THE UNSTOPABLE PROCESS OF INDIAN INTEGRATION HAS BEEN STARTED,VERY SOON INDIA WILL BE DEVIDED INTO SMALL STATES,THANKS TO INDIAS "BANYA MENTALITY"
FIRST THEY WILL ASK FOR THEIR STATES ,AFTER THEY WILL ASK FOR THEIR INDEPENDENT STATES.
INDIA HAD TAUGHT TO HIS MINORITIES HOW TO BE INDEPENDENT BY SHOWING THEM TO ATTACK EAST PAKISTAN AND CREATING BANGLADESH.
NOW CHINA WILL DO THE SAME TO INDIA BY SUPORTING MAOIST,NAGALAND,BUDOLAND,GHURKHA LAND AND MANY MORE.

"JASA KARO GHAY WASA BHAROO GHAY"

JAI HOU KALI KE JAI

Timely question.
Our mind should be occupied to strengthen the economy, to do away with corruption, to remove poverty, to deal with problem of over-population, to counter the designs of ISI to bleed India.
Once these problems are resolved, the states re-reorganization can be considered.

Dear J.Surya has written a good article. This demand for creation of smaller states should not lead to balkanisation of our country, which probably China or Pakistan may look for.

For this we need to make the Centre more strong. Like for example the Governor of any particular state should never be from that state.

IAS cadres should be from the other states than the states they belong to.

But in the guise of balkanisation, we can not overlook the over all development of the state. e.g Bundelkhand in U.P.: Since the Levers of powers move around in Lucknow, This area of Bundelas has not seen any devoplment in the last sixty years of independence despite the known fact that this area is comprised of Rich Minerals/ Hard working and Simple/ Honest people. What is there fault?

Coming to Realty rates: The realty rates depends more on the development of the area rather than its being Capital of that state.
1)Indore is much more costlier than Bhopal.
2) Ludhiana is much more costlier than Chandigarh.
3) Over the years the realty rates were more in Kanpur than Lucknow despite Lucknow was the capital from the very beginning. It is for the last Ten or Twelve years that the development has started in Lucknow and the realty rates have gone up. Kanpur was much more developed during Sh C.B.Gupta's regime. Now there is hardly any development in Kanpur.
Noida/ Greater Noida are not Capitals of U.P.
Faridabad/ gurgaon are not Capitals of Haryana.
Even, Hyderabad, before the development by Chadrababu naidu, was only matching with Vishakhpatnam, another important town of A.P

As i have been writing thru these columns, the recarvation or recreation of states should not be political. It should be viewed from Managing point of view/ in the over development/ cosidering the bigger aspiration of the people and there general well being.
Rest Later.

This is what you call the comedy of errors.. More than 500 distinct geopolitical fragments which niether share anything in common come under a single roof and you call that a country and expect the constituents to feel patriotic for the same ..
Let us put a simple question to ourselves. Out of a billion people , how many of us have the capability to appreciate the concept of Nation as a single entity? Nationality doesn't reflect anywhere in our mundane life..When the aam admi has to fetch himself two square meals , all thee Nationality concepts become nonsense..
There is so much mismatch in the resource balance in the country, that sometimes it becomes practical for us to moot for smaller entities based on Economic viability.

Jug - your argument about the demand for creation of new states being a land grabbing act needs a bit of elaboration. You would be right if states created in the last couple of decades have done either worse than their original state or have done worse on social parameters outside of GDP etc.

On most of these counts, you would find that smaller states created recently have seen an uptick on governance. You would add the corruption in Jharkhand as a repartee but would probably ignore that M/s Koda and Soren have been supported by the current UPA.

You are right in saying that there should be a national character which overrides local/regional expectations. But then, you also need to define what is really that binds us together as a nation ? I would really appreciate if you could define this please.

Continuing with my rant against the lack of neutrality in your articles - You have not mentioned once that while Telangana was a demand all political parties had accepted - its the bungling by the UPA government which has caused this whole thing to flare up, hasnt it ?

Of course the usual dislike for the Thakerays is put on full display - even to the extent of clubbing congress prop Raj with Bal Thackeray.

