EVENTS & ISSUES
New Delhi, 24 November 2008
Need For Small
States
GOOD FOR GOVERANCE
By T.D. Jagadesan
The demand for separate States of Telangana and Vidharbha
has been under consideration of successive
Governments for some decades. Today, it has gathered urgency with the BJP
promising the creation of Telangana with 100 days of being voted to power. Since the demand for smaller States has been
raised by others also, the Central Government should seriously consider
appointing a States Reorganisation Commission
(SRC) to go into the merits of the respective claims.
Needless to say, whenever the demand for new States is pressed by the people of a region, the opponents to the
creation of small States come up with a variety of arguments. Mainly, that the formation of linguistic States
in the 50s was itself a mistake as it seriously harmed the process of national integration. This is a fallacious argument for two
reasons.
One, the formation of new States in the 50s was not entirely
on the basis of language; linguistic identity was only one of the many criteria
followed in creating them. Two,
experience has shown that linguistic States have in no way been a hindrance to
national integration; they have only made administration smooth and
better. If linguistic identity was the
only criterion, there should have been only one State for all Hindi-speaking
people. This, of course, would have been
an administrative monstrosity.
Indeed, the demand now is for forming new States out of
large States, even if they have a common language. The main motivation of the people who demand the
separate States of Telangana and Vidharbha is the conviction that they have a
sub-cultural identity and that a separate State alone can enable them to get an
equitable share of the benefits of development.
Importantly, the framers of the Constitution were fully
conscious that there would be need for changing the boundaries of a State which
were primarily created for the convenience of the colonial rulers. The reason why very liberal provisions were
incorporated under Article 3 of the Constitution, giving the Union Cabinet and
Parliament adequate powers to form new States by separation of territories from
existing States or uniting two or more States, or parts of some States, or
altering the name of a State.
The most important justification for the creation of new States
is that this would help the cause of better governance. Those familiar with the
administration of development programmes know that one of the main reasons for
their unsatisfactory progress has
been the inadequate supervision by senior officers.
Under the Parliamentary system of Government, the formulation
of polices is the responsibility of the political leadership with the assistance of senior officers, while the implementation
is mainly the responsibility of bureaucrats at the field level. Senior officers
are expected to maintain a close watch on programme implementation through
field visits. But in the case of States with a very large population, this
important responsibility is not adequately attended to.
Therefore, reducing the size of the States has become an
absolute necessity if the people are
to get the full benefits of development programmes. Out of the 28 States in the Indian Union, 10
have a population above 50 million and five, namely Andhra Pradesh, Bihar,
Maharashtra, West Bengal and U.P. have a
population of over 75 million each.
The demand for the division of States has arisen most
forcefully from the people of these States as they have been experiencing the
disadvantages of having a large size of population. Uttar Pradesh, with a population of 166
million, is a chronic case of under-development. The need for its division is obvious.
In the past, some senior politicians had resisted the idea
of carving smaller States out of UP as they feared that such a step would
reduce its importance in national politics.
But now most political parties are in favour of getting three or four
new States out of U.P, notwithstanding the creation of Uttaranchal.
Besides, there have been experiments, through Constitutional
amendments, to provide for preferential treatment to certain regions within a State
in matters such as education and employment. The boldest attempt in this
direction was the provision for the establishment of Development Boards for
backward regions like Vidharbha and Marathwada in Maharashtra. Article 371 (2) of the Constitution provides
for vesting the Governor of the State the power for ensuring equitable
allocation of funds to the backward regions.
It may be recalled that when Dr P.C. Alexander was the Governor
of Maharashtra, he held the view that the special powers for the Governor
diluted the responsibility of the Chief Minister and his ministerial
colleagues, who were always to remain accountable to the legislature.
In the ultimate analysis, if a separate State is what the
overwhelming majority of the people of a region wish to have on grounds of
better administrative convenience and efficiency, conceding such a demand will
be in keeping with the spirit of Article 3 of the Constitution and with the
principles of democracy.—INFA
(Copyright,
India News and Feature Alliance)
|