July 13, 1998

By deciding to carve out new states, the Centre crosses the political Rubicon but the implementation may not be easy.

By Farzand Ahmed, N K Singh and Bharat Desai

Free India thought of redrawing its map almost the moment it was born. In 1948, the Union government appointed a commission under Justice S.K. Dar of the Allahabad High Court for just this purpose. Dar recommended reorganisation on administrative rather than linguistic grounds. His report was promptly rejected. Finally, impelled by the successful agitation for a Telugu-speaking state in 1952-53, the government set up the States Reorganisation Commission. Its report was acted upon in 1956 and linguistic states legitimised. Since then, there have been constant efforts to tie up the loose ends. Notably, in 1960 the state of Bombay was split into Gujarat and Maharashtra. Six years later, old Punjab was trifurcated into Punjab, Haryana and Himachal Pradesh.

Now, in resolving to make Vananchal, Uttaranchal, Chhattisgarh and Delhi states, the Centre has finally recognised the administrative criterion. The recent decision was a simple one, being part of the BJP-led coalition's National Agenda. Implementation may not be as easy. It requires a two-thirds majority in the Lok Sabha to carve a fresh state. The Government barely commands half the House. Yet, the political Rubicon has been crossed. The states profiled below will come to be -- sooner or later.

Paradise cum Parasite
Uttarachal will be beautiful--and Centre-dependent

When Uttaranchal -- Uttarakhand, if you prefer -- finally becomes a state, its proponents will have reason to congratulate themselves. Their reward of statehood has arrived with relative celerity. After all, autonomy for the hill regions of Uttar Pradesh became a political issue only in 1994. Mulayam Singh Yadav, then chief minister, decreed colleges in the hills would have to reserve seats for OBCs. Since the OBC population in the region is rather small, the message was clear: seats would be filled by OBCs from the plains. Kumaon and Garhwal rose in revolt.

In comparison to other demands for statehood, Uttaranchal is rather non-contentious. The Uttar Pradesh Assembly has passed unanimous resolutions recommending its formation. This is largely because the area's politics is monopolised by the BJP. Even stalwart Congress Uttaranchalis like N.D. Tiwari lost in the recent general elections. The Samajwadi Party (SP) and Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) are practically non-existent here. On its part, the BJP is looking forward to ruling its next state.

The politics of Uttaranchal may be straightforward. The economics is anything but so. The region has long been disparaged as practising a "money order economy" -- dependent on remittances from migrants. Apart from seasonal tourism, there is virtually no avenue for income. This has led to the obvious question: is Uttaranchal viable?

Chief Minister Kalyan Singh's Government set up a subcommittee to finalise details for Uttaranchal. The findings were along expected lines, given the BJP's electoral commitment to Uttaranchal.

In 1994, Mulayam too had set up a similar cabinet subcommittee. The report was favourable in that it felt that Uttaranchal's development would be facilitated by statehood. Even so, the report was clear the new state would have to receive "special Central assistance on the lines of Himachal Pradesh and other Himalayan states".

Uttaranchal's opponents argue its tax collections amount to a mere Rs 179 crore. Its chief minister will perennially be in Delhi, begging bowl in hand. At present the Uttar Pradesh Government has an Uttarakhand Development Department with a budget of Rs 618 crore (1996-97 figures). This includes a Central assistance of Rs 225 crore. Kalyan has now written to the prime minister asking for it to be raised to Rs 500 crore a year, on par with Himachal Pradesh. Expect Uttaranchal to be the Centre's baby.

Power without the Glory
NCT means Delhi will be a state though not India's capital

Other people think of impending statehood as autonomy; Delhiites think of it as complication. The Union Cabinet, while deciding to give full statehood to Delhi, has also resolved to carve out a "National Capital Territory" (NCT). The NCT will be the seat of the Government of India, house the cream of the Indian establishment and be directly controlled by the Union Home Ministry.

The NCT's boundaries are yet to be delineated. It is expected to be virtually coterminous with the city Edwin Lutyens built and with the 42.74 sq km area controlled by the New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) -- arguably the richest civic body in Asia. This region is currently in the New Delhi Lok Sabha constituency. The first confusion relates to the status of Delhi MLAs who have been elected from the NDMC/NCT zone. "They may not be a part of the Delhi Assembly any more," says Jag Pravesh Chandra, Congress MLA. "I am sure the affected MLAs will continue to be a part of the Assembly," retorts Jagmohan, BJP MP from the New Delhi seat.

Complexities abound. There will, for instance, be two sets of police forces: one for the NCT and one for the Delhi state. Since policing in security-obsessed Delhi entails intense coordination, there are worries on this score.

Thus far, Delhi's police functioned under and was financed by the Centre. Its transfer to the state regime will come at a hefty price. Delhi police's Rs 400 crore-annual budget will now be transferred to Chief Minister Sahib Singh Verma's Government.