Why is it so difficult for liberals to accept that their centralised view of governance (in which St.Stephens passouts take most of the media time and power) is dangerous, elitist and will lead to a lashback from the 'sons of the soil' in myriad ways ?

I am all for smaller units of governance, reducing the power of westernised, elitist liberals. There is much more talent in this nation in the smaller states(aka Dhoni) than the Bombay Club, Delhi Gymkhana, St.Stephens to run this country.

The article reflects an incomplete analysis of the demand for smaller states.Before commenting anything let's take the example of uttarakhand created in the year 2000.The gap between the state and national level in per capita income has been narrowed since the creation of state.This fact has also been noted by NCAER in their Draft Uttarakhand Development Report.
That's more or less the case of jharkhand and chattisgarh created in the same year 2000.
Moreover due to social,economic and political differences some areas in a state are not yet devloped since the last 62 years from independence as compared to other areas.
Therefore our country is in an intense need of devlopment through the creation of new states.
Just look at the example of UP.It has a total of 70 districts situated from north-east to north-west of India.Both the eastern and western part of UP are different in social,economic and political backgrounds .Thus the eastern portion of UP is not yet devloped as compared to the western portion and the state government is certainly finding difficult to handle this large constituency.
Therefore with the division of power the controlling can be more easy and efficient.
Yes,before deciding anything the commission should investigate such ares in the country which are in an intense need of division by going through the facts and analysis of past years.The decision should not be in a haste as the creation of state is a complex process.
So the division of states cannot be termed as totally illogical and our India cannot be called as Balkanistan or so.

yes sir
u hv really agitated the right areas.
We are not INDIA but bengali, Tamil, Punjabi , gujurati, Marathi , bihari, odia, etc etc and etc. that is really painful by living in such a wonderful country we r always confined by regional linguistic boundaries. We do not even think of our MOTHERLAND, rather we behave by congestion that we r all great individuals by language, state and religion."Desh chahe pani me dube, hum apni ahankar nahi chhodenge". Ahankar for what? for nothing, useless.
May GOD bless my MOTHERLAND, love u all my HINDbrothers. try to learn respect yourself, your work and your country then only you face yourself in the mirror.

What you need to know is that Telangana will be part of India. Neither, India is breaking into hundrends of smaller states. Do not create false fears.
Separate Telangana is not a new demand, its 50 years old demand. Its demand for economic balance, better governance, development.
Is US less united given it has twice states as that of India?

Gorkhaland will buttress the republic and not break it.
India is like the great banyan tree – the proverbial kalpavriksha – and as it grows older its lateral spread is characterized by its aerial prop roots which grow into thick woody trunks. With its long branch precariously extending to the NorthEast, thankfully, it is only natural for the tree to establish a prop root of Gorkhaland at its critically weakest juncture to cover a wide area that is India.
A dud monolith is not what the far-sighted framers of constitution envisaged in the first place. Bharat of their vision is a beautiful Indian mosiac strongly bonded by the cement of patriotism that arises out of a sense of belonging, so far only imagined by some of its constituents and eagerly poised to be mainstreamed.
Gorkhaland means Juggling-away from Bengal for true national integration, a la Jugal-Bandhi fevicol style, Jugal Daju !! :)

What u say holds true....These leaders arent,a bit, concerned about the needs and aspirations of the genral public... Whats most disheartening to see is that the student community too in the TELANGANA region is voicing its opinion for a separate state....The social fabric that held India together seems to be slowly but steadily eroding...

Jug,

Like you seemed to agree, creation of Uttarakhand does make a sense now. From a personal account, it did not make any, when I used to live in Haridwar which was a bone of contention for the two fighting regions. Almost all the business lobby including the land mafia, and the middle class servicemen, including me, were unanimous that Haridwar should be retained in UP. The rationale was that if Haridwar was included in Uttarakhand, it would be cut-off from the prosperous neighboring districts, would suffer badly in business because of new border trades rules, would go into an oblivion, and subsequently the real-estate would decline too.

It was not to be. A bloody battle was fought, and Haridwar, to our dismay was included in Uttarakhand. And as the cliché goes, the rest is history.

