Federalism and the Formation of States in India

Federalism and the Formation of States in India: Some Evidence from Hyderabad-Karnataka Region and Telangana State Susant Kumar Naik ISBN 978-81-7791-255-5 © 2017, Copyright Reserved The Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bangalore Institute for Social and Economic Change (ISEC) is engaged in interdisciplinary research in analytical and applied areas of the social sciences, encompassing diverse aspects of development. ISEC works with central, state and local governments as well as international agencies by undertaking systematic studies of resource potential, identifying factors influencing growth and examining measures for reducing poverty. The thrust areas of research include state and local economic policies, issues relating to sociological and demographic transition, environmental issues and fiscal, administrative and political decentralization and governance. It pursues fruitful contacts with other institutions and scholars devoted to social science research through collaborative research programmes, seminars, etc. The Working Paper Series provides an opportunity for ISEC faculty, visiting fellows and PhD scholars to discuss their ideas and research work before publication and to get feedback from their peer group. Papers selected for publication in the series present empirical analyses and generally deal with wider issues of public policy at a sectoral, regional or national level. These working papers undergo review but typically do not present final research results, and constitute works in progress. Working Paper Series Editor: Marchang Reimeingam FEDERALI SM AND THE FORMATI ON OF STATES I N I NDI A: SOME EVI DENCE FROM HYDERABAD- KARNATAKA REGI ON AND TELANGANA STATE Susant Kumar Naik* Abstract This paper deals with the political representation and the process of federalization in I ndia with reference to Hyderabad-Karnataka region and Telangana. I t also focuses on the aspect of regional inequality and the lack of political representation which led to an increase developmental gap among the regions in the states. Thus the unequal development among various regions within the states led people to demand for separate statehood. This paper, to a large extent is based on a pilot study. Region-specific facts have been collected from secondary sources and problems put in context of I ndian federalism. I t is clear from the pilot survey of both the regions that there is an indeed developmental gap, lack of political representation and strong leadership in both the regions. Key w ords: Federalism, Political Representation, Special Status, Regional I mbalances. I ntroduction The I ndian society is so manifold and diversified in nature that it is very difficult to be concise in any of its aspects. The people of I ndia have experienced the term ‘diversity’ in their daily life in many ways due to its diverse customs, languages, religions, governance structures, laws, social relations etc. The colonial administration also faced difficulties in administering such a big and diversified society like I ndia. Even during the partition, the constituent assembly strongly debated the diverse elements of I ndian social and political life while drafting the Constitution. I n such a situation, it was necessary for the constitutional framers to formulate multicultural-constitutional approach, keeping in mind institutional arrangements and the territorial demarcation among various I ndian states. As a result, they worked for an independent I ndia. That must be designed to accommodate socio-cultural, linguistic, religious and geographical diversity within the framework of a federal state. Mainly for this reason, federalism was an effective technique for managing diversity and solving its related conflicts among the I ndian states. Therefore, the founding fathers aimed for a federal structure, which would consider the socio-cultural diversity as its central issue in building the entire constitutional architecture (Amirante, 2012). Given this context, the I ndian federal polity is in major debate due to its nature of unequal process of federalization. Many recent literatures explain that the I ndian federal structure has to work in parallel with the democratic polity and the region-specific issues. Though I ndia is considered as the largest democratic country in the world, the people of this country are still fighting for their socioeconomic and political rights. This is experienced from various issues such as the demand for separate statehood, growing regional imbalance among the I ndian states and so on. However, federal polity in * The author is a PhD Scholar at Centre for Political I nstitutions, Governance and Development (CPI GD), I nstitute for Social and Economic Change, Bengaluru, I ndia. Email: [email protected] This paper is a part of my ongoing PhD thesis at I SEC. I am thankful to my supervisor Dr V Anil Kumar, Doctoral Committee members and the Panel Experts who have contributed their valuable comments and suggestions for this paper. I also place on record my sincere thanks to the anonymous referees for their insightful comments and suggestions. Usual disclaimers apply. I ndia emerged out of its peculiarity of society and culture, its state system and the nature of I ndian Constitution. I n addition, most literature on I ndian history shows that the I ndian states were governed by the absolute or centralized bureaucratic, monarchic or feudal systems throughout the development of modern I ndia. I t shows that some features of these states during that time, even though not strictly federal, had facilitated their transition into a federal polity (Saxena, 2006). Usually the term is very subjective towards the colonial legacy which was meant for hegemonic administrative control without losing their heir-ship and to avoid political chaos in British I ndia. I n this regard, the Montague Chelmsford Reforms of 1919 was the first to initiate the process of power sharing between the empire and its constituents. The Motilal Nehru Committee report also recommended the idea of an all-I ndia federation joined by the I ndian states with certain powers, rights and privileges of various states in the Union. Thus our founding fathers aimed on a federation with strong central government that would hold together the diverse economic, linguistic and cultural entities. The British I ndia followed the federal principles in order to maintain the political stability and their dominance on the I ndian society due to several movements by I ndians. I n post-independence period too, the issue of creating or altering the boundaries of I ndian states has become more vibrant. This is due to the congress party’s promise, which was made during the freedom struggle to give back states their autonomy, freedom and identity from the British. Our constitutional framers united I ndia by creating a ‘Union of States’ which was based on the federal constitution. The definition of the federalism also states that it is a system of political organization which provides a shared government (both union and the state government) for a common purpose of maintaining regional distinctiveness and their governance. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar welcomed the recommendations of SRC to create or separate a state due to some natural/ practical reasons. This is because the socially disadvantaged or backward sections are likely to be subjected to discrimination in a bigger state (Rao, 2010). I n order to visualize the future of federal polity, Dr. Ambedkar stated that the federal constitution can provide the expression of regional goals and interests as well as national objective. On the other hand, the role of SRC (State Reorganisation Commission) is also very significant in the context of I ndian federalization. As per its recommendations, the just independent I ndia restructured the boundaries among the I ndian states as per their linguistic demand. But the linguistic basis of state formation was debated continuously in I ndia due to socio-political and economic issues which varied among the states. The nature of I ndian federalization has been changing throughout several stages of development. Today, the demand for separate statehood is increasing not on the basis of language but on the basis of regional development. Therefore, as the society changes along with which, the attitude and behavior of the people also changes. This is because; people of I ndia had experienced with the federal development that took place since 1950s to 2000. But today, they have experienced with the unequal development among the regions as well as the lack of political representation within a state. This argument can be further supported by Burgess and Saxena by saying that each society or a country settle for a federal model which would be according to its own context and need. I t also says that the conception of federalism differs particularly among the people and political actors within a country. I ndia has come across many socio-political and regional movements. Through these movements, it always aimed to bring socio- 2 cultural and political reformation within its society. The fact of I ndia is that it is one of the largest multiethnic democratic country in the world (Tillin, 2011). However, unequal development among the I ndian states has kept the tensions on the boil post-reorganization. The liberalization of I ndian economy also had a major impact on the regional development. The period of 1970s gives the pictures of social movements which grew among I ndian states due to the disparities or lack of development within the region (Horo, 2013). This is where; the mass movement started for the creation of separate statehood for some regions within a state. I t can be evidenced from the cases such as Gorkhaland Movement in West Bengal (Pradhan, 2012), Bodo Movement in Assam, Coorg Movement and special status for Hyderabad-Karnataka region in Karnataka (Assadi, 1997), Tribal Movement in Jharkhand for not making local language as medium of education (Singh, 2014) and so on. On the basis of above evidence, it can be argued that the movements took place in many I ndian states due to their socio-economic backwardness and cultural and political dominance by some on others. I n some cases, the I ndian union has been successful in suppressing some movements and in others, it failed. For example, it assigned regional autonomy to Darjeeling in WB, special status to HK region in Karnataka and separated Telangana from AP and so on. Thus the I ndian federalization acted differently on the issues of separate statehood in different ways. The whole federalism discourse is debated today not on the aspects of size, identity or language rather on the existing regional inequalities and their political autonomy among the I ndian states. The coalition politics is also playing a major role in shaping the political system of I ndia today. I t has opened the door for various regional parties which are more active in the regional level and have a major role in influencing the national political agendas. For this growing regional inequality, the liberalization of I ndian economy is also one of the reasons. The role of the state in economic activities is shrinking while the role of market is increasing. On the other hand, many I ndian states are struggling to accelerate regional growth, increase political autonomy and create economic opportunities for its people. I n this context, the so called ‘Westminster Model’ of I ndian federalism still faces challenges while coping with regional issues. Among those issues, two have been taken up for this study i.e. Hyderabad-Karnataka region, which got special status within the state of Karnataka and the state of Telangana which bifurcated from the state of Andhra Pradesh. These regions have been taken up for this study because they have a long historical experience of socio-political and economic deprivation with the parent state within I ndian union. Methodology This paper has adopted a political-economy approach by focusing on several dimensions of inequalities that exists in HK region and in Telangana region. Moreover, it focuses on the aspects of regional inequality and the lack of political representation which led to an increase in the development gap among the regions in the state. This paper is based on primary field work relying on the pilot study that was conducted in both the regions of two states i.e. Karnataka and Telangana by meeting fifteen members of the regions which includes key participants, social activists, leaders and some academicians and employed unstructured questionnaires. This data was collected from both the regions during the month of February to mid-May in the year 2016. For this, a novel sampling method has been applied and respondents were selected randomly to have a discussion on the regional issues that exists in a 3 specific region. The real names of the respondents of both the regions have been kept confidential and pseudo names have been used. However, it has to be kept in mind that the explanation given in this paper is purely based on the pilot observation. Henceforth, the field work will be done by proper questionnaire schedule with structured interview by following composite sampling method. Case of Hyderabad-Karnataka Region: I nitially, the Hyderabad-Karnataka (HK) region had only three districts: Bidar, Gulbarga and Raichur under the Hyderabad state. Later; it was merged with old Mysore state (present Karnataka) in 1948. From 1997 to 2009, three more new districts were created namely: Ballary, Koppal and Yadgir and now they consist of six districts. The history of Karnataka shows that the HK region has a long-spell of development gaps among the districts in the state. This is seen not only among the HK region districts but also in comparison with non-HK region districts of the state. However, it is well evidenced from Nanjundappa Committee report and HDI report of Karnataka, the Hyderabad- Karnataka region has scored very high rank in all socio-economic and political indicators. For which the people of these regions started demanding for the special attention of the Centre or the state government to see the regional dimensions of development of this region. And the objective was to get special status in terms of economic assistance which would be an outcome of long spell of stagnation and deprivation. I n this regard, effort was made for the first time by state government after 1991 to provide some financial assistance to Hyderabad-Karnataka region. Subsequently, in 1992, the HyderabadKarnataka Area Development Board (HKADB) was established by the state government to look after the development plans of the regions. The main objective was to promote holistic development of this region by focusing on irrigation, health, education, agriculture, industries, women empowerment, transport and tourism. The High Power Committee for Redressal of Regional I mbalances (HPCFRRI ) also identified HK region as the extreme backward region of the state (Rajneesh, Degaonkar & Kattimani, 2011). The growing dissatisfaction among the masses of HK region in recent years indicates their frustrations about underdevelopment. However, the demand for a special status (for HyderabadKarnataka region) was officially made only in 1996 after the issue was raised in the assembly by former minister Vaijnath Patil. Similar efforts were also made by others like by K.B. Shanappa in 2009 in the Rajya Sabha. The Hyderabad Karnataka Horata Samiti, led by Vaijnath Patil, who carried out a sustained campaign to obtain special status for this region. Later, the Constitution Bill, 2012 of I ndian Constitution proposed to incorporate a new Article 371-J in order to provide special provisions for the HyderabadKarnataka region (Standing Committee Report, 2012). Under this Article, the Governor of Karnataka would have special responsibility for HK region. The provision of special status states that the region must get equitable allocation of funds for developmental activities. I t also should get the equitable opportunities and facilities for the people in matters of education, health and employment (Bakshi, 2013). The development gaps, which have been observed in the above section, are shown in table-1. 