Friday, December 11, 2009

History of Telangana II

1948-1952 Influx of Andhra People

It has to be noted that with no such precedence in Independent Indian political history, for four years, civil and military administrators ruled Hyderabad State. This period saw a huge influx of Andhra people into this region taking up all the new positions that the new India was throwing open to its people. With the pretext that people of Telangana were not educated in English or Telugu, the positions were filled up people from Andhra region. Once these people occupied these vital positions, they in turn invited many of their kith and kin to fill in many other positions. The history of Telangana Movement owes its origin to a certain extent to this period. During this time, it became evident to the people of Telangana that future holds complete marginalization of its people.

We don’t make a record of migrations within the state, but if there is such a statistic, it will clearly reveal that millions of Andhra people migrate to Telangana occupying many positions in the government offices, banks, schools, colleges, universities, etc. Also, there was a great influx of businessmen from Andhra who had sold off their lands and assets in Andhra and setup business in Telangana region. We will also notice almost negligible migration happened from Telangana to Andhra regions during this period.

Mulki Rules Flouted

The Nizam set up schools, colleges, madrasas and a University that imparted education in Urdu. Nizam, who had great admiration for British, started Hyderabad Civil Service (HCS) similar to Indian Civil Service (ICS). Though Nizam had three different regions in his kingdom – Telugu, Kannada and Marathi regions - he managed the conflicts that could arise between these regions by implementing ‘Mulki Rules’. Mulki Rules provide 80% reservation for local people in all recruitments for C and D posts at district level and 60% reservation for local people in Class A and B posts at divisional level. This system ensured that people of the each region got access to opportunities. The Mulki Rules came into existence in 1928.

During the influx after Independence, most of these rules were flouted using fake certificates that gave people of Andhra region a local status. When the people of Telangana realized how Andhra people were able to take up the jobs using these fake certificates, they started a protest called ‘Gair Mulki Go Back!’ [Non-Mulki Go Back]

1952 Hyderabad State Elections

And contrary to the contemporary belief that Telangana was never a state before, Burgula Ramakrishna Rao was elected the Chief Minister of Hyderabad State in 1952. Telangana was part of a state called Hyderabad state in India, before it became a part of Andhra Pradesh against its will.

Creation of Andhra State

While Hyderabad State came into existence on its own which included Telangana only in 1948, Telugu-speaking Andhra region was a part of Madras Presidency. This region became independent on August 15, 1947 along with rest of India as Madras Presidency.

Fearing that most of the newly created jobs and opportunities would be taken up by Tamils since they were more educated and had access to opportunities, Andhra people started a protest. Potti Sriramulu, the leader of this agitation started a ‘hunger strike till death’ on 19th October 1952. Even though New Delhi surmised that these people could be given a new state with a new capital to take care of academic and government jobs and other economic opportunities, Potti Sriramulu fought for Madras city (now called Chennai) as their capital city. The recommendations given to New Delhi suggested that Madras will belong to Tamils and not to Andhra People. Potti Sriramulu died on 15th December 1952 after 63 days of fasting.

His actions resulted in formation of First State Reorganization Committee (SRC) which divided the nation along linguistic lines, though Nehru was quite averse to such organization based on language.

New Delhi approved for creation of a new state called Andhra on 1st October 1953 for the people of Andhra region carved out of erstwhile Madras Presidency.

One of the misconceptions that are flouted nowadays is that Potti Sriramulu fought for a greater and unified Vishalandhra comprising all Telugu people under one state. There is no truth to this. He had in fact fought for extremely local demands for his own people of Andhra region, and not Telangana people.

Prevailing mood before Creation of Andhra Pradesh

Hyderabad State was created in 1948, Andhra was created in 1953. Andhra people won themselves a state but not Madras. Their capital city was an unknown city called Kurnool. They were still scouting for a much needed capital city that can rival Madras. The death of Potti Sriramulu put agitation of Andhra People on the national scene. With the creation of Andhra, legitimacy for creating states on linguistic lines was gaining ground.