Haridwar became one of the prime industrial hubs in the region with everybody from HLL, Hero Honda, M&M, Sahara, to Havells, and small garment exporters setting plants and shops taking advantage of tax holiday in the region. The story of other towns like Dehradun, Nainital, and Udhamsingh Nagar is no different. Even Dehradun becoming capital was not an unnecessary expenditure. The money spent in infrastructure, or making vidhan sabha bhavan, new bus stops, etc. actually spurt the economy in the right direction. Even things like induction of new innocent faces for Uttarakhand Police with new uniforms was a welcome and refreshing change.

On the whole all of the region named later Uttarakhand was benefited. I fail to understand why this can’t be replicated elsewhere. BJP, and Congress changed hands alternatively in Uttarakhand, and in this way, there wasn’t a political stability in the region. But despite that, people felt closer to each other, and to India. The erstwhile interlinking to UP was gone, and Uttarakhand directly could relate to Mother India now.

Does the ISI want a developed, confident, and coherent India?

History is behind Telangana."Gentleman's agreement" was not honoured. leaders of Andhra robbed first water,then jobs , natural resources (coal),now land & EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES.Once Hyderabad exchequer was surplus.They spent our money for their development. .we were forcefully merged with false promises which never met. SRC commission did't recommend merger in 1956.if u look at state administration , banks etc u find hardly 5% of staff from Telangana.does 4 crore population out of 8 cr in 10 districts deserve this. no major development took place after merger.even before merger hyderabad already has world class educational institutions , hospitals, under ground drainage etc. we lost our land for irrigation projects but we cant get that water. canals were built hundreds of kms to andra region. we were left dry, nagarjunsagar dam was constructed 20km downstream from proposed site which resulted in right canal at lower level which supply to Andhra region & left canal at higher level which supply Telangana, water always flows from high level to low level. as a result entire Nalgonda district was suffering from Fluorosis where millions of people are disabled. these are only few examples.OUR FIGHT IS FOR OUR SURVIVAL.DEVELOPMENT can't replace SELF-RULE,SELF-RESPECT,INDEPENDENCE.we are not separating away from India. Telangana has the largest area, with 1,14,800 km2, which makes it larger than 17 states in India. so it is not a small state. don't compare it with demand for other small states. we are asking what was already there which was ours and nothing new.so before talking about Telangana just look at its history, injustice done,& suffering of people of Telangana. we just want the rulers who are ruling us to QUIT TELANGANA, not the people who settled in Telangana. we are also Indians & we respect plural society,unity in diversity. it was a Hyderabad state & region is telangana. so now no question of telangana without hyderabad

Will leaders/politicians consider these facts objectively?The answer is NO.Because they have their vested interests and want to make money.The people who will consider these facts have no power in decision making.Who will understand 'UNITED WE STAND & DIVIDED WE FALL'

The demand for smaller states is driven by economics, whether it's agriculture in Telangana or large base of power plants in Vidarbha, and as pointed in one of Swaminomics articles, there is a good positive economic case in creating smaller states.
There is NO reason to believe that India is going to be Balkanized due to such demands!

I think it's more towards being bureaucrats rather than fulfilling ISI's plans. Basically to fulfill the Koda principle which cannot be done when you are not in authority.

ऐ मेरे प्यारे वतन ऐ मेरे बिछड़े चमन तुझ पे दिल कुर्बान।
तू ही मेरी आरजू तू ही मेरी आबरू तू ही मेरी जान ॥धृ॥

तेरे दामन से जो आये उन हवा-ओंको सलाम
चूम् लूँ मैं उस ज़ुबाँ को जिसपे आये तेरा नाम
सबसे प्यारी सुबह तेरी सबसे रंगीं तेरी शाम
तुझपे दिल् कुर्बान ॥१॥

माँ का दिल बनके कभी सीने से लग जाता है तू
और कभी नन्ही सी बेटी बन के याद आता है तू
जितना याद आता है मुझको उतना तड़पाता है तू
तुझ पे दिल कुर्बान॥२॥

छोड़ कर तेरी ज़मींको दूर आ पहुंचे हैं हम
फिर भी है येही तमन्ना तेरे जर्रों की कसम
हम जहां पैदा हुये उस जगह ही निकले दम
तुझ पे दिल कुर्बान ॥३॥

the other isi factor.
1.flood in assam.
2.draught in orissa.
3.eartquake in latur ,gujrat.
4.selling of ranbaxy by singh brothers.
5.icl (zee) flop show.
6.faiure of lalit modi in rajasthan.

