Most Affordable IAS Coaching in India

The Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act

Whatsapp 93132-18734 For Details

The Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act - 2014

Get Free IAS Booklet

Why in News: The Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014, which bifurcated unified Andhra Pradesh into two States, was notified on March 1, 2014 and had come into force from June 2, 2014.

Summary of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act

The Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014, officially bifurcated unified Andhra Pradesh into two states, leading to the creation of Telangana on June 2, 2014, now observed as Telangana Day. Historically, the demand for Telangana statehood has roots in the Telangana Rebellion of 1945, where peasants, led by the Communist Party of India, revolted against the Jagirdari system. This region was later merged with Andhra State in 1956, sparking continuous demands for Telangana’s separation. The Srikrishna Committee (2010) was established to examine this proposal, culminating in the 2014 reorganisation.The push for new states in India stems from various factors, including historical and social distinctions, administrative needs, political aspirations, socio-cultural identities, economic disparities, and the desire for greater local autonomy. However, arguments against the creation of smaller states cite the risks of increased regionalism, economic and administrative challenges, dominance by specific castes or tribes, inter-state disputes, and political fragmentation that could threaten national unity.

1) What were the primary reasons behind the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014?

The Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014, was primarily driven by long-standing demands for a separate state of Telangana, citing regional disparities, cultural differences, and concerns over economic development. The Telangana movement, which had gained significant momentum, culminated in the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh into two states: Telangana and Andhra Pradesh.

2) How were the resources and assets divided between Andhra Pradesh and Telangana under the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014?

The division of resources and assets under the Act followed the principle of territoriality. Key resources, such as water from the Krishna and Godavari rivers, were apportioned based on guidelines provided by the Act. Financial assets and liabilities were divided based on population ratios, while government employees were allocated to the two states based on their nativity and preference.

3) What were the significant challenges faced during the implementation of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014?

Major challenges included the division of government employees, ensuring an equitable distribution of water resources, and the establishment of a new capital for Andhra Pradesh. The status of Hyderabad as a joint capital for ten years also posed administrative complexities. The reorganization led to economic challenges for Andhra Pradesh, which had to develop a new capital and infrastructure, while Telangana inherited a more developed Hyderabad.

4) What is the role of the State Reorganization Commission (SRC) in the context of Indian federalism?

The State Reorganization Commission (SRC) played a crucial role in shaping India's federal structure post-independence. Established in 1953, the SRC recommended the reorganization of states based on linguistic and cultural homogeneity. This led to the formation of several new states, thereby addressing demands for cultural and linguistic recognition within India's federal framework. The Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014, although not directly connected to the SRC, echoes the continuing relevance of state reorganization in addressing regional aspirations.

5) How does the Andhra Pradesh Reorganization Act, 2014, impact the federal structure of India?

The Act highlights the dynamic nature of India's federalism, where demands for statehood and regional autonomy continue to shape the political landscape. It underscores the capacity of the Indian Constitution to accommodate the reorganization of states to address regional aspirations and grievances. The creation of Telangana also set a precedent for other regions with similar demands, reinforcing the importance of balancing regional identities within the broader national framework.

Background of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act

The Telangana rebellion : In late 1945, a group of peasants rebelled against the then- dominant Jagirdari system. The insurrection, led by the Comrades Association and linked with the Communist Party of India, grew violent and battled with the Razakars, (a militia) led by Kasim Rizvi. The princely state of Hyderabad, which included Telangana, was taken over by the Indian Army in 1948–1949 as a result of Operation Polo.
Linguistic Reorganisation(1956) : To create the state of Andhra Pradesh, Telugu- speaking regions of Hyderabad State were combined with Andhra State. Since then, the people of Telangana have been demanding for the area to be divided into a distinct state once more.
Proposal for Telangana statehood : The Government of India embodied the Srikrishna Committee (2010) to examine the proposal for Telangana statehood or continuation of the state as one.
The Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act of 2014 crafted Telangana as a separate state from Andhra Pradesh.

Introduction of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act

Emergence of Telangana : On June 2, 2014, the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014 crafted Telangana as a separate state from Andhra Pradesh.

2 June - Observed as Telangana Day.
Other Important State Profiles:-

The State Bird – Palapitta (Indian Roller or Blue Jay).
The State Animal – Jinka (Deer).
The State Tree – Jammi Chettu (Prosopis Cineraria).
The State Flower – Tangedu (Tanner’s Cassia).