The same bystanders from Andhra region, who stood by while Telangana went through Razakar Movement and who later on took up many positions in the Hyderabad state now started to vie for Hyderabad city.

It should be known that Hyderabad was a very famous city in the world already. It was considered the second most important city in the Muslim World where one of the world’s richest men resided. It was known for architecture marvels and international businesses. Hyderabad state was the biggest princely state in India who had direct access to British Crown.

People of Andhra now caught a new slogan to create a new state for all Telugu people, including people of Telangana. The reality had set in New Delhi that creation of states along linguistic lines could not be avoided. During First SRC headed by Fazal Ali, states like Kerala, Madras State (Tamil Nadu), Mysore state (later named to Karnataka), were all created based on linguistic lines. Andhra people vied for Hyderabad and hence whole of Telangana, and campaigned under the slogan that the binding factor was the common language Telugu. Though Telangana was unimpressed by such placatory moves because of the experiences of 1948-52, and though Telangana was least interested in joining Andhra, and though Telangana bitterly opposed it when it came to happen, Andhra prevailed and they were successful in annexing Telangana to form Andhra Pradesh thereby winning the crown jewel Hyderabad.

Another misconception that is flouted now is that First SRC has definitely agreed for creation of Andhra Pradesh from Telangana and Andhra State. That is not the case. In fact, the First SRC clearly makes a case of Telangana. Here are the excerpts from the text:

The Case for Telangana

375. …The considerations which have been argued in favour of a separate Telangana State are, however, not such as may be lightly brushed aside.

376. …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. …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. …while Telangana, itself may be converted into a colony by the enterprising coastal Andhra.

379. ' The Telangana' it has further been argued, can be stable and viable, unit considered by itself.

References: Link 1, Link 2, Link 3, Link 4, Link 5, Link 6, Link 7, Link 8.


  1. Sujai,
    I read these excerpts during my college and when I argued these i was shocked to know that none of my peers ever know about it and I was criticized for being a false propagandist. Needless to say half of my friends in my college(med school) were second generation settlers. Surprisingly most of the other half did not believe me and gave a deaf ear.

  2. Sujai this I believe because of the history text books in our school that never included true Andhra pradesh history even though we were all celebrating Nov 1 as AP formation day. Worse is the situation of CBSE history books(that I studied) although good in some parts but never ever portray the region of telugu kingdoms(just a map that shows kakatiyas as a very small kingdom) I do not know when the entire telugu people would learn their actual history from a history teacher rather than the political party funded media or the tamilian and North Indian intellectuals version of histoy books.

  3. I have read your previous articles.
    After reading this, i felt you are hypocrite. Earlier you wrote India, unity, religion blah blah. Now, Andhra, Telangana, divide blah blah.

    Anyway, write anything. it's your blog, your opinion (a*h*).

  4. "1948-1952 Influx of Andhra People"

    Is it sin for people to move to the capital of their state for a living??? Is it sin? Sujai? why did you move to USA? and now to Bangalore? what do you think about the huge influx of people from India to USA? what are your thoughts on this. You are talking like David Duke. Please just read what exactly you wrote, read it again.

    "Once these people occupied" Stop this are talking like an anti semite just like once Jews occupied NY wall street etc...

    I think this is hatred you are not able to justify why telangana people were not able to succeed and take responsibility that they did not work hard. Its easy not just for you but also to the rest of all the loosers in the world to blame.

    I can do this i will blame god for not making me a superman...Its EASY.

    Sujai why do you think the immigrants work hard in USA and are successful? Because they know they have to work hard for their survival and nobody is going to help them in this foreign land. Similar is the case of andhra immigrants to Hyderabad.

    Mulki Rules Flouted

    Does this apply in Independent progressive competent India?

    Why dont you think about improving and raising competency of Telangana people? WHO IS STOPPING?

    Why do you want to go back in time? do you think this is progressive thinking?