Whenever the topic of Telangana is raised, many of us blindly support Andhra or Telangana based on where we come from. Not sure how many really think of why the demand for separate state has been there for such a long time. The 2 major reasons why the demand has been pending for so many years is WATER AND HYDERBAD. People around the state have earned and invested in and around Hyderabad so there is a concerns about the safety of the investment if the state is separated while both the major rivers in our state flow mostly through Telangana. Below are some facts that are few reasons for the demand. Sentiments can be foolish but not facts.

a. There are 10 districts in Telangana, 9 in Andhra and 4 in Rayalaseema. Out of these 7 districts in Telangana, 3 in Andhra and 1 in Rayalaseema are considered severely backward districts which means 70% of districts in Telangana are backward while in Andhra it is 35% and in Rayalaseema it is 25%. Apart from these there are some areas in all parts of the state which are also backward.
b. 45% of the state income comes from Telangana region. When it comes to utilization of funds, the share of Telangana is only 28%.
c. Normally canals are dug to supply water to the crops from rivers for cultivation. The amount of land cultivated through canals in just Guntur district is more than the land cultivated with canals in entire Telangana region.
d. Nagarjuna sagar dam is built in Nalgonda district which is in Telangana but majority of the water from the dam is used for Krishna and Guntur district. The original dam was supposed to be build much ahead of its present location but the location was changed so that it falls in the Telangana region. Due to the construction of the dam several hectares of Lime stone mines vanished as part of the dam back waters. Everyone know that lime stone is used for producing cement. Even the natural resources were not allowed to remain.
e. Fluorinated water problem is only

Is asking a seperate state within is wrong?? Oh! and the Indian identity. Can i please know Mr. Jug, what is Indian Identity. Is it the Identity of that all the People who are inhabitating their lands for centuries should speak one particular language or ahould follow on particular religion. is it that the people who have to learn a particular language just for the sake of unity and compete with the people who naturally speaks that language. I think no.....Unity matters little where basic needs are not met out. There is no point being united when justice is denied to one group an dthe other enjoys. The classic example is Pakistan. They are united, atlest till today. Is it the situation ok there? Justice denied to East Pakistan. Bangalis where complled to learn URDU and forced to compted with natural urudu guys. Everybody knows what happened there.See... See i'm not deviating for the point. I just want to reinforce that India is diverse enough and we should learn to respect the Diversities it has.

The essence of India lies in its diversity. When you try threatning it, it breaks. If you allow a tamil to live like a tamil an d a punjabi to be a punjabi and a bengali to be a Bengali, then i think there is no problem forthcoming for the unity of the republic.

It is better if the writer gets the meaning of Balkanistan right.

There are more than 50 states in USA with little above 300M people, that too with dual citizenship, still its not a Balkanistan!!

We have a 100 billion people and if the administration is becoming difficult, what’s wrong if we create one or more administrative units for better governance and development.

One should remember a State is merely an administrative unit in the eyes of constitution.
There were only 14 states in 1956. Now there are 28 states and 7 Union territories. Still India is not yet Balkanistan!!

Telengana is not a small region, it is of more than 30M people with 10 districts. And was a separate state for 8 years (1948 to 56). Which was merged with Andhra even against the recommendations of Fazal Ali Commission ( 1st State Reorganization Commission).

Genuine demands of people of Telengana for better governance, education, health, water, industry and development, very much under the limits of our constitution, should never be considered as balkanization of India by any wise person.

AS globalisation spreads its nasty tentacles throughout the world, the nation states become weaker day by day. Not a good sign for the common man, if he is divided along caste and community lines... he will cease to have a strong voice to fight against economic injustices... here it is apt to remember the old saying, "united we stand, divided we fall".

