To, The President of India, Rashtrapati Bhavan, New Delhi,And The Honourable Chief Justice, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI,
Proposed division of State of Andhra Pradesh is politically motivated and against all principles of political prudence.
(i)Mr. PM and Mrs. Sonia have no popular mandate to decide the fate of AP.
(ii)The proposal is against the object of Article 371D which intends to integrate people of the State emotionally.
(iii)And given the working of Anti defection law MPs and MLAs of Parliament and State Assembly cannot express their free will in respective houses of Parliament and Assembly.
And One Mr. Jaipal reddy in Cabinet meet held on 3rd October claimed that non Telugu people’s contribution to the development of Hyderabad is more when compared to that of Telugu people ! After two days he tried to correct his statement stating that his intention in the statement was to highlight contribution of Other States people. Fact is that other States people in Hyderabad are 11% of City population. Muslims contribute 42%. Former Andhra State people contribute 35% of the City population.
I think exercise of division of AP must be stopped forthwith for the following reasons:
1. Government at the Center is headed by a Prime Minister who is not an elected MP from a Lok Sabha Constituency. Virtually he is a nominated PM.
2. It is repeatedly told that Decision to divide the State of AP is taken by Mrs Sonia Gandhi, UPA chairman, and is being implemented just because of her wish to give Telangana ( to KCR ). She is no President of India. She is just a political party president. This party is propped up in Parliament to run the Government by several Political parties. Our political system does not give any role to party presidents in running of the Governments.
In fact Constitution authorizes elected representatives of the people to Legislate not the Political party presidents. Still Sonia Congress is controlling the reins of power at New Delhi for obvious reasons.
3. Authority of Both the above two personalities to take such a drastic decision to divide a historic State of AP is hence questionable.
( I think Rule of these pseudo PM and UPA chairman is indirectly being facilitated by a law which was enacted in 1985 as anti defection law )
4. As long as Anti Defection law is in force question of division of State of AP should not be discussed and voted in the State Assembly and Parliament for MPs and MLAs are hand cuffed with anti defection law.
“ Anti defection law “ does not allow State and Central Legislators to express their free will as per their conscience.
This Anti defection law undermines provisions of Article 150 which provides for “ Supremacy of Parliament “ and “ Freedom of speech of Legislators in Parliament and State Assemblies “ in the interest of Democracy.
Article 105 in The Constitution Of India reads as follows:
105. Powers, privileges, etc of the Houses of Parliament and of the members and committees thereof
(1) Subject to the provisions of this constitution and the rules and standing orders regulating the procedure of Parliament, there shall be freedom of speech in Parliament
(2) No member of Parliament shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him in Parliament or any committee thereof, and no person shall be so liable in respect of the publication by or under the authority of either House of Parliament of any report, paper, votes or proceedings
(3) In other respects, the powers, privileges and immunities of each House of Parliament, and of the members and the committees of each House, shall be such as may from time to time be defined by Parliament by law, and, until so defined shall be those of that House and of its members and committees immediately before the coming into force of Section 15 of the Constitution (Forty fourth Amendment) Act 1978
Click on the following LINKS to view my You tube Videos on the issue of,
Click the following buttons to visit my other Websites:
నా ఇతర వెబ్ సైట్లు చూడడానికి ఈ క్రింది బటనులు నొక్కవలెను.
(4) The provisions of clauses ( 1 ), ( 2 ) and ( 3 ) shall apply in relation to persons who by virtue of this constitution have the right to speak in, and otherwise to take part in the proceedings of, a House of Parliament or any committee thereof as they apply in relation to members of Parliament
Anti defection law leaves Political party presidents as masters of Parliament and Assemblies and MPs and MPs are made slaves of their Party presidents. This anti defection law undermines authority and freedom of speech of not only MPs and MLAs but also Speakers of the houses of Parliament and Assemblies.
As per our tradition largest political party leader in the houses of Parliament or Assembly should run the Government and Speaker of the house should run the house – either Parliament or State Assembly.
But Anti defection law gives away reins of the legislative houses to political party presidents practically making PM or CM or Speaker subservient to Party presidents.
Clause 2 of Anti defection law reads as follows:
“2) Thus, a member of Legislature is bound to follow the instructions of his original political party in all matters that are put to vote in the House and will be disqualified if he does not follow these instructions. However, he will be saved from disqualification if his original political party condones his action in violation of the direction within fifteen days of voting.”
So, as long as Anti defection law is in force free will of people cannot be reflected in legislative houses. Hence, all the exercise and process which is under the way to divide the State of AP should be declared infructuous and unlawful.
AP State was formed to integrate Muslims of Hyderabad into Indian Union.
5. In 1956, 2 Year old Andhra State and 5 year old Hyderabad State were merged to form the present day State of Andhra Pradesh. ( Gulbarga, Bidar and Aurangabad which formed part of the then Hyderabad State were merged with Karnataka and Maharashtra states on linguistic principle ).
Andhra Pradesh State was formed to counter disintegrating forces which threatened India’s Unity in those days. The decision was taken by the then PM Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru in National interest ( It may be remembered that Nizam made a petition against occupation of his territories by India in the United Nations calling Indian police action as illegal. And that petition was lying there in the UN till 1978 ).
Apparently Former Andhra State people ( Coastal districts and Rayalaseema ) were encouraged to migrate to Hyderabad in order to outnumber Muslims there in Hyderabad city. This process had been occurring for the last 60 Years odd. Even today Muslim population in Hyderabad is about 42%. ( Muslim population percentage reduced to 25% after formation of Greater Hyderabad ).