    "1952 Hyderabad State Elections"

    Again why do you want to go back? Nizam never supported Independent India. Nizam is always having seperatist idea of joining it with newly formed muslim nation of Pakistan.

    "Creation of Andhra State"

    "Telugu-speaking of Andhra region, and not Telangana people."

    What language do you speak Sujai???

  5. Blueshift:

    Is it sin for people to move to the capital of their state for a living??? Is it sin? Sujai? why did you move to USA? and now to Bangalore?

    It is not sin for people to move to the capital for their state for a living. But in the above section I was referring to a different state. Between 1948 and 1952, Hyderabad state was a different state.

    There are certain opportunities that a state has to create for its own people. When you select an official language that is alien to the locals the locals will lose out on their jobs. That’s what exactly happened during 1948-52. The people of Telangana were educated in Urdu at that time while most of them were illiterate.

    There was already a scheme in place to take care of such situation under Nizam Rule. In some ways Nizam governed his 3 distinct regions better than newly formed India – which went tangent on idealism. He ensured that certain portion of jobs went to people of that region only. Flouting those rules, people of Andhra were installed in various high positions in Telangana thereby tipping the balance forever.

    what do you think about the huge influx of people from India to USA? what are your thoughts on this.

    Such influx from India to USA is minimal. Even now, only citizens of USA are allowed to take up jobs in many government positions. And also there is a limit on how many foreign workers can come from countries like India. The gates are never open completely like it happened during 1948-1952.

    "Once these people occupied" Stop this are talking like an anti semite just like once Jews occupied NY wall street etc...

    Well, I don’t see any anti-semitism in it. Discrimination against any race or religion or caste can happen when certain people get an unfair head start against others. That needs to be corrected. All such corrective measures were unimplemented by Andhra Pradesh.

    I think this is hatred you are not able to justify why telangana people were not able to succeed and take responsibility that they did not work hard. Its easy not just for you but also to the rest of all the loosers in the world to blame.

    Look. You need to relax a bit and take a deep breath. There is no hatred in me against any particular Andhra person. I have many great friends who are from Andhra. I am not targeting individuals here. In fact, I have no interest in targeting Andhra even as a group.

    I will not be upset if we don’t get Telangana this time around. But all I know is that the resentment against Andhra people in Telangana will only increase if that separation does not happen now. I don’t want that to happen at all.

    The only reason I talk about Andhra people is because they are forcibly coming into the equation. As most of us see it, we are not getting Telangana because people of Andhra are not letting us go. This relationship is suffocating and yet people of Andhra do not seem to understand it.

    Telangana was not able to succeed as well as other regions and we take the blame for it. However, we want to reform ourselves on our own. We want to create opportunities to people of Telangana so that get a chance to succeed. We want to create canals so that our people can farm lands. We want to give power to our villages and industries so that they can prosper. We want to create more schools so that our kids can get an opportunity to make it out there.

    We tried to do this in this union and it didn’t work out. We want to opt out. Is that too much to ask? Its not like we have not been telling you that this marriage is not working out. There are enough indications to suggest that we wanted to opt out. So you should not be surprised at all.

    Didn’t people of Andhra seek a separate state from Madras Presidency citing the very same reasons that Tamils would hog all the jobs and positions depriving the Andhra people? So why can’t Telangana people not have their own state for themselves?

  6. Blueshift:

    Sujai why do you think the immigrants work hard in USA and are successful? Because they know they have to work hard for their survival and nobody is going to help them in this foreign land. Similar is the case of andhra immigrants to Hyderabad.

    I completely agree that most immigrants work hard. And the reason for the success of Andhra people in Hyderabad is because they have been immigrants.

    I understand what it is to be an immigrant. Currently, I am an immigrant in Bangalore. However, I will never ask for Bangalore for myself out of Karnataka. I will always believe that it belongs to Karnataka. And tomorrow for some reason Karnataka gets divided into North and South Karnataka, I will be a rational person to admit that Bangalore will belong to South Karnataka. I will not make a case for Bangalore to be Union Territory and will not foolishly say that it should belong to North Karnataka.