Creation of New States - Constitutional Provisions

Article 2: Admission or establishment of new States: Parliament may by law admit into the Union, or establish, new States on such terms and conditions as it thinks fit

Article 3: Formation of new States and alteration of areas, boundaries or names of existing States: Parliament may by law—

Form a new State by separation of territory from any State or by uniting two or more States or parts of States or by uniting any territory to a part of any State;
increase the area of any State;
diminish the area of any State;
alter the boundaries of any State;
alter the name of any State:

A bill for creating a new state can be tabled in either house of the Parliament only after the President of India's recommendation.
Before recommending to the Parliament, the President consults the state legislatures whose areas or boundaries would be impacted.
The state legislature's recommendations are not binding on the Parliament.
A bill must pass with a simple majority (majority of members present and voting) in both houses of Parliament.
Articles 2 and 3 allow for amendments to the First and Fourth Schedules of the Indian Constitution.
No such law is deemed to be an amendment of the Constitution for the purpose of Article 368.

Reasons for the demand of newer states in India

History & nature of society : Historically, the regions of Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand were populated by tribals who had their own unique nature of society.
Political : The western UP area dominated by the Jats desires for Harit Pradesh to have more political power, which is presently held by the Yadavs in UP.
Administrative & Governance : To bring power centres closer to people and increase engagement in mainstream politics in a certain region. For instance, Vidarbha in Maharashtra and Bundelkhand in Uttar Pradesh.
Socio-cultural & Ethnic : Minority communities in states fear that the mainstream culture will sweep away their culture. For instance, Gorkhaland in West Bengal and Bodoland in Assam.
Economic : Sentiments of deprivation and a lack of economic progress in comparison to other parts of the state. For instance, Telangana in the unified Andhra Pradesh state.
Greater local autonomy : Accepting demands for independent states opens up opportunities to improve the 'self-rule' and 'shared-rule' principles of federal governance.
Physiographic : People from the same physiography have identical cultures. For instance, Uttarakhand is a hilly area, but the remainder of Uttar Pradesh is plain.

Arguments against the demand for smaller states in India

Risk for increased regionalism : This might lead to an increase in son of the soil movements.
Economic Potentiality & Administrative Challenges : Bureaucratic and administrative expenditures have increased. Smaller states could find it difficult to bring in enough money to cover their expenses.
Supremacy of Dominant Caste/Tribe : There is a larger probability that a certain caste will dominate the state's power structures.
Increased Inter-State Disputes : Disputes over borders, water resources etc.
Threat of Political Fragmentation : Division of states can result in political instability and fractured governance. This could compromise national unity.

Performance of newly formed states

Three new states established in 2000 have had improved economic development in terms of GSDP and per capita income.
Between 2005–06 and 2014–15, Uttarakhand saw an average growth rate of 18.9%, whereas UP saw an average increase of 14.1%.
New states saw improvements in socioeconomic circumstances, includingPoverty reduction, literacy rates, and infant mortality rates (IMR).

Conclusion of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act

The Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014, which led to the creation of Telangana, is a significant chapter in India's ongoing process of state reorganisation. It highlights the complexities and sensitivities involved in addressing regional aspirations while balancing national unity. The demand for Telangana underscores the importance of acknowledging cultural, economic, and administrative disparities within states. However, the challenges posed by the creation of smaller states, such as regionalism and administrative viability, require careful consideration. Ultimately, the reorganisation of states must be approached with a focus on equitable development, effective governance, and the preservation of India's diverse yet unified identity.

UPSC Prelims PYQs of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act

Consider the following pairs: (2015)
States - Formation Year
1. Chhattisgarh - 2000
2. Uttarakhand - 2001
3. Jharkhand - 2002
which of the above pairs is/are correctly matched?

(a) 1 only
(b) 1 and 2 only
(c) 2 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2, and 3.

Show Answer

Correct Answer :(a) 1 only

With reference to the ‘Indian States Reorganisation’, consider the following statements: (2017)
1. The States Reorganisation Act of 1956 was based on the recommendations of the Dhar Commission.
2. The Reorganisation of states was primarily based on linguistic lines.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Show Answer

Correct Answer :(b) 2 only

Main PYQS of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act

Critically analyze the importance of the States Reorganisation Act of 1956 in post-independence India. How has it impacted the political and administrative structure of the country? (2013)

Discuss the pros and cons of creating smaller states in India. How do you evaluate the success of smaller states like Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, and Jharkhand? (2014)

Discuss the need and challenges of reorganization of Indian states with special reference to the creation of new states in recent times. (2017)

EXPECTED QUESTIONS FOR UPSC CSE - Prelims MCQs

With reference to formation of new states in India, which of the following statements is/are incorrect?
1. Formation of new states in India is done by a constitutional amendment under Article 368 of the Constitution.
2. A bill regarding the formation of a new state can only be introduced in the House of People.
Select the answer using the code given below:

(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2

Show Answer

Correct Answer :(b) 2 only

EXPECTED QUESTIONS FOR UPSC CSE - Descriptive Question

New states in India are often seen more as the outcome of political compulsion and less as drivers of institutional change. Comment. [10 Marks] [150 Words]