While it is still unclear what the direct benefit for the citizen will be, complete statehood for Delhi is set to dominate the BJP's campaign when the assembly elections take place this winter. Already, Verma is talking of his Government becoming more responsive -- and more capable of responding -- to the Delhiite's needs.

It was the BJP, as the Jan Sangh, which first demanded statehood for Delhi in 1965. It may now find the fruits of its labour bittersweet. Full statehood will mean Delhi will finally cease to be the pampered child of the Union Government. The state's rulers will be on their own when they seek to tackle Delhi's ever-worsening water and power scarcity. Life for the Delhi BJP -- and, in fact, for Delhi -- will be that much more harsh without the Central chaperone.
-Sayantan Chakravarty

Poverty Amid Plenty
Vananchal will be rich; Vananchalis will be poor

It's a struggle older than India's Independence. The battle for Jharkhand, or Vananchal as it will be called, has been waged by the Adivasis of the Chhotanagpur Plateau-Santhal Parganas belt for well over half a century. Initially led by Jaipal Singh -- an Oxford-educated prince who captained Indian hockey to its first gold medal in the 1928 Olympics -- the tribal communities of the region have been demanding freedom from exploitation.

The Adivasi demand for statehood extended to their regions in Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa and West Bengal. In effect, it has been reduced to one state. The proposed Vananchal is a truncation of the original Jharkhand dream and will comprise only southern Bihar. Yet, even this truncated dream can prove a nightmare for the rest of Bihar.

The Vananchal belt is the bedrock of the Bihari economy. It accounts for two-thirds of the state's revenue. Of the Rs 1,700 crore collected as sales tax in Bihar every year, Rs 1,200 crore comes from the southern districts. Of the Rs 850 crore it earns as royalty for mineral mines, Rs 700 crore comes from Vananchal. No wonder Shankar Prasad Tekriwal, finance minister in Bihar's Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) Government complains, "Only 30 per cent of the people will corner 70 per cent of the revenue if Jharkhand is separated from Bihar."

Vananchalis have reason to complain though. They live amid 40 per cent of India's mineral resources -- but also, amazingly, amid great poverty. In the backyard, as it were, of TISCO's impressive steel plant in Jamshedpur is a socio-economic arid zone. Vananchal gives Bihar 70 per cent of its revenue -- but only 15 per cent is re-invested there. Outsiders (locally knows as dikus) have swamped the tribal tract, taking over its commerce. Much of the immigration has come from north Bihar and in the past two decades alone, the Adivasi population in Vananchal has been reduced from 36 per cent to 26 per cent.

Granting Vananchal statehood is the ultimate double-edged weapon for the BJP. It hopes to ride to power in the new province by virtue of finally fulfilling tribal aspirations. If the decision may win the BJP one state, it may well lose in another. The potential bankruptcy of Bihar could galvanise Laloo Yadav -- on the backfoot after the fodder scandal. His RJD has little presence in south Bihar anyway and could stoke the fires of north Bihari chauvinism. This clearly has the BJP-allied Samata Party worried. It has approached the Vananchal issue with caution and even demanded a compensation package worth Rs 50,000 crore for Bihar.

Another set of people who will be hurt by the birth of Vananchal are, paradoxically, the factionalised and largely discredited Jharkhand Mukti Morcha (JMM) leaders. For years they held the key to electoral success in the tribal belt but betrayed their mandate numerous times. The disenchantment peaked after the JMM bribery scandal of 1993, when MPs were accused of taking money to back the Congress government in the Lok Sabha. After decades of promising their people statehood, when statehood finally comes the JMM old guard may find itself losing rather than gaining.

Preparing for Bipolarity
Chhattisgarh politics will mean Congress vs BJP

When the plan to create Chhattisgarh was unveiled, the happiest people were not the residents of eastern Madhya Pradesh who would now get their own state. Rather, the most relieved were government servants in Madhya Pradesh. Geography has made transfer both an industry and a paranoia in India's largest state. Over-night, even a clerk could find himself transferred from Bhind to Bastar -- 1,300 km and a whole mindset away.
This will soon be impossible. Bastar itself will be Chhattisgarh's biggest district and cultural showpiece due to its rich tribal heritage. Chhattisgarh is rich in other sectors as well: iron ore, granite, coal, diamonds. It contributes 44 per cent of Madhya Pradesh's revenue but only a quarter of its legislators.
Chhattisgarh was for decades the bastion of the Shukla brothers, S.C. and V.C., and the Congress. Yet, in 1998, the BJP won seven of 11 Lok Sabha seats. For a while the BSP made an impact but the return of Arvind Netam to the Congress -- he briefly joined the BSP -- suggests trouble. Leading BJP Chhattisgarhis are Ramesh Bais, Union minister for steel and mines, and N.K. Rai, chief of the Madhya Pradesh unit.

Issue Contents | Write to us | Subscriptions

© Living Media India Ltd