4 Table 1: Five Top and Bottom Ranking Districts in HDI in Karnataka: 2001 and 1991 Education I ndex 2001 Health I ndex 2001 I ncome I ndex 2001 HDI 2001 HDI 1991 Top 5 Districts HDI Ranks Districts HDI Ranks 1 Bangalore Urban 1 Udupi 1 2 Udupi 2 Belgam 2 3 Kodagu 3 Dakshina Kannada 3 Kodagu 3 4 Shimoga 4 Bangalore rural 5 Bangalore Urban 5 Udupi 4 5 Dakshina Kannada Uttara Kannada Districts HDI Ranks Districts Bangalore Urban Dakshina Kannada HDI Ranks Districts Districts 1 Dakshina Kannada 2 Udupi Udupi 3 Kodagu 4 Kodagu 4 Bangalore Urban 5 Shimoga 5 Shimoga 1 2 Bangalore Urban Dakshina Kannada HDI Ranks Bottom 5 Districts HDI Ranks Districts HDI Ranks Districts HDI Ranks Districts HDI Ranks Districts HDI Ranks Districts 27 Raichur 27 Bagalkot 27 Raichur 27 Raichur 27 Raichur 26 Chamarajnagar 26 Dharwad 26 Bidar 26 Gulbarga 26 Koppal 25 Gulbarga 25 Haveri 25 Gulbarga 25 Chamarajnagar 25 Gulbaraga 24 Koppal 24 Bijapur 24 Haveri 24 Koppal 24 Chamarajnagar 23 Bellary 23 Gadag 23 Bijapur 23 Bijapur 23 Bidar Source: Human Development Report Karnataka, 2005 The table 1 categorizes districts that are doing well and those are faring badly for both the period of 1991 and 2001. I t is found that the top five districts of the state which are top in all developmental indicators are from the non-Hyderabad Karnataka region. While on the other hand, those districts which are at the bottom level in terms of development in socio-economic indicators are from the Hyderabad- Karnataka region. For example, in both the period, the Hyderabad Karnataka districts have been put on the bottom level except one district from non- Hyderabad-Karnataka region. An indepth study of this region is essential to find out possible reasons for backwardness among those districts, although they have granted special status under the I ndian union. Field Observation in HK Region: The I ndian federal set up has been facing many challenges due to the regional inequalities among the states. I ndian federalism has failed to meet the development needs of many states which led to regional imbalance as argued by Mr. Gajendrai. I ndia, as a union of states, must look after the constituent states and mitigate regional issues. The demand for separation is growing among I ndian states due to the cultural discrimination, geographical and economic and political imbalances. The developments have taken place only in the capital city (Bangalore) of the state but not in Hyderabad Karnataka region. The movement started in this region during 1948 due to its backwardness. The HK region joined with the I ndian union to develop their region. After coming under I ndian union too, the HK region was still neglected by the centre as well as by the state (Mysore). 5 The Karnataka history clearly says that Mysore leadership has dominance over the HK region as a whole particularly in economic and political domain. Under the Prime Ministership of Jawaharlal Nehru, it was difficult for his government to create or divide a state from its parent state. For Nehru, it was the matter of unity and security concern for which he was not ready for separation policy for any I ndian state. The death of P. Sriramulu under indefinite fasting for separate Andhra led Mr. Nehru to agree for separate Andhra Pradesh. During this period, there was no such strong movement or leadership who fought like Sriramulu for the cause of HK region. Later, the HK region was included in the state of Mysore which was formed in 1956. However, being a part of Mysore state; did not change the fortunes of the HK region rather the inequalities grew gradually. Later, the call was raised in HK region seeking special attention from the centre in order to reduce the regional backwardness. However, the people of HK region did not ask for a division from Karnataka, rather it was for special status within Karnataka in terms of financial assistance for the development of this region. The ground realities show that due to lack of access to education, health and employment opportunities, the people of this region migrated to the neighboring states of I ndia. The focus of political parties was confined to city-based issues (like Bangalore, Mangalore etc.) and not on the regional issues. As the movement started in the HK region, the people of north Karnataka (Bombay Karnataka) also started demanding for separate statehood. The role of regional parties of this region in the national politics is very low. Mr. Gajendra also viewed that the region-specific growth could have brought equal development among the regions or states under the I ndian federal structure. I n the sense that, as I ndia is a region-specific nation, it is not focusing on regional development. I n the name of federal arrangements, it is neglecting the regional growth in terms of socio-economically as well as politically. This indicates that the regional development do not occupy any space in the national development plan. Ms. Chandrakalaii highlights that both Fact Finding report of 1956 and Nanjundappa Committee report of 2002 pointed out that HK region is the most backward region of the state (Rajneesh, Degaonkar and Kattimani, 2011). But unfortunately, the committee recommendations have not been implemented at any level. The role of Hyderabad-Karnataka Area Development Board (HKADB) is also limited due to the scarce resources. After the implementation of 371-J, there has been a growing conflict between the economic and political institutions according to one respondent. She also argued that the impact of globalization on the national politics is one of the reasons for the growing inequalities. The role of the HKADB is limited in the process of development due to clashes among the political and economic lobbies. This region is an example of under development due to the lack of political will, trickledown economics and historical factors as argued by the respondent. During the state formation in 1950s, the language was considered as the criteria, but now it has shifted to the economic development. Throughout the rule of several successive governments, the political support to achieve the special status for this region was low. This indicates that there was a lack of political will. Mr. Ramu iii opined that the question of regionalism and sub-regionalism poses a challenge to the national development in general and regions in particular. I n the process of federalization, the terms regionalism and subregionalism have become more apparent in I ndia today. These concepts are more debatable due to its significant impact on the development, security, economic growth and cultural ties. As an ideology and political movement, regionalism seeks to advance the causes of regions of a nation. The concept 6 regionalism includes three major aspects such as; regimes, regionalism and regional integration (Gochhayat, 2014). I t means the regionalism and the regional integration will develop in a certain kind of regimes but not in others. I f the ‘Westminster Model’ could solve those regional demands, then the issue of regionalism or sub-regionalism would not have risen among I ndian states. I n the context of I ndia, Brass and Khan defined regionalism in terms of movement for greater autonomy and a reaction against the federal administrative imbalances (Brass, 1990 and Khan, 1992). To overcome all those problems, many political and non-political organizations came forward to help HK region. Organizations like Dharam Singh Samiti, Hyderabad Karnataka Development Board, Hyderabad-Karnataka Yuva Sangharsh Samiti (HKYSS) and Hyderabad-Karnataka Pradeshada Horatagala Samanyaya Samiti which was constituted under leadership of Mr. Sitaram iv took up the cause of HK region. After 2009, the movement became so strong that the state government as well as the union government had to take notice. The movement of HK region was purely based on the issue of regional inequalities or backwardness of the region. I n March 2010-11, the issue of HK region was taken up and passed in the Karnataka assembly due to the initiatives of then chief minister Mr. Yeddyurappa. I t was approved by then Home Minister P. Chidambaram after a meet with Mr. Mallikarjun Kharge on this issue. Then in 2013, the Centre passed the Gazette notification to pass the Ordinance of 371-J for HyderabadKarnataka region. However, the aspirations of the people of HK region was not fulfilled fully by the provisions of 371-J since even after getting the special status for the region. There has not been any positive impact on the regional inequalities of the region. There is a growing feeling that the state government maintains a ‘step-motherly attitude’ towards the regions of Hyderabad Karnataka. Due to this, the people of Hyderabad Karnataka region will demand for separate statehood if the situation remains the same. He states that the transfer of resources to the state governments, for the development of HK region, is not being realized. He argued that development will take place fast if the state is small and administratively effective. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar had also once supported the idea of smaller states in I ndia, so that the deprived or backward section of the society will equally fight for their rights and justice. I n a larger state, there is more chance of increasing marginalization among all sections as the state will be unable to give proper attention to all the sections. As an active member of the movement, Ms. Radhamaniv says that issues raised by the people in the HK region are genuine. She said special status for HK region was inevitable, though the Centre had opposed it many times. Since 1990s, the Union government assigned special provision for states like Maharashtra, Gujarat, Nagaland, Assam, Manipur etc. however, it was denied to the Hyderabad Karnataka region, which is proof of political apathy. At present, the people of HK region have realized that the assignment of special status by I ndian union was a ‘piecemeal approach’ to make the people happy. This refers to the political interest of some parties which was in the Centre. They did so in order to silence the movement by allotting special status to this region. But practically, there is no benefit from this provision of special status as we have been experiencing the development of this region, she said. As a social activist, Mr. Santosh vi also stated that the districts of HK region has been the focus of debate till present. During the rule of Nizam, the development of the HK region was done to some extent despite objections. Major demand was for financial assistance and the movement intensified after 1970s, Mr. Santosh said. He 7 was also of the opinion that he and his organization had always tried to make people aware about the long spell underdevelopment of HK region. Mr. Santosh said that they organized the people of this region to make them active and be aware of their economic backwardness. All the sections, particularly students, workers, and women participated in the movement. At present, the region has progressed only in the field of education with a major part of developmental agenda remaining unaddressed. Many committees were set up who in turn asked the government of Karnataka to look into the causes of backwardness in this region. But still, there is hardly any improvement with projects only on paper. Ms. Padmavativii claimed that from the beginning, the people of Mysore state have oppressed the people of the HK region. The leadership of the Mysore state always had a dominant role compared to leaders in the region when it comes to development. The leaders of HK region hardly raise issues and are merely followers of leaders of other regions. Even now, the region is lagging behind in all aspects of development due to the inactiveness of political leadership and lack of awareness among the people. I t is argued by Mr. Sagar viii that the pre 371-J, the situation was worse in this region. After merging with the Mysore state, the people in the region faced huge political discrimination. The development took place among all the districts of the state except HK region. I t was only after 1970s, that a movement was initiated in the region to raise the voice against the injustice. However, various social and political organizations ignored HK’s struggle for equitable development. The Centre accorded special status to the region only after the initiative of Vaijnath Patil. There is hardly any change in the situation in post 371-J. There is slight improvement seen in the education sector with some facilities given to the students from the region. Backwardness still persists due to lack of strong leadership and proper utilization of fund. Only the proper implementation of policy measures and proper planned development with sufficient funds can bring the development to this region. The Case of Telangana: The formation of Telangana is a huge victory for the people of this region due to their long spell of marginalization and the lack of political representation. After the formation of Andhra state, the Telugu speaking districts of old Hyderabad state were merged with Andhra. The state reorganization of 1950s followed the language criteria to organize the I ndian states. As backwardness or the marginalization grew, the demand for a new state gained ground. And this situation can be observed in both the cases taken up for the study. The Telangana movement started for separate statehood immediately after the formation of Andhra Pradesh. This is mainly due to the exploitative attitude of leaders from other regions of Andhra, dating back to the days of Nizam rule. The demand for separate statehood for Telangana grew up to be not just socio-cultural in nature, but also economic and political. The people of this region woke up to the fact that their socio-political and economic rights have been undermined since the formation of Andhra Pradesh. I n pursuance of the ‘Gentlemen’s Agreement of 1956, the Telangana Regional Committee (TRC) was formed with elected representatives (Srinivasulu, Basavaiah & Ravinder, 2011). The committee aimed to assess the available resources and allocate them to ensure proper development of this region. But consequently, the TRC was abolished under the ‘Six Point Formula’ in 1973. The regional planning and development committees, which were 8 constituted under ‘Six Point Formula’, were not accountable to the elected representative (I bid). Later, these committees were also abolished which appeared like a political game for the local people of this region. Thus, it can be argued that there was no proper mechanism for regional planning and development of this region. Though the demand for statehood was launched first in 1969; it took a