    Does this apply in Independent progressive competent India?

    Why should this not apply in a ‘progressive competent’ India? All states are formed along these lines – that the people of that state get a preferential treatment over others in certain opportunities – like government jobs. Even twenty years ago, the only source for employment for many Indians were government jobs. Losing out on them is deprivation of certain section of people forever.

    The very Mulki rules were agreed upon by Andhra leaders many times in the last sixty years but never implemented. Hence, the only way out is a separate state.

    Why dont you think about improving and raising competency of Telangana people? WHO IS STOPPING?

    Nobody is stopping us. However it will take time for us to get there. That does not mean we will import educated Bengalis to occupy all the basic positions till our people get ready. One of the basic ideas of having a state is such that people of that land get their basic employment and education opportunities even though more competent people may available in other states.

    That is nature of federal character of a nation. Though we live in a single nation our identity interests are protected by our states. We, the people of Telangana, always wanted to be a separate state where our interests are protected. That is a perfectly legitimate demand.

  7. Mr. blueshift, Why do you oppose formation of telangana state? How do you think it will help telangana develop staying united? Why not the otherway?

  8. Sravan,
    I cant agree anymore aboout the textbooks anymore. They were poisoned. There was no freaking mention of Telangana history. All we were fed was Potti Sriramulu died to unite Telugu people and the first Andhra CM was Prakasham and then Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy. There is no poet from Telangana, no freedom fighter, no social activist. We dont have any special festivals either. Sankranthi and Atlathadde were the main festivals according to the texts.I feel sad that we were deprived of this.
    I got a question for all you guys shouting United Andhra, Why are you imposing yourself on us? We dont want to be united with you. Accept it people!!! Leave us alone!!Enough....

  9. Sujai,

    I just found your blog. Need to catch up yet on all you have written. I just read the first link. I completely agree with you on the Telangana demand. I believe all the people of Telanagan feel the same way. You are doing a great service to Telangana and India. Keep it up and good luck.

    For myself, I have not met (personally) a Telangana person who does not want a separate state. I read postings online that say they are from Telangana (I dont really believe this part of their statement) and they don't want Telangana.

    In my life so far I stayed in many parts of AP and know the
    ignorance of Andhra people about Telangana's problems. Well, they are not facing the problems/suffering/deprivation, so they don't care and don't want to know about them.

    I think it is very difficult to bring these inequalities to attention when all the news media is owned and operated by Andhra people. I feel the pain when historic events are represented incorrectly and most of the people dont know the formation of Andhra State and Andhra Pradesh. People don't know and misrepresent that Potti Sreeramulu fought for Andhra Pradesh. When it was actually for Andhra State, to get separated from Madras State. Which was very similar to Telangana Demand except for the language aspect.

    I will be waiting for more posts from you...

  10. It is good to know that my people are now to get justice after long time (one generation suffered), please send this information to everyone in India.
    M Sateesh Goud

  11. Here Blueshift,

    You need to be made into Redshift.

    Yes, arguing on people perturbations always requires thinking temporally. So Sujai is right to travel back in time.

    You need to think, why have your fore fathers partitioned from the then already stable Madras state.

    Seems your knowledge of indian constitution is week. An indian state is a part of the Republic of India. So een after partitioning of AP, Telangana continues to be a part of India.

  12. Looks like a consistent theme in your blog is that Andhras are foreigners in Telangana--virtually all your analogies are about British in India, or Bangladeshis in Kolkata. I know that in Nizam's time Andhras were indeed considered foreigners or immigrants in Hyderabad. Looks like your thinking is stuck in that era.

    You keep asserting (as if asserting it makes it true) that a city only belongs to the region it is a part of. That idea is completely contrary to how cities live and function. A great city like Los Angeles "belongs" to Southern California only in the most mundane, boring sense; in reality, all people living in this city, man of whom are foreigners, immigrants and so on, feel a sense of ownership and pride in this city, and the city in turn fosters an environment in which everyone living here feels a part of the city.

