1. blunder ned not adject "The biggest" however Orissa was the first lingistic State created by British 0n 1.4.1936.
> 2. People were and are from linguitic entities as Tamilians and Bengalis > which does not prevent them as infeior national than any other Indian and it > is not the cause of the fissiparious tendencies which started long back- > probably 7th division was 0n 15.8.1947 on the basis of religion(after > Afganista, Burma, Ceylone etc). > > 3. Not always te Politicians found a new way out to create more > opportunities for them by creating more States wChief Minister downwards and > bureaucrats/ Governors proliferating eating into the exchequer as many of the > smaller states like Haryana, Punjab,Kerala have prospered after formation. > > 4. If the demands for separation and division of States would be endless > make India unitary but you cannot give it to some languages and avoid some. > The division of Assam to smaller States had other bearings more important > than the langiages and is well known which I would like to avoid discussiong > as it would again lead to the dimunition of Hindus/orinal inhabitants' > numbers by invasion of newer religions. > > 5. In a democratic country you cannot say that this is a very unhealthy > trend for the Country as a whole, till regional balance in economic growth is > achieved.> > 6. Why zones and which zones... can you think forst for US form of > presidential system(and there are also 50 states?). Dr. Dhanakar Thakur > On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 S kumar wrote : >1. The biggest blunder committed by Nehru was the Linguistic Division of the >States under Sardar KM Panikkar's Commission, after the fasting to death of >Potti Sriramulu and Andhra separated from Madras State. > > 2. People started thinking as linguitic entities as Tamilians and Bengalis > rather than Indians and the fissiparious tendencies started. > > 3. The Politicians found a new way out to create more opportunities for > them by creating more States wChief Minister downwards and bureaucrats/ > Governors proliferating eating into the exchequer. > > 4. The demands for separation and division of States would be endless. This > started mainly after the division of Assam to smaller States and now many > others have started agitating. > > 5.This is a very unhealthy trend for the Country as a whole, though > Politicians encourage such a splitting creating more opportunities for them > to hold important postions CM downwards. > > 6. The Country would do well with the whole Country divided to five zones > with smaller States ruled by administrators. But who will bell the cat? > > >Jharkhand News <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > Jharkhand.News > > > > > > > > > > > Gorkhaland triggers fresh debate over smaller states > > The resurgence of a movement for a separate state of Gorkhaland carved out > of West Bengal has revived the debate within political parties on smaller > states. In the absence of unanimity, each political party has worked out its > own logic for supporting or resisting demands for smaller or not-so-small > states. > > The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) favours splitting up states, barring a > few, for better governance while the Congress party prefers not to have a > fixed position on the issue. > > The Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M) is against smaller states per > se. The Communist Party of India (CPI), however, is all for them but not in > the case of every state. > > At the end, for political parties, it is a matter of political expediency, > says political analyst G.V.L. Narasimha Rao. > > The BJP actively campaigned for the new state of Jharkhand because it led > to, as was widely known, curbing the influence of the Rashtriya Janata Dal > (RJD) of Lalu Prasad who held sway in Bihar. > > "The BJP supported the Jharkhand movement to expand their political > influence. But the BJP would resist any move to split up Gujarat where it is > so powerful," Rao told IANS. > > Senior Congress leader M. Veerappa Moily added: "There is no point > recklessly dividing states for political expediency. The Congress does not > have an ideological stand on the issue." > > But for all practical purposes, the Congress is against the creation of any > more smaller states though many within its own ranks are supporting the > separation of Telangana from Andhra Pradesh state. > > "Reckless division of states will have a cascading effect and states may > eventually end up being divided along caste lines," Moily warned. > > The only ground for slicing up states, according to Moily, could be > administrative convenience. But there is no consensus on how big or small a > state should be for administrative convenience. > > The CPI-M is fighting the Gorkhaland movement tooth and nail. Splitting > West Bengal would mean the party losing an area of its present influence and > administrative jurisdiction. > > CPI-M leaders, however, couch their opposition to Gorkhaland in a different > language. > > "Creating smaller states on the issue of development would mean undermining > linguistic considerations. Similarly, new states formed on the basis of > ethnic considerations would mean undermining the economic and administrative > viability," said CPI-M central committee member Nilotpal Basu. > > Clearly, political India has no single mind on whether smaller states are > good for the country. > > The Gorkhaland movement in the 1980s turned violent amid charges by the > Marxists that the Congress was secretly backing the Gorkhas so as to > undermine the CPI-M in West Bengal. Its advocates say they are not satisfied > with the limited autonomy granted to them. > > A separate Gorkhaland would be made up mainly of the hilly parts of > northern West Bengal, close to Nepal. Its capital would be Darjeeling, a > tourist paradise. > > The campaign for Jharkhand and Chhattisgarh had the strong backing of the > tribals, who felt they were not getting their due from the plainspeople. > > Those clamouring for Uttarakhand also mainly a hilly region and home to > many tourist and Hindu pilgrimage centres wanted to get out of the clutches > of the mammoth Uttar Pradesh. > > In 2000, all three states Uttarakhand, Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand were > carved respectively out of Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Bihar. > > That success only emboldened the feelings of those who say they too need > separate states. > > Both the central and Maharashtra governments are contending with the demand > for a separate state of Vidarbha, constituting the eastern region of > Maharashtra with Nagpur as the capital. "The BJP supports Vidarbha because it > is strong in this part of Maharashtra," said analyst Rao. > > Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) leader Mayawati has indicated that Uttar Pradesh, > India's most populous state of which she is chief minister, could be broken > into three states Poorvanchal, Bundelkhand and Harit Pradesh. > > At one time, PMK chief S. Ramadoss had called for a separate state in > northern Tamil Nadu where his Vanniar community is numerically strong. The > DMK and the AIADMK do not want Tamil Nadu to be broken up. > > Demands have also been made to separate the Jammu region from Jammu and > Kashmir and Coorg from Karnataka. > > Between 1947 and 1950, the princely states that existed during the British > Raj were politically integrated into the Indian union. Most were merged with > existing provinces. > > In 1956, the states reorganisation commission appointed by then prime > minister Jawaharlal Nehru reorganised the boundaries of Indian states along > linguistic lines following mass protests in many parts of India. > > After toying with the idea of a second states reorganisation commission, > the ruling Congress has junked it. According to Moily, none of the partners > of the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) are for it. > > But that does not mean the demand for new states will go away. If Telangana > comes up, it would be made up of 10 Andhra Pradesh districts. It is a good > case in point. > > Last month, the movement for a separate state of Telangana suffered a > setback when the Telangana Rashtra Samiti (TRS) lost out to the Congress and > the Telugu Desam Party (TDP), both of which are not for a break-up of Andhra > Pradesh, in by-elections to four Lok Sabha and 18 assembly seats. > > The TRS MPs and MLAs had forced these elections after quitting their seats > to protest the Congress' dithering over a separate Telangana. But despite the > electoral drubbing, the TRS has vowed not to give up the demand. And many in > the Congress and the TDP agree with TRS. > > > thaindian.com/newsportal/politics/gorkhaland-triggers-fresh-debate-over-smaller-states_10061785.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > News TV Blog Photo Music Video Live Chat > Directory Testimonials Forum Contact > > > > > > > >