while for the movement to become strong. The repressive measure adopted by the state was also a major reason why the movement became aggressive (Rao, 2010). The leaders of Andhra region did not pay proper attention or showed commitment for equitable development of this region. On the one side, the Telangana leaders continuously travelled to Delhi for separate Telangana. While on the other side, the people of Telangana were conducting peaceful and democratic movements in villages and towns with in the Telangana region. Between the period of 1977 and 2004, the Telangana movement was controlled by the state and the Andhra politicians supported it. The politicians from Telangana were under the pressure and were completely dependent on the state laws to protect their positions. Throughout different periods of the movement, many protests and strikes took place. Many students also joined in a huge number for Telangana cause and some even died for it. The politics of Andhra Pradesh was dominated either by congress or by TDP. When the Telugu Desam Party (TDP) party was in power (up to 2004 general election) in undivided Andhra Pradesh, it did not give proper attention for Telangana development. Being a leader of TDP since 1983, K. Chandrashekhar Rao (KCR) was well experienced with the situation of Telangana regions. As there was no initiative in promoting development in this region, he resigned from TDP and formed a separate party of his own called Telangana Rashtra Samiti (TRS) in 2001. The TRS contested in many elections (Assembly election, Lok Sabha election etc.) but it did not get the majority and made an alliance with the congress in the state. I n 2004 election, the TDP lost the majority in the state due to the farmer’s suicide and other causes. Congress won the election in 2004 but had an alliance with the KCR party in the state of AP. This is also resulted no positive outcome for the people of Telangana. For which, KCR thought to contest election of its own by having one agenda of separate Telangana. I t was the Telangana Rashtra Saimiti (TRS), which came as a major supporter for Telangana cause even though it entered into Andhra politics in 2001. Gradually, it earned the popularity from both south as well as north Telangana region. TRS was the only party, who fought continuously for separate Telangana and became a dominant party in Telangana regions. I n a way, it carried the hopes and aspirations of Telangana people (Pingle, 2014). I n addition, the Sri Krishna Committee (SKC), which was constituted by the Government of I ndia in 2010, undertook a survey to know about the people’s opinion on the formation of Telangana. Finally, on 30th July 2013, the Congress Working Committee (CWC) decided to request the government of I ndia to create the state of Telangana. Despite the violent agitation in other regions of Andhra, the Union cabinet approved the formation of the state of Telangana on 3rd October, 2013. However, the formation of a Telangana state will become pointless, if it fails to provide to the people of this region: accountability in governance, development, political representation and economic opportunities. Thus the unequal development was observed as given in table 2 based on the scoring of the Telangana districts. 9 Table 2: HDI and its rankings across Districts of Telangana: 2004-05 and 2011-12 Sl. No. Districts HDI Rank 2004-05 2011-12 2004-05 2011-12 1 Adilabad 0.289 0.508 6 6 2 Hyderabad 0.631 0.764 1 1 3 Karimnagar 0.350 0.521 4 4 4 khammam 0.286 0.519 7 5 5 Mahbubnagar 0.270 0.464 8 9 6 Medak 0.261 0.446 9 10 7 Nalgonda 0.320 0.500 5 7 8 Nizamabad 0.251 0.466 10 8 9 Ranga Reddy 0.364 0.605 2 2 10 Warangal 0.356 0.534 3 3 -- -- Telangana 0.322 0.510 Source: Human Development in Telangana State, District Profiles- 2015 The table 2 presents the values of HDI for the 10 districts of Telangana state with their relative rankings. I t indicates that there has been a significant improvement in the HDI across all the districts. However, the relative rankings of some of the districts changed in seven years between 2004-05 and 2011-12. I n both the periods, Hyderabad, Ranga Reddy, Warangal and Karimnagar retained their ranks from 1 to 4 respectively. On the other hand, the ranks of the bottom two districts in 2004-05 i.e. Nizamabad and Medak changed to 8 and 10 respectively in 2011-12. For Khammam, the rank improved from 7 to 5 while for Nalgonda slipped from 5 to 7 and Mahbubnagar from 8 to 9 and Adilabad remained at 6th position in both the years. However, this study needs more empirical evidence to support the arguments; it posed in the above sections. This paper analyzes the field narratives to figure out how regionalism rose as a real challenge to I ndian federal structure. Field Observation in Telangana Regions: Most of the federal studies have focused on national growth, centre-state relation and the functioning of federalism at both levels. I n this process, socio-political and economic opportunities of backward regions have been neglected in a state. I t resulted in I ndia to grow the regionalism or sub-regionalism within the state. This situation created the feeling of ‘inferiority’ and ‘superiority’ within the group or region. To live a dignified life, the people of socio-economic and politically disadvantaged regions started demanding for separate statehood according to Mr. Radhakrishnaix. He is of the opinion that regionalism has become the major obstacle to federal development. I n the case of HK region also, the concept of regionalism became an obstacle in the way of federal development. The concept regionalism can be a multi-dimensional in nature. Hence, to reduce the socio-economic, political and cultural regionalism, the state must play the role of a protector rather than spectator. Social contract political theorists like Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau also have argued that the state had risen out of a voluntary agreement, or social contract made by individuals who recognized that only the establishment of a sovereign power 10 could safeguard them from the insecurity, disorder and brutality of the state of nature (Heywood, 1994). On the other hand, the liberal theorists hold that the state is merely a neutral arbiter among the competing groups and individuals in a society. I t is an ‘umpire’ or referee capable of protecting each citizen from the encroachment of his or her fellow citizens. But the political system in Andhra Pradesh has been depriving the people of Telangana in terms of political participation. The land-owning communities were suppressing the rest of the communities in business and agricultural domain. Following the recommendations of Fazal Alli Commission, the Gentlemen Agreement of 1956 came with a lot of promise for the development of Telangana and its people. As per the agreement, some assurances (particularly political representation) were given to the people of Telangana, which were not fulfilled. After 1969, under the Prime Ministership of I ndira Gandhi, the Six Point Formula of 1973 was initiated and later violated. When N.T. Rama Rao became the chief minister of Andhra Pradesh, he constituted Girglani Committee to look into the reasons for backwardness of Telangana. After the study made by committee, it highlighted many educational irregularities and improper functioning of institutions in the state, which was a major discrimination for the people of Telangana. I n 1989, the people of this region constituted an organization called ‘Non-Party Forum’ to fight against the state negligence. The liberalization of I ndian economy had a negative impact on the I ndian states. Globalization and liberalization also brought significant change in the I ndian economy. However, with the increase in national