Former Andhra State people have been living in Hyderabad for three Generations
6. Demand of Telangana districts people asking former Andhra State people to “ pack up “ militates against the very principles or basic features of the Constitution of India with regard to Citizenship.
And according to Mahabharata a person who resides in any place for more than 12 Years would become de facto owner of that property. This principle is applied as “ Principle of Adverse possession “ in our legal parlance. And Constitution of India guarantees citizenship rights to people who lived in any place in India for a period of 5 years.
“Telangana wala jago - Andhra wala bhago “ slogan used by TRS and Co. runs against the principles of the Constitution. That is why all those agreements as to Employment opportunities were drawn upon in the so called “ Gentlemen agreements “ without touching the Constitutional provisions. Acceptance of demands of Telangana political leaders with respect to former Andhra State people residing in Hyderabad city would undermine the very fabric of fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution. This would trigger rising of heads of fissiparous forces across the Country and endanger the very existence of Indian Republic.
7. Sri Krishna Committee highlighted some glaring facts about scale of development in different regions of the State of AP. According to Sri Krishna Committee Telangana region is one of the most developed regions in India. And Rayalaseema and Coastal Districts of AP are underdeveloped industrially.
AP State was integrated into one State to counter rise of Communist power in those days and Communists who were conducting Armed rebellion in Telangana were prevented from entering Hyderabad city by taking the so called Police Action in 1948 by Government of India.
8. Accusing people from former Andhra State as looters and land grabbers is most unwelcome thing. Are there any cases filed against Former Andhra State people living in Hyderabad and Telangana districts in this respect ?
9. Recently one Legislator from Telangana region threatened to blast Chief Minister’s helicopter, by taking help from Naxalites, if CM dared to visit a place in Telananga.
10. The so called GO No. 610 issued during NTR’s regime in 1985 was against the five point formula of Mrs. Indira Gandhi released in 1973. According to this five point formula regional reservations in Hyderabad must end by 1977 and in Telangana districts by 1980. So issue of GO No. 610 in 1985 to fill vacancies on regional basis was politically motivated and against Article 371D.
Division of AP is Against the spirit of Article 371 D
11. Jai Andhra movement which lasted for about 110 days was suppressed during 1971. Former Andhra State people were pacified by the Center to demand for division of the State then.
And Article 371D was brought into force in 1973 by amending the Constitution of India in 1972 as Amendment No. 32.
i) According to Article 371D if there is any dispute of displeasure as to the application of quota of reservations to different regions of the State those who are aggrieved or those who represent those aggrieved can ask for constitution of a Tribunal to exclusively deal with this problem.
To the best of my knowledge till date there is no such demand from Telangana region for the constitution of the Tribunal as envisaged in Article 371D. And if at all such Tribunal was constituted there is no trace of any cases filed in this respect.
Hence, How can Telangana leaders claim that there were violations in filling of quota of posts now ?
If there are violations aggrieved people can go to Tribunal or ask for constitution of a Tribunal if it does not exist. For this reason one should not demand division of the State.
ii) Statement of Objects and Reasons appended to the Constitution (Thirty-third Amendment) Bill, 1973 which was enacted as the Constitution (Thirty-second Amendment) Act, states that,
“….Recently several leaders of Andhra Pradesh made a concerted effort to analyse the factors which have been giving rise to the dissatisfaction and find enduring answers to the problems with a view to achieving fuller emotional integration of the people of Andhra Pradesh. “
So, basic reason and fundamental objective of Article 371D is emotional integration of different regions of People of Andhra Pradesh. Article 371D is part and parcel of Constitution of India. Article 371D addresses the problem of unity and integrity of India. Hence, provisions as to “ Objectives and Reasons “ for enactment of this Article 371D form part of Basic feature of the Constitution of India. Hence, neither Parliament not State Assembly can divide the State setting aside Article 371D. Hence, Parliament cannot amend the Article 371 D if it affects unity of the State of Andhra Pradesh.
12. Even Indira Gandhi speech mentions Hyderabad and Telangana as different regions in 1973. Hyderabad experienced immense developmental activities for two reasons. One is, money that was pumped into by Central Government and another reason is investments made by Former Andhra State people in the City. It may be noted that every year DRDO expends Rs. 10,000 crore from Hyderabad. About 150 central government offices and organizations work from Hyderabad. ONGC which has its operations concentrated in Coastal regions has its head office in Hyderabad.
Proposed division has ulterior motives,
Why Sonia Congress is in a hurry to divide the State of AP ? There must be some ulterior motive behind this exercise given the Statement of Mr. Jaipal reddy referred above.
13. State of AP is historic which pioneered formation of linguistic States in Republic of India. Eventually principle of Linguistic States obliterated “ 500 odd Princely States “ including Nizam of Hyderabad and ensured Unity and integrity of India all these years.
If this State of AP is divided in the name of Telangana which would result in mass exodus of former Andhra State people from Hyderabad city would prove another Partition.
And withdrawal of Former Andhra State people from Hyderabad would indirectly accepts argument of Nizam that his Hyderabad was occupied by India illegally…
14. Proposed division of AP would prove that Shri J Nehru was wrong in getting accession of Hyderabad into Indian Union.
And also the proposed division militates against intentions of Mrs. Indira who was for emotional integration of different regions of the State of AP.
So I request that Your Honour may be pleased to the needful to stop proposed division of AP in the interest of AP and India.
I herewith enclose my Book released on 26th October this year titled: " తెలుగు జాతి ప్రస్థానం Save Andhra Pradesh Save India" for your kind reading and reference.
( D V S Janardhan Prasad )