    The same is true of San Jose, which you ignorantly say "belongs" to the locals--do you mean whites, or mexican-americans, or blacks, anyone except the Indians living there? Let me assure you that San Jose or any major American city doesn't make a mistake like that, they aspire to be world-class cities (and that doesn't mean just having fancy buildings and roads, it means a world-class outlook) and don't like to be stuck as provincial backwaters.

    Your expression is sophisticated, but your thinking is really backward and provincial, and in the matter of having a feel for the spirit of great cities, really ignorant. I feel sorry for India that a lot of people are going to be taken in by your sophistry.

  13. All the argument's here seem to imply that TG as a seperate state of HYD as part of TG would solve the problems

    Where is the money to support two or three new states ??

    It is easy to say we would split for administrative purposes but a lot more painful in practice

  14. Though I disagree with the content and arguments that Sujai and his frnds use to support their arguments I really appreciate them for this blog
    Atleast the discussion is civil if not logical all the time .

    I hope we all can set an example to the street tramps (politikos) from both sides on agreeing to disagree

  15. Indian Angeleno:
    Looks like a consistent theme in your blog is that Andhras are foreigners in Telangana--virtually all your analogies are about British in India, or Bangladeshis in Kolkata.

    I also used the analogies of Tamils, Kannadas and Telugus in Bangalore, Gujaratis in Tamils in Mumbai consistently in blog. You seem to have consistently missed those analogies.

    I know that in Nizam's time Andhras were indeed considered foreigners or immigrants in Hyderabad. Looks like your thinking is stuck in that era.

    Mulki Rules treated the people of Telangana and Andhra differently though they lived in the same state.

    You keep asserting (as if asserting it makes it true) that a city only belongs to the region it is a part of. That idea is completely contrary to how cities live and function.

    Really? Give an example. Use a case where a region was separated to create a new province/state/nation to showcase how the people of a city chose not to go with the region.

  16. @Indian Angeleno

    You are confusion demographic makeup with geographic demarcation.

    LA may have many migrants (just like Hyderabad), but it is in California and nobody disputes that.

    Mexicans and Texans don't claim LA to be their city.

  17. jimbo:

    Atleast the discussion is civil if not logical all the time.

    Thanks. I owe it to the commenters who keep the discussion civil on this blog. I thank them all.

  18. hi i read ur views
    but i have something different

    Isn’t it strange that ‘Regionalism’ has suddenly started gaining more prominence lately?

    Don’t you feel that regional parties have become more powerful in holding the UNION at ransom?

    Why is this happening so often?
    Answer: I believe that it is human nature to follow what others do (if they are successful in achieving what they want).

    My reasoning:
    The congress didn’t take any action against the MNS till the elections were over, why?
    Because the MNS was nullifying the Sena and so the Congress was at profit without doing something outrageous.
    As soon as the elections are over, Congress wakes up and acts (suspension of the MNS MLA’s from the legislature) portraying that they are against any violence. Where was the Congress when there was far bigger violence happening on the streets of Mumbai (thrashing of the poor and the helpless)? Where was the ‘action’ then? So an example was set that one could get away by talking Regionalism.

    The issue of Telangana has a long history of over 40 years. But why has the regional party TRS become so aggressive in pursuing it lately even though it was formed in 2001?

    please read the full blog at

    please do post ur views!!