growth, regional inequalities also increased simultaneously within the nation. The Telangana Rashtra Samiti party highlighted all the discriminations against the people of Telangana region. Since, regionalism has become a significant issue in the I ndian politics; the regional parties are more active now. I n Andhra Pradesh, the TDP had a dominant role in political domain compared to the congress party in the state. However, the Telangana issues were local in nature: denial in socioeconomic political, cultural and dialectic/ identity and rights. I nitially, no political party supported the cause of Telangana. I t was only after 2009 state election results; the fate of the Telangana statehood was decided. The continuous domination over all aspects of daily life of the people of Telangana was termed by one of the respondents as the ‘internal colonialization’. As they are economically backward, they have been named as the peripheral area and have to depend on developed areas (AP). I t is this exploitation that lies at the core of regionalism in a real sense. I n recent years, there is an upsurge on the issues of regionalism and regional movements particularly in the context of the federal democracy in I ndia (Gochhayat, 2014). The lack of development forced the people of Telangana region to migrate to neighboring states for their source of livelihood. The situation echoes in Hyderabad-Karnataka region too. I n Andhra Pradesh budget, the allocation of funds for the Telangana region was very low and even the allocated amount was not properly spent for its development. Then minister, K. Rosaiah even argued that the revenue must spend for the development of Telangana region. I f it was just the question of resource or funds for the people of Telangana, it could have been solved earlier as was done in Hyderabad Karnataka region. But the call for Telangana statehood is as old as the I ndian union itself. I n the case of Hyderabad Karnataka region, the demand for special status came to front strongly after 1980s. Moreover, Telangana region was geographically bigger, spread across ten districts of undivided Andhra Pradesh. I n this regard, Sarangi 11 and Pai (2009) have argued that the federalization in a current scenario must be based on the size of the state as well as governance accountability. This was the main reason, which led to the people of Telangana to be remain as marginalized or deprived. Therefore, the real intention of the movement was to obtain administrative accountability, autonomous and dignified life with equal distribution of available resources. But due to lack of active state role and local political will, there was an unequal distribution of resources in the state of Andhra Pradesh. The non-Telangana leaders of the state were socioeconomically as well as politically well off from the British period. They continued their dominance over Telangana vis-a-vis economic and political development. The Sri Krishna Committee (SKC), set up by the Congress government, examined the issues in Telangana and people’s views on it. The report also found the problems of regional inequality among the regions of Telangana and the level of political representation of the people. There was also a movement for separate statehood for Rayalaseema region, inspired by the Telangana statehood demand. Though the Congress government was successful in managing other movements, the Telangana statehood movements refuse to die down due to long history of struggle. After the formation of Andhra Pradesh, the people of Andhra and Rayalseema took away all the employment opportunities and dominated political and non-political institutions. I n this way, the feelings of superiority as well as inferiority rose among the different social groups in Andhra Pradesh. Mr. Mohan x blames lack of strong political leadership as the main reason for marginalization of Telangana. According to him, ineffective political institutions and lack of political will are the reasons for underdevelopment of the region. I f the state were to distribute resources equally and focus to regional development, it will greatly help national growth too. There was no such activity initiated by the Centre as well as by the state government in Telangana region. Mr. Jivan xi argued that I ndian federalism is creating sub-federalism within a state by providing special packages to some of the regions. The question of sub-federalism is gaining ground due to lack of economic and political development. He stated that statehood movement gained ground due to the lack of modernization, woeful educational facilities and absence of administrative accountability. I n fact, the real Telangana movement started when the ‘Mulki Rule’ started dividing the natives and outsiders within the Hyderabad state. There was a huge discrimination against the people of Telangana vis-à-vis employment opportunities. Some sections of the people in this region remained backward due to lack of educational facilities. The local people started losing their jobs for which the ‘Mulki rule’ was adopted. The violence spread between Hindu-Muslim and local and non-locals within the state. The violation of Gentlemen Agreement’s provision fuelled the anger among various sections of the society, particularly youths, adults, tribal and politicians. The Telugu Desam Party had played a dominant role in all decision-making process of the state. The role of TDP was also one of the reasons for the delayed formation of Telangana state. The political representatives from the Telangana region were playing the role of ‘Yes Men’ within the state politics. Hence, the kind of dependency and subservient relationship continued from the Nizam period till the formation of a separate state. Later, the emergence of TRS party in AP changed the political scenario and the party introduced a ‘TRS-Manifesto’ for the development of Telangana. The promises of change and development made by the state and Union government, is termed as the ‘symbolic politics’ by Mr. Pankaj xii. He argued that if the political representative will not fulfill the problems of the people, 12 the democratic polity will not work in a larger state like I ndia. Many, especially students of Telangana region, took the extreme step of suicide to garner political support for Telangana, which is a shame for the I ndian democracy. I n fact, the movement started from student communities due to the discriminatory approach in education as well as employment opportunities. The Telangana cause carried the political symbolism of the fight for equitable development. The demands for new states are growing day by day because of marginalization and lack of their political opportunities for entire regions. I t was also argued by Mr. Ramesh xiii that the Telangana cause was based on regional identity and the political rights. When the regionalism increases, it will create an imbalance among the people raising issues of economic development and political representation. The state has not followed the policy of inclusive growth, in which all regions will get their share in economic development. The apathy of the state led the people of Telangana region to consider the treatment meted out to them as an insult to their dignity, freedoms and rights as a human beings or citizen. Due to all these reasons, separate statehood became a rallying cry for the justice for the people of this region. They fought for a Telangana state since 1950s to live in dignity and prosperity. Mr. Raghu xiv cited regional discrimination towards some section of the society as the reason for rising regionalism. The region of Telangana was deprived not only economically and politically but also socio-culturally. The people of Rayalseema region, who belonged to higher castes, looked