You must Sign In to post a response.
  • Category: India

    By dividing a state into small states , the state will fulfill basic needs.... ?

    After independence, the state Reorganization Act of 1956, there were 14 states and 6 union territories in the country. Which has now increased to 28 states and 8 union territories, but the problems of the common people remain the same.

    For example, three new states emerged in the year 2000. Jharkhand was carved out of Bihar. Chhattisgarh was carved out of Madhya Pradesh. Uttarakhand was carved out of Uttar Pradesh.

    The leaders and to some extent the public say that with the division of the state, each person of the state will be guaranteed bread, cloth and house.

    Every person will be ensured education, employment and security and people will be able to protect their language and culture, if this happens then small states should be formed.

    Now the question arises whether by dividing a state into small states, the basic needs of common people living in that state will be fulfilled.
  • #705267
    To some extent this would help the local people as more grants would be there and more autonomy would be there and things like that. In a big state when a part of it appears not getting the desired attention such thoughts of separation emerge. It is an age old process. If you see the position in Europe there are so many countries strewn across that part of the globe. They are all separate in their language, culture and administration. There is nothing wrong in dividing the states into sub states and the process can go like that. The main question is that whether this division would really make the common man happy. That is difficult to assess as in many case that does not happen. So whom does it help? It helps to those politicians who do not get an important place in the erstwhile state and after making a new state they get the coveted positions in it and their objectives and aspirations are met.
    Knowledge is power.

  • #705268
    This post can be well addressed with our Telangana which was formed out of united AP. Previously the local civic problems were not addressed even though there were corporators, MLA's amd ,MP's . Now the colony roads , internal roads, colony parks , street lights and drinking water woes are better addressed and we are getting immediate responses and work done. The pre monsoon preparedness of the GHMC has made no chocking of drainage lines and thus even the rain water would be get cleared within no time. The lakes are being safeguarded from encroachments and under the program of Haritha Haram crores of saplings are being planted across the villages, towns and the cities. More decentralization of powers would give better chance to govern and address the civic needs in more effective way.
    K Mohan @ Moga
    'Idhuvum Kadandhu Pogum "
    Even this challenging situation would ease

  • #705328
    Smaller States will be better to have better governance. The common can have a better approach to the people in the ruling in a small state than a big state. But if the intentions of the rulers are not good, big or small. it will not make any difference.
    When AP and Telangana were in a combined State all the rulers concentrated more on the development of a single city that is Hyderabad. Once this city is developed the people of Telangana thought that Hyderabad is theirs and they thought the people from AP are getting benefitted and they started agitating and finally the two states got divided. In the process, AP has the last everything and they don't even have a city which is good to be the state capital. This is a clear example of the narrow thinking of the rulers. Small state or big state, the rulers should see that there will be an overall development. But even today the state government of Telangana is giving importance to Hyderabad only but not to the other districts. If tomorrow, if the state has to lose Hyderabad, means Telangana will be a big zero again.

    always confident

  • Sign In to post your comments