  19. Ajit Singh,
    By completely focussing on the present issue you ignoredthe historical background of these separate state movements. Well telangana sentiment cannot be actually called as a regionalism because though andhra and telangana are quite simimilar culturally and linguistically there are certain subtle differences.
    And this separate state movement is not because of these subtle differences.
    It involves decades long discrimination of the region in all sectors and gross underdevelopment and economic regression.
    This has given rise to a tendency of superiority among one regiona people and inferiority among the other. This I think you can understand is very dangerous for our Nation's Integrity. SO it is better we separate as states and thereby get a chance to politically strengthen those long suppressed masses.
    Telangan by it self is not a very small state as percieved by most rather it would be 13th largest state in the union. It is selfsufficient interms of resources. Political empowerment of people is more possible in a smaller state and can aid in proper utilization of the regions' resources and at the same time prevents exploitation by politically strong other regiomns.
    Looking at the issue as regionalism is only a result of failure to consider the historic background and regional economy.
    Whereas there has been always several demands for separte states in other regions in India based mostly on similar reasons, national medias and people's focus has turned to them because of the recent political exigency in Andhra Pradesh

  20. Ajit singh,
    For you know the history of telangana butmay be you were oblivious tothe changes that were happeneing in the last few years,
    TRS formed in 2003 to fight for separate telangan state because it wanted to capitalize on telangana people's longstanding aspiration.
    It formed coalition in 2004 to win elections and join govt in 2004 but failed to pressurize the govt against powerful andhra lobbying.
    The party legislatives promptly resigned from the govt when it became clear that congress has only made false promise.
    Whereas before2009 elections every party has promised separation of telangana state before elections and people were really looking for some initiation.
    Adding ire to the fury,
    Supreme court has made a judgement to recognize hyderabad as a freezone and not to implement GO 610 in that region thereby creating an opportunity for political parties and people to begin the agiation.

  21. Ajit Singh:
    I address some of these issues on this blog in other posts.

    They are titled (not in exact words):
    Excessive Nationalism
    Excessive Regionalism
    Coalition Politics


  22. can u mail me Telangana history pre-independence please.. this is my Id-

  23. I think this is nothing but chauvnistic interpretation of history. I would like to challenge line by line but not sure if it is worth.

    However, I would like to ask few questions. How would you know that Telangana people didn't want to form AP. Isn't it true that Congress and Communists supported the formation of AP. Isn't it true that the resolution for unified state was passed in both assemblies. Isn't it true that all major Telangana leaders singed Gentlemen's agreement(GA).

    Isn't it true that the domicile rule as well as GA itself is meant for 5 years which can be extended for a maximum of another 5 years meaning regional reservations in any job are invalid after 1966. Based on this who is abusing who?

    The so called crown jewel is surrounded by people barely eating twice a day. Isn't this the primary reason for the 1948 revolt against Nizam's attrocities.

    Stop abusing history and creating divisions in the country.

  24. To Sravan's post on Dec 30th.

    I'm not defending congress, but can anyone tell me where Congress said it will support or give Telangana before 2009 elections. Congress was more or less single handedly lead by YSR who is known for his opposition to Telangana (I'm not a YSR fan, rather hate him more than anyone. However, to me history is history no matter whom I hate). Congress (in turn YSR's policy) got majority in 2009 election. Doesn't it mean Telangana people didn't considered separate Telangana as much as you are trying to present here.

  25. On Telangana: avatar reading all the things said about telangana it seems that all the examples of so called discrimination are regarding some public sector jobs which form maybe 10% of state employment. The author of this blog seems to be from he private sector. My question is this - have you ever been denied a job in any private sector because of your region. In fact, on the contrary what about all the jobs created by andhra people ?

    To the ridiculous statement that " we have tried living together and it is not working - leave us" , I think the issue is of hyderabad. As far as I see the telangana movement started in late 40's and Hyderabad has been the joint capital since the 50's. So the issue of hyderabad attracting andhra capital and people is as old as the telangana issue. So the issue of hyderabad should be settled at the same time. Clearly, if the motives of so-called telangana agitatorsmis altruistic and about cultural issues this should not be a problem


Dear Commenters:
Please identify yourself. At least use a pseudonym. Otherwise there will be too many *Anonymous*; making it confusing.

Do NOT write personal information or whereabouts about the author or other commenters. You are free to write about yourself. Please do not use abusive language. Do not indulge in personal attacks and insults.

Write comments which are relevant and make sense so that the debate remains healthy.