down the people of Telangana because of casteism. They never let the people of Telangana to rise as competitor in any field and did not create any opportunities for them. I t was the people’s commitment that led to separate statehood for the people of Telangana, which will give them their constitutional rights and freedoms. Ms. Shantilataxv said that the underdevelopment in the Telangana region started way back within the Andhra Preadesh. There was no political will to improve the life condition of the people of this region. Many natural resources like water for irrigation was exploited more by the people of Rayalseema and coastal Andhra. Though two major rivers, namely Krishna and Godavari flows through Telangana, the people of the region prevented from using them. Even though Telangana districts contribute more towards the state GDP, the area remained backward. The present backwardness of Telangana regions is not recent since its emergence with Andhra Pradesh. Therefore, the people of this region started a mass movement for separate statehood. Conclusion The rise of regionalism poses a major challenge for the I ndian federalism. This has been due to the growing inequality among the regions and within the regions. I t is very clear from the pilot study that the regional imbalance and lack of political representation led to underdevelopment in the proposed two study areas. As per the available literature as well as the reports/ documents prepared by both state and Union government, the level of inequality is high in these regions. The inequality exists in those regions due to the clash between the political and economic domain which overlaps in many areas. The respondents have stated that these two spheres of development are very significant to fulfill developmental objectives. They give scope to the people to be politically aware and politically participate in the development of their own regions. This paper analyzes that regionalism and lack of 13 political representation has become a challenge for I ndian federal structure. However, this study needs more empirical evidence to support its arguments that is raised in the above sections. End Notes i Gajendra Kumar is an academician in Kannada University, Karnataka and the interview was taken by having a huge discussion on HK region issues. ii Ms. Chandrakala S. is an academician and has done a lot of works on the issues of HK region. She has visited many villages and conducted many meetings, survey to discuss their problem and making aware about the problems of those regions. iii Mr. K Ramu is also an academician and done works on HK region. iv Mr. Sitaram is an active member, the founder and the movement activists for 371 (J) for Special Status of HK region since the beginning of the movement with lots of experience. v Ms. Radhamani A. has a good experience of HK region realities as well as an active member of the movement and also has worked on many aspects of HK region. vi Santosh is a social activist; he led many social movements in the HK region. He was also the member and president of many organization and movements. vii Ms. Padmavati is an academician and written some paper particularly on the issues of HK region. She had also organised some seminars/ conferences in their department regarding the HK region based issues. viii Mr. Sagar S. is an academician as well as social activist. He has worked in many committees, organization and so on. He is very active in all the meetings of HK region by raising the issues of the region. He also participated in the movement for special status for HK region. ix Mr. Radhakrishna Rao is an academician and an active member Telangana movement and the chairman of TJAC. He was among major activist and spokesperson for the cause of Telangana. x Mr. A. Mohan is an active participant of Telangana movement and led the movement too. As a social activist, he has contributed through several writings as well as physically for the success of Telangana movement. xi Mr. Jivan was the member of the Telangana movement and also of the Telangana-Joint Action Committee. Earlier, he was working as a news reporter particularly from the Telangana region. He is also having a very close relation with Telangana movement and its people throughout the movement. xii Mr. Pankaj Rao has worked on many political issues of the Telangana regions. xiii Mr. Ramesh K. has contributed in terms of their socio-economic and political development part as a whole and how this situation led to the Telangana demand. xiv Mr. Raghuram is a leader and a member of some organization of Telangana. He has participated in many sociopolitical campaigns for the cause of Telangana. xv Ms. Shantilata belongs to a research institutes which has produced many literature on Telangana. She worked on many issues of the region of Telangana, particularly on the agricultural and economic aspects of the region. She is also associated with preparing of many reports particularly of Telangana and AP. References Amirante, Domenico (2012). Religious Pluralism, Cultural Differences, Social and I nstitutional Stability: What can we learn from I ndia? Nation-Building through Constitutionalism: Lessons from the I ndian Experience. Hong-Kong Law Journal, 42 (1): 23-42. Assadi, Muzaffar (1997). Separatist Movement in Coorg. Economic and Political Weekly, 32 (49): 311416. Bakshi, P M (2013). The Constitution of I ndia. New Delhi: Universal Law Publishing Company. Burgess, Michael (1993). Federalism and Federation: a Reappraisal. I n Burgess and Gagnon (eds) , Comparative Federalism and Federation: Competing traditions and Future Directions. University of Toronto Press. 14 Brass, Paul R (1990). The Politics of I ndia since I ndependence. The New Cambridge History of I ndia, I V (1), Cambridge University Press. Gochhayat, Artatrana (2014). Regionalism and Sub-regionalism: A Theoretical Framework with Special Reference to I ndia. African Journal of Political Science and I nternational Relations, 8 (1): 1026. Government of Karnataka (2005). Human Development Report. Bangalore: Planning and Statistics Department, Government of Karnataka. Government of Telangana (2015). Human Development in Telangana State, District Profiles. Hyderabad: Centre for Economic and Social Studies. Heywood, Andrew (1994). Political I deas and Concepts: An I ntroduction. London: Macmillan Publication. Horo, Albert (2013). Jharkhand Movement. I nternational Journal of Humanities and Social Science I nvention, 2 (4): 1-6. Khan, Rasheeduddin (1992). Federal I ndia: A Design for Change. New Delhi: Vikas Publishing House Ltd. Pingle, Gautam (2014). The Fall and Rise of Telangana. New Delhi: Orient Balck Swan Publication. Pradhan, Alina (2012). Politics of Separation: The case of the Gorkhaland Movement. The I ndian Journal of Political Science, LXXI I I (4): 683-90. Rajneesh, Shalini, Chaya Degaonkar and Sangeeta N Kattimani (2011). I nclusive Growth-371 for Development of Hyderabad Karnataka Region, Prasaranga, Gulbarga. Rao, C H Hanumantha (2010). Regional Disparities, Smaller States and Statehood for Telangana. New Delhi: Academic Foundation. Sarangi, Asha and Sudha Pai (2009). States Reorganisation: Contemporary Concerns. ESS Report , January. Saxena, Rekha (2006). Situating Federalism: Mechanisms of I ntergovernmental Relations in Canada and I ndia. Delhi: Manohar Publishers and Distributors. Singh, Prabhat K (2014). Nurturing Linguistic Diversity in Jharkhand: Role of the Mother Tongue. Economic and Political Weekly, XLI X (51): 17-19. Srinivasulu, K, M Channa Basavaiah and D Ravinder (2011). Srikrishna Committee: Thorough but Unviable. Economic and Political Weekly, XLVI (10). Standing Committee Report (2012). Parliament of I ndia, Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs. One Hundred and Sixty Fourth Report on Constitution Bill, 23 November, Rajya Sabha. Tillin, Louise (2011). Questioning Borders: Social Movements, Political Parties and the Creation of New States in I ndia. Pacific Affairs, 84 (1): 1-22. 