AS globalisation spreads its nasty tentacles throughout the world, the nation states become weaker day by day. Not a good sign for the common man, if he is divided along caste and community lines... he will cease to have a strong voice to fight against economic injustices... here it is apt to remember the old saying, "united we stand, divided we fall".

Well, I complete agree with Gunjan, Shrikant Shukla & Ritesh Srivastav.

Jug, it seems you’re looking at new states with the brown coloured glasses of Land Maifa & their likes. Isn’t that a pessimistic choice?

More states = More focus over lesser area = More accountability !!!

AS globalisation spreads its nasty tentacles throughout the world, the nation states become weaker day by day. Not a good sign for the common man, if he is divided along caste and community lines... he will cease to have a strong voice to fight against economic injustices... here it is apt to remember the old saying, "united we stand, divided we fall".

It looks like we should abolish the concept of state and go down straight to the district level..If the argument is about efficiency of state machinery, we can evolve a mechanism with district administrative unit with some legislative powers like Panchayat and Centre at the top in a unitary framwork. Creation of states on linguistic seems to be in error in retrospect...
I agree with Jug that all these demands are nothing but amounting to Balkanization of India and ISI and more importantly, China should be delighted with these developments.

It is time we allow "fast until death" to reach its logical conclusion and instead get on with the business of governance and development.

If making smaller states and de-centralization brings better governance then why PANCHAYAT RAJ is not appreciated. And why not to give more powers to DISTRICT COLLECTORS and make them more accountable. We have tools available even at grass root levels, system has to just update them and utilize them efficiently. Create more basic infrastructure for development rather than creating more states.
Why do we ever require smaller states ?? Does it mean India do not have politicians who can manage and take care of development in BIG states. I don’t want may hard earned money to be wasted on proving Z-Security of 40-50 CMs and 100-150 Ex-CMs. Especially when they themselves accept that they could not manage BIG responsibilities. In such case what should be the batter option to have new smaller states or to have BIG skilled and capable leaders ( not Politicians..)

Precisly the OPPOSITE. India exists as a single nation BECAUSE regions have been given their states, be it linguistic in the 50's or administrative in this century. Else, there would have been 30 different countries within few years of independence, a la Pakistan's fate which disallowed the East its language and culture. Same thing almost happened with Sri Lanka which suppresses the Tamils. So India has only been pragmatic in allowing states to be formed.

Jug has trivialized the entire issue of small state creation by linking it to land garbing. Jug your blog lacks depth and understanding of the local people. Developmental imbalances are the main drivers of demand for small states. All the regional people, who are demanding smaller states have no stated or unstated wish of moving out from India. Yes, but the linguistic basis on which states were created and demanded to be created is not the correct way. The basis on which states should be created needs to widely discussed and agreed upon.

This trend is dangerous and will lead India backwards into what it was before the British conquered it. Small goons and chieftains will clamor for separate states. Sensible folks with a ture Indian identity like Sachin Tendulkar will not have a voice or say.

the balkinization threat to our country is very real. a man in street in india is swayed emotionally easily and the mass opinion tend to get coloured; rumours are taken as facts very easily. hence, a group of persons, for various selfish motives tend to start movements that may for a short time appeal a large segment of population. we should remember that the whole idea of lingustic states began with a demand for a unified idea in mid fiftees. unfortunately our masses have not learnt any lesson. hope it is still not too late.

Sir,

Your article should have read "general population that inhabits the area" and not "general popluation that inhibits".

Well. by nature we are divisive and not cohesive. Each of us want to be recognized as unique and many of us do not want to be happy living each other. ISI or no ISI, we will still fight. In the name of democracy, sane voices are throttled by mobs. Unfortunately this is the legacy we have inherited from our great freedon struggle. We have carefully got this culture of mob violence from those days. So why regret?

If you think this is Pakistan's idea of Balkanization, then I would recommend you to brush up on your basics, starting with Balkanization definition. Which is way off the mark for Indian States. I don't see the logic behind smaller state being gobbled by Pakistan. And India's unity was never the defined by homogeneous entities. The request by small states is about governance and distributing resources. For example, would AP with approx 7 Crore population be better off with 2 big capital cities like Hyderabad than a single one. By capital I meant all the development that comes with that.