrangements which may be made on these lines. It seems to us, however, that neither guarantees on the lines of the Sri Baug Pact nor constitutional devices, such as "Scottish devolution" in the United Kingdom, will provide workable or meet the requirements of Telangana during the period of transition. Anything short of supervision by the Central Government over the measures intended to meet the special needs of Telangana will be found ineffective, and we are not disposed to suggest any such arrangement in regard to Telangana.

385. A further point to be borne in mind is that the State of Andhra was brought into existence only recently and has still not got over the stress of transition. It has for example, still to formulate a policy on land reforms and the problems arising from the partition from the composite State of Madras have, by no means, been. Tackled fully yet. Integration of Telangana with Andhra at this stage is, therefore, likely to create administrative difficulties both for Andhra and Telangana.

386. After taking all these factors into consideration we have come to the conclusions that it will be in the interests of Andhra as well as Telangana, if for the present, the Telangana area is to constitute into a separate State, which may be known as the Hyderabad State with provision for its unification with Andhra after the general elections likely to be held in or about 1961 if by a two thirds majority the legislature of the residency Hyderabad State expresses itself in favor of such unification.

387. The advantage of this arrangement will be that while the objective of the unification of the Andhras will neither be blurred nor impeded during a period of five or six years, the two governments may have stabilized their administrative machinery and, if possible, also reviewed their land revenue systems etc., the object in view being the attainment of uniformity. The intervening period may incidentally provide an opportunity for allaying apprehensions and achieving the consensus of opinion necessary for a real union between the two States.

388. Andhra and Telangana have common interests and we hope these interests will tend to bring the people closer to each other. If, however, our hopes for the development of the environment and conditions congenial to the unification of the two areas do not materialise and if public sentiment in Telangana crystallises itself against the unification of the two states, Telangana will have to continue as a separate unit.

389. The State of Hyderabad (as we would prefer to all this unit), to be constituted for the time being, should consist of the following districts,' namely, Mahabubnagar, Nalgonda, Warangal including Khammam, Karimhagar,Adilabad, Nizamabad, Hyderabad, Medak and Bidar and Munagaala enclave in Nalgonda district belonging to the.Krishna district of the existing Andhra State.(Source: Government of India's "Report of the States Reorganisation Commission, 1955".)
Separate Telangana state movement

1969 Movement

In the following years after the formation of Andhra Pradesh state, however, Telangana people had a number of complaints about how the agreements and guarantees were implemented. Discontent with the 1956 Gentleman's agreement intensified in January 1969 when the guarantees that had been agreed on were supposed to lapse. Student agitation for the continuation of the agreement began at Osmania University in Hyderabad and spread to other parts of the region. Government employees and opposition members of the state legislative assembly swiftly threatened "direct action" in support of the students. This movement, also known as Telangana movement, led to widespread violence and deaths of hundreds of people including 360 students.

Although the Congress faced some dissension within its ranks, its leadership stood against additional linguistic states, which were regarded as "anti-national." As a result, defectors from the Congress, led by M. Chenna Reddy, founded the Telangana People's Association (Telangana Praja Samithi). Despite electoral successes, however, some of the new party leaders gave up their agitation in September 1971 and, much to the disgust of many separatists, rejoined the safer political haven of the Congress ranks.

During the movement Government promised to correct the violation to Gentleman's agreement in jobs, budget allocations, educational facilities[4]. Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi was strongly aginst the division of the state but on her recommendation, P. V. Narasimha Rao became first Chief minister of Andhra Pradesh from Telangana on September 30, 1971. Still some of the extremist leaders who were not the Congress men remained in the cause. The non Congress men formed the STPS (Samyukta Telangana Praja Samiti) Leader include, Badri Vishal Pitti, Sada Laxmi, Konda Laxman etc. under leadership of Sridhar Reddy, student leader.