15 Recent Working Papers 339 Pa r t i ci p a t i on of Sch e d u l e d Ca st e Households in MGNREGS: Evidence from Kar nat ak a 355 R Manjula and D Rajasekhar 340 Re l a t i on sh i p Be t w e e n Se r vi ce s Tr a de , Econ om i c Gr ow t h and Ex t e r n a l St a b i l i sa t i on i n I n d i a : An Em p i r i ca l I nvest igat ion Manasi S, K V Raju, B R Hemalatha, S Poornima, K P Rashmi 356 Mini Thomas P 341 Locating the Historical Past of the Women Tea Workers of North Bengal Korean Media Consumption in Manipur: A Ca t a l y st of Accu l t u r a t i on t o Kor e a n Cult ure 357 Socio- Economic Determinants of Educated Unemployment in I ndia Ta x Cont r ibut ion of Ser vice Sect or : An Em pir ica l St udy of Se r vice Ta x a t ion in I ndia Ef f e ct of Ru r a l I n f r a st r u ct u r e on Agricult ural Developm ent : Dist rict - Level Analysis in Karnat aka 360 361 Moreh- Namphalong Border Trade 348 Emerging Trends and Pat t erns of I ndia’s Agricultural Workforce: Evidence from the Census 362 S Subramanian 363 Est i m a t i on of t h e Ke y Econ om i c Determinants of Services Trade: Evidence from I ndia 364 Em ploym ent - Ex por t Ela st icit ies f or t he I ndian Text ile I ndust ry Ca st e a n d Ca r e : I s I n di a n H e a l t h ca r e Delivery Syst em Favourable for Dalit s? 352 La n d a n d W a t e r Use I n t e r a ct i on s: Emerging Trends and I mpact on Land- use Changes in t he Tungabhadra and Tagus River Basins Per Stalnacke, Begueria Santiago, Manasi S, K V Raj u, Nagot hu Udaya Sekhar, Maria Manuela Port ela, Ant ónio Bet aâmio de Almeida, Mart a Machado, Lana-Renault, Noemí, Vicente-Serrano and Sergio 353 Ecot axes: A Com parat ive St udy of I ndia and China Rajat Verma 354 Ow n House and Dalit: Selected Villages in Karnat aka St at e I Maruthi and Pesala Busenna W ork- Life Balance among W orking Women – A Cross- cultural Review Gayatri Pradhan 366 Food Security in Karnataka: Paradoxes of Perform ance Stacey May Comber, Marc-Andre Gauthier, Malini L Tantri, Zahabia Jivaji and Miral Kalyani Ecological History of An Ecosystem Under Pressure: A Case of Bhitarkanika in Odisha Subhashree Banerjee 365 Sobin George 351 I nformal Employment in I ndia: An Analysis of Forms and Det erminant s Rosa Abraham Tarun Arora 350 Value of Statistical Life: A Meta- Analysis w ith Mixed Effects Regression Model Agamoni Majumder and S Madheswaran Mini Thomas P 349 Social Exclusion and Caste Discrimination in Public and Privat e Sect ors in I ndia: A Decomposit ion Analysis Smrutirekha Singhari and S Madheswaran Marchang Reimeingam 347 Educat ional Out com e: I dent ifying Social Fact ors in Sout h 2 4 Parganas Dist rict of W est Bengal Jhuma Halder Soumya Manjunath and Elumalai Kannan 346 Clim a t e Cha nge a nd Se a - Le ve l Rise : A Review of Studies on Low - Lying and I sland Count ries Nidhi Rawat, M S Umesh Babu and Sunil Nautiyal Mini Thomas P 345 The Changing Rates of Return to Education in I ndia: Evidence from NSS Data Smrutirekha Singhari and S Madheswaran 359 I ndrajit Bairagya 344 Ge og r a p h i ca l Acce ss a n d Qu a l i t y of Primary Schools - A Case St udy of Sout h 24 Parganas District of West Bengal Jhuma Halder 358 Marchang Reimeingam 343 An a lysis of Ex por t Com pe t it ive n e ss of I ndian Agricult ural Product s w it h ASEAN Count ries Subhash Jagdambe Priyanka Dutta 342 Al t e r n a t i v e M e d i ci n e Ap p r oa ch e s a s Healt hcare I nt ervent ion: A Case St udy of AYUSH Programme in Peri Urban Locales Sensit ivit y of I ndia’s Agri- Food Export s to the European Union: An I nstitutional Perspect ive C Nalin Kumar 367 Relationship Betw een Fiscal Deficit Composition and Economic Grow th in I ndia: A Time Series Econometric Analysis 368 Concept ualising W ork- life Balance Anantha Ramu M R and K Gayithri Gayatri Pradhan 369 Land Use under Homestead in Kerala: The St at us of Homest ead Cult ivat ion from a Village Study Sr. Sheeba Andrews and Elumalai Kannan 370 A Sociological Review of Marital Quality among Working Couples in Bangalore Cit y Shiju Joseph and Anand I nbanathan 371 Migrat ion from Nort h- East ern Region t o Bangalore: Level and Trend Analysis 386 Rosa Abraham Marchang Reimeingam 372 373 An a l y si s of Re v e a l e d Com p a r a t i v e Advantage in Export of I ndia’s Agricultural Product s 387 Subhash Jagdambe 388 374 376 PPP I nfrast ruct ure Finance: An Empirical Evidence from I ndia 390 391 Nagesha G and K Gayithri Cont r ibut or y Pe nsion Sche m e s f or t he Poor: I ssues and Ways Forw ard Federalism and the Formation of States in I ndia I ll- Health Experience of Women: A Gender Perspect ive Annapuranam Karuppannan 380 381 Grow th Effects of Economic Globalization: A Cross- Count ry Analysis Tr a de Pot e nt ia l of t he Fishe r y Se ct or : Evidence from I ndia Toilet Access among the Urban Poor – Challenges and Concerns in Bengaluru Cit y Slums S Manasi and N Latha 384 Usage of Land and Labour under Shifting Cultivation in Manipur I s Decent ralisat ion Promot ing or Hindering t he Effect ive I mplement at ion of MGNREGS? The Evidence from Kar nat ak a D Rajasekhar, Salim Lakha and R Manjula 396 Veena Renjini K K 383 ‘Cast e’ Among Muslims: Et hnographic Account from a Karnataka Village Sobin George and Shrinidhi Adiga 395 Sovna Mohanty 382 Ea r nings a nd I nve st m e nt D if f e r e nt ia ls betw een Migrants and Natives: A Study of Street Vendors in Bengaluru City Channamma Kambara and I ndrajit Bairagya 394 The Polit ica l H ist or iogr a phy of M oder n Guj ar at Tannen Neil Lincoln Cult ur al Dim ension of W om en’s Healt h across Social Groups in Chennai Annapuranam K and Anand I nbanathan 393 Susant Kumar Naik and V Anil Kumar 379 Econ om i c Gl ob a l i z a t i on a n d I n com e I n e q u a l i t y : Cr oss- cou n t r y Em p i r i ca l Evidence Sovna Mohanty 392 D Rajasekhar, Santosh Kesavan and R Manjula 378 W om a n h ood Be y on d M ot h e r h ood : Ex p l or i n g Ex p e r i e n ce s of Vol u n t a r y Childless W omen Chandni Bhambhani and Anand I nbanathan Veena Renjini K K 377 Li v e l i h ood s, Con se r v a t i on a n d For e st Ri g h t s Act i n a N a t i on a l Pa r k : An Oxym oron? Subhashree Banerjee and Syed Ajmal Pasha Marchang Reimeingam Qu a n t i f y i n g t h e Ef f e ct of N on - Ta r i f f Measures and Food Safet y St andards on I ndia’s Fish and Fishery Products’ Exports Au g m e n t i n g Sm a l l Fa r m e r s’ I n com e t hrough Rural Non- farm Sect or: Role of I nformation and I nstitutions Meenakshi Rajeev and Manojit Bhattacharjee 389 MGNREGA Job Sust ainabilit y and Povert y in Sikkim 375 Ele ct r icit y Consum pt ion a nd Econom ic Grow t h in Karnat aka Laxmi Rajkumari and K Gayithri M a r i t a l D i sh a r m on y a m on g W or k i n g Couples in Urban I ndia – A Sociological I nquit y Shiju Joseph and Anand I nbanathan Structural Change and Labour Productivity Grow th in I ndia: Role of I nformal Workers Efficiency of I ndian Fertilizer Firms: A St ochast ic Front ier Approach Soumita Khan 397 Politics in the State of Telangana: I dent it y, Represent at ion and De m ocr a cy Anil Kumar Vaddiraju Marchang Reimeingam 385 St a t e I nt er vent ion: A Gif t or Thr ea t t o I ndia’s Sugarcane Sect or? Abnave Vikas B and M Devendra Babu Price: ` 30.00 ISBN 978-81-7791-255-5 INSTITUTE FOR SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CHANGE Dr V K R V Rao Road, Nagarabhavi P.O., Bangalore - 560 072, India Phone: 0091-80-23215468, 23215519, 23215592; Fax: 0091-80-23217008 E-mail: [email protected]; Web: www.isec.ac.in