In the year 1972, all candidates belonging to STPS under the leadership of M Sridhar Reddy contested the assembly elections, however, only Mr T Purushotham Rao got elected from Wardhannapet constituency of Warangal District and rest were defeated. In 1969, Mr Purushotham Rao unveiled Telangana map in the state assembly.

At the end of 1972, when the Supreme Court upheld the Mulki rules, Jai Andhra movement started in Coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema regions protesting the protections mentioned in the Gentleman's agreement. P. V. Narasimha Rao had to resign as Chief minister of Andhra Pradesh on January 10, 1973. President's rule was declared in the state. Finally, a political settlement was arrived at under the aegis of the Central Government. A Six-Point Formula was agreed upon by the leaders of the two regions to prevent any recurrence of such agitations in future.

The `Six-Point Formula' included

(1) the abolition of Mulki rules and the Telangana Regional Committee (protections mentioned in the Gentleman's agreement) and
(2) the establishment of a Central University at Hyderabad to augment educational facilities.
(3) In regards to jobs, state divided into six zones, within the framework of three regions, namely, Coastal Andhra, Rayalaseema, and Telangana (Zone V, and Zone VI) with Hyderabad under Zone VI. Each zone should prefer local candidates for state government jobs. However according to GOM, the regions were rezoned with Zone I,II,III Coastal Andhra, Zone IV Rayalaseema, Zone V,IV Telangana.

Movement in 1990-2004

The emotions and forces generated by the movement, in 1969, were not strong enough, however, for a continuing drive for a separate state until 1990s when Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), promised a separate Telangana state if they came to power. BJP created Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh and Uttarkhand states in year 2000 as promised. But the BJP could not create a separate Telangana state because of the opposition from its coalition partner, Telugu Desam Party.

These developments brought new life into the separatist Telangana movement by year 2000. Congress party MLAs from the Telangana region, supported a separate Telangana state and formed the Telangana Congress Legislators Forum. In another development, a new party called Telangana Rashtra Samithi (or TRS) was formed with the single point agenda of creating a separate Telangana state, with Hyderabad as its capital lead by Kalvakuntla Chandrasekhar Rao popularly known as KCR.

2004 and later

In 2004, for Assembly and Parliament elections, the Congress party and the TRS had an electoral alliance in the Telangana region with the promise of a separate Telangana State. Congress came to power in the state and formed a coalition government at the centre. TRS joined the coalition government in 2004 and was successful in making a separate Telangana state a part of the common minimum program (CMP) of the coalition government. In September 2006 TRS withdrew support for the Congress led coalition government at the centre on the grounds of indecision by the government over the delivery of its electoral promise to create Telangana. In December 2006, the TRS won the by-election to the Karimnagar parliamentary constituency with a record margin.There was pressure on the Congress party to create a Telangana state in 2008.

All TRS legislators in Parliament and in State (4MPs, 16MLAs, 3MLCs) resigned in the 1st week of March 2008 and forced by-elections to increase the pressure on Congress party, and to intensify the movement. By-elections for the 16 MLA seats, 4 MP seats were held May 29, 2008. During the election campaign, the TRS party said it is a referendum on a Telangana state but both Congress and TDP parties said it is not a referendum on Telangana and also said that they are not opposed to the formation of Telangana state. To the disappointment of Telangana proponents, the TRS retained only 7 out of 16 MLA seats and 2 out of 4 MP seats after the by-elections.

In June 2008, Devender Goud, who is considered number two in the TDP, a politbureau member and Deputy Leader of the Telugu Desam Legislature Party, resigned from the party saying he would devote his time and energy to the formation of a separate Teelangana state. In July 2008, Mr Goud along with some other leaders like Mr. E Peddi Reddy formed a new party called Nava Telangana Praja Party.

On 9 October 2008, in a historical turnaround from its 26-year history TDP announced its support for the creation of Telangana.

The Nava Telangana Party, led by the former home minister of Andhra Pradesh, T Devender Goud, declared Telangana as a separate province within India on November 2, 2008. Konda Laxman Bapuji announced that "We solemnly declare statehood for Telangana on November 2, 2008.

2009 and later

In February 2009, state government declared that it had no objection, in principle, to the formation of separate Telangana and that the time had come to move forward decisively on this issue. To resolve issues related to it the government constituted joint house committee.

Ahead of the 2009 General Elections in India all the major parties in Andhra Pradesh supported the formation of Telangana. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) again announced their policy of having smaller states and would create two states, Telangana and Gorkhaland, if they won the election. The Congress Party still says it is committed to Telangana statehood, but claims Muslim minorities are opposed to creation of separate state along with majority of people. Some analysts, however, feel that the "Muslim reluctance card" has been very smartly played by Chief Minister Y. S. Rajasekhara Reddy, who is staunchly opposed to the formation of the new state.

The Telugu Desam Party(TDP) has promised to work for Telangana statehood. Telangana Rashtra Samithi (TRS) joined a Mahakutami (or grand alliance) with TDP and left parties to defeat the Congress party for denying statehood for Telangana.

The Praja Rajyam Party (PRP), newly founded by film star Chiranjeevi, supported Telangana statehood prior to elections, (but after sensing the public desire for a united Andhra Pradesh later changed its stance.) Nava Telangana Party merged with PRP after it realized that there is not enough political space for two sub-regional Telangana parties with Telananga statehood as main agenda.

Several political parties, including some Telangana congress leaders, criticized Chief Minister, Y.S. Rajasekhara Reddy (YSR), when he changed his stand from pro-Telangana and gave anti-separation statements after the polls.

Congress returned to power both at center and state.

In September 2009, Chief Minister Y. S. Rajasekhara Reddy (YSR) died in a helicopter crash while flying in bad weather.

In the first week of Dec 2009, the TRS president, K. Chandrashekar Rao (KCR) started a fast-unto-death demanding that the Congress party introduce a Telangana bill in the Parliament. Student organizat-ions, employee unions and various organizations joined the move-ment. Telangana strikes shut down Telangana on Dec 6th and 7th. Student organizations planned a massive rally at the state Assembly on Dec 10th. Government warned that the rally did not have permi-ssion and deployed police troops through outTelangana.The apparent decline in KCR's health led to a sense of urgency to take a decision on the issue of Telangana statehood.

Proposed Telangana State Formation Process

On December 9, 2009, at 11:30 PM, Mr. P. Chidambaram, Union Minister of Home Affairs announced that the Indian government will start the process of forming a separate Telangana state, upon introduction and passage of a separation resolution in the Andhra Pradesh assembly. KCR thus ended his 11 day fast, saying from his hospital bed that this was a true victory of the people of Telangana. People from Telangana celebrated the central government's decision while those from the Coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema regions (Andhra region) protested.

In fact, within a short time of the Home Minister's declaration, sensing the public mood, MLAs from the Coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema regions (Andhra region) submitted their resignations in protest of the process of creation of a new state within Andhra Pradesh. As of 16 December, at least 147 legislators (including Praja Rajyam Founder Chiranjeevi and many Members of Parliament resigned in protest of the Government's decision to begin discussions on forming a new state of Telangana. 22 Ministers from the State Cabinet, all from Andhra (Andhra and Rayalaseema) regions submitted their resignations.

On December 16, media reports confirmed that there was a split in the Praja Rajyam Party (PRP) over the Telangana issue, with its leader Chiranjeevi as well as 16 out of 18 party MLAs(remaining 2 are from Telangana) opposing the division of Andhra Pradesh while Telangana leaders in the party were unhappy with the shift in the party's views.

On December 23, the Government of India announced that no action on Telangana will be taken until a consensus is reached by all parties.

The TRS reacted by calling for another bandh (general strike) on 24th Dec '09, an action aimed at stalling the regional economy. A JAC (Joint Action Committee) was formed with pro-separation members of the major political parties. There have been reports that members of the JAC have widely divergent approaches on the issue of a separate Telangana. Subsequently, Andhra (Coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema) region MLAs started withdrawing their resignations while MLAs and ministers from Telangana started submitting their resignations, demanding the Centre to take immediate steps to initiate the process of bifurcating Andhra Pradesh.

Home minister had a all party meet on January 5 to elicit views of all parties in the State.

Further, on the advice of Congress party's central leadership, all of the Ministers from Telangana have withdrawn their resignations. Rallies, hunger strikes, suicides continues, sometimes turning into violent, through out Telangana to protest against the delay in bifurcating the State. The all-party Telangana Joint Action Committee (JAC) started relay hunger strikes and threatened resignations of all legislatures on Jan 28, demanding the Centre to spell out its stand on separate Telangana and start the process of creating the State within a timeframe. 

Union home minister P Chidambaram on January 28 said that the Committee to examine the demand for a separate Telangana would be announced next week.

 On Feb1,2010 Chidambram stated that the commitee is a mechanism to form a consensus based on Jan 5th meeting.


  1. In 1972 "Jai Andhra Movement" you wrote only 2 line you should write in detail why movement came and whole Andhra shut down for 6 months for what?, what I know is for separate state of Andhra then what happened? Who stop them? What happened in Andhra assemble at that time. You should write in detail the whole article is telangana point of view if you can write Andhra perspective then they will be legitimacy to this article.

  2. @Murthy. U r quite right that the article is wholly on T point of view. How it could become legitimate if written in Andhra Perspective, I fail to understand. There is nothing much in archieves about Jai Andhra movement. Pl.see -,9171,906815,00.html

    Also something more -

    In September 1971, Brahmananda Reddy, the then Chief Minister, resigned his position to make room for a leader from Telangana to become the Chief Minister. On the 30th of September, 1971, P.V.Narsimha Rao* became the Chief Minister. The Telangana Praja Samiti was dissolved and its members rejoined the Congress.(*He raised to the position of occupying the Chair of Prime Minister of India during 1991-96.)

    During 1972, another agitation known as the Jai Andhra Movement was launched in the Andhra region. The agitation was a sequel to the Telangana agitation which demanded that only `Mulkis' should be appointed to the posts in Telangana including the Hyderabad city. The `Mulki' issue had a long history behind it. As early as in 1919, the Nizam of Hyderabad issued a firman laying down that only `Mulkis' are eligible for public appointments in the State. `Mulki' was defined as one who was born in the State of Hyderabad or resided there continuously for fifteen years and had given an affidavit that he abandoned the idea of returning to his native place. Even after the formation of Andhra Pradesh, the Mulki rules continued to be in force in the Telangana region. As these rules stood in the way of the people of the Andhra region to compete for the posts, their validity was challenged in the High Court. A full bench of the High Court by a four-one majority held that the Mulki rules were not valid and operative after the formation of Andhra Pradesh.

    But on an appeal by the State Government, the Supreme Court declared on the 3rd of October, 1972 that the Mulki rules were valid and were in force. The judgement created a great political crisis in the State. The people of the Andhra region felt that they were reduced to the status of second class citizens in their own State capital. They felt that the only way to uphold their dignity was by severing their connection with Telangana and started a movement for the separation of Andhra region from Andhra Pradesh.

    As the agitation continued, President's rule was imposed in the State on the 10th of January, 1973. Finally, a political settlement was arrived at under the aegis of the Central Government. A `Six-Point Formula' was agreed upon by the leaders of the two regions to prevent any recurrence of such agitations in future. The `Six-Point Formula' included (1) the abolition of Mulki rules and the Telangana Regional Committee and (2) the establishment of a Central University at Hyderabad to augment educational facilities.

    On December 10, 1973, President's rule in the State was revoked and a popular ministry with Sri Jalagam Vengala Rao as the Chief Minister was inducted. With this, normalcy returned and the State enjoyed political stability.

    I hope this meets ur requirement. THANKS.