Last Part 3 – Know and Understand Complete Justice B.N. Srikrishna Committee report on Telangana –

Last Part 3 – Know and Understand Complete
Justice B.N. Srikrishna Committee report on Telangana –

Officers committee identified the anomalies in Government employment between 1975 and 1985 which were in violation of the Presidential Order and recommended measures to rectify the same.

Following the Committee’s report, the Government, thereafter, appointed
a One-Man Commission headed by V. Sundaresan, another (Retd.) IAS officer of
the state government, to further examine the violations in the implementation of
the Six Point Formula and to suggest corrective step taking into consideration the
report of the Officer’s Committee.



On the basis of the recommendations of both these Committees, and after having wide ranging discussions, the state Government entered into an agreement with the Telangana Non-Gazetted Officers Union on 07.12.1985 and issued orders in the form of G.O.Ms. No.610 (SPF) on December 30, 1985, for the rectification of irregularities in t

During the next 15 years after the issue of G.O.610, the Government is reported
to have been receiving representations regarding rectification of lapses in the
implementation of the Six Point Formula insofar as it related to public services.

The matter was discussed in an All-Party meeting held on 15.6.2001, and a One-
Man Commission (Six Point Formula) was constituted on 25.06.2001, under J.M.
Girglani, IAS (Retd.).
The Girglani Commission submitted its final report on
30.9.2004 with 126 findings and suggested 35 remedial measures.
the Report was finally accepted by the Government on 10.08.2006.

implementation of G.O. 610 during 1985 to 2005 was, at best, tardy, which remains a grievance of Telangana employees.

The formation of united Andhra Pradesh was premised on the all-
inclusive Telugu “sub-nationalism”.

In the meanwhile, the state during the last 30 years also witnessed
the growth of Naxalism in a major way.

Reportedly, different political parties did seek the support of
the naxals at election time during this period.

It will be recalled that the BJP, in its national executive meeting at
Kakinada (Andhra Pradesh) in 1997, had passed a resolution supporting a
separate state for Telangana. Accordingly, in the 1998 Lok Sabha elections, BJP
gave the slogan “One Vote, Two States”.
It received more votes in the Telangana region.

MLAs of the Congress from Telangana region had also started a regional forum
called Telangana Congress Legislators Forum (TCLF) with the consent of the
state leadership.
In the panchayat election in Telangana region, the slogan of
TCLF was “Jai Congress, Jai Telangana”.

coming of the TRS and the position on Telangana taken by the BJP, the state unit of the Congress Party had also projected Telangana cause under the aegis of “Telangana Congress Legislators Forum (TCLF)” in the panchayat election in 2001.
It was reported that at that time 41 MLAs belonging to the Congress from Telangana region had urged the Congress President, Smt. Sonia Gandhi, to permit them to take up the “movement” for a separate state of Telangana.

leaders of the Congress Forum for Telangana and the TCLF passed a resolution
at Nalgonda in December, 2002, assuring the people that a separate statehood
for Telangana was very much on the agenda of the Congress and it would strive
to creat a separate Telangana soon.

In the run-up to the 2004 Lok Sabha and Assembly elections, the
Congress and the TRS formed an electoral alliance.
In the Congress election manifesto for 2004 elections, it was stated that “the Congress Party recognizes the growing emotions and aspirations of the people in the Telangana region”. It was further added in the manifesto that „while respecting the report of the
States” Reorganization Commission, the Congress Party notes that there are many
valid reasons for formation of separate states in Vidarbha and Telangana.

The Congress won both the Lok Sabha and the State Assembly
elections and formed Governments at the Centre as well as in the state.
The TRS also joined the Government, both at the Centre and in the state.
The UPA in their National Common Minimum Programme (NCMP), 2004, of the Government included the Telangana issue also stating that “The UPA Government will consider the demand for the formation of a Telangana state at an appropriate time after due consideration and consensus”.

The UPA Government accordingly constituted a three-Member
Committee of the Cabinet Ministers under the Chairmanship of Shri Pranab
Mukherjee in November, 2004 with Dr. Raghuvansh Prasad Singh and Shri
Dayanidhi Maran as Members.
The Committee did take up this matter further, but no conclusion seems to have been arrived at.

On the reported grounds that the Central Government had been
indecisive over the delivery of its electoral promise to the TRS for creating a
separate Telangana TRS in September, 2006 withdrew support to the Congress-led UPA Government at the Centre.

On January 31, 2009, before the State Assembly elections, Shri
K.Chandrasekhara Rao, President, TRS announced that TRS had joined the
„Mahakutami‟ (grand alliance). The grand alliance was headed by Telugu Desam
Party and included the Third Front and the Left parties.

during the NDA regime up to 2004 BJP did not solve this problem.

Soon after the 2009 Assembly elections, TRS left Mahakutami and tied up with the BJP, the alliance which exists even at present.

congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA-2) again formed the Government at the Centre. It may be relevant to mention here that unlike the National Common Minimum Programme (NCMP) of UPA-1, the NCMP of UPA-2 did not make any mention of the Telangana issue.

On November 9, 2009, the TRS president Chandrasekhar Rao wrote to the President of India about his intention to go on fast-unto-death in order to fulfil the hopes and aspirations of the people of Telangana for a separate state.

TRS President, K. Chandrasekhara Rao started his fast-unto-
death on November 29, 2009 demanding that the Central Government should
introduce the Telangana Bill in Parliament.

December –
a Joint Action Committee (JAC) was formed by the students of Osmania and Kakatiya universities.
The JAC started seriously agitating for the cause of a separate Telangana, demanding an assurance for the same.

During this period, reportedly over five thousand persons were
taken into preventive custody with a view to bringing the law and order situation
created by the agitations under control.

December 7, 2009 –
all political parties, except CPI (M), were in favour of a proposal to adopt a resolution in the State Assembly for creation of a separate Telangana.

Union Home Minister, P.Chidambaram in the late evening of December 9, 2009 at New Delhi announced the decision of the Central Government to initiate the process of forming the state of Telangana, adding that an appropriate resolution would be moved in the State Assembly.

Based on this development TRS President, Chandrasekhara Rao gave up his fast
and the agitation was called off.

The above announcement, however, created a backlash in coastal
Andhra and Rayalaseema regions, resulting in agitations and eruption of violence
in many districts.

Then again congress party changed the view. this led to ending of agitations in coastal
Andhra and Rayalaseema regions, agitations restarted in Telangana region due
to the perceived change in the stand of the Government of India.

At this point, reportedly sixty three MLAs belonging to Telangana region (Congress – thirteen; TDP – thirty seven; TRS – ten; BJP –one; PRP –two) submitted their resignation.

On December 30, 2009, a bandh was called by the Telangana Joint Action
Committee (TJAC) paralysing the entire region.

the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) neither responded to the Committee‟s request to provide their inputs nor joined in the deliberations with the Committee.
Here committee means Sri Krishna committee

Andhra Pradesh (AP) is one of the largest states of India. Spread
over 275 thousand square kilometers, it hosts a population of over 90 million.

Andhra Pradesh has a total geographical area of 2,75,100 square
kilometers with a coastline of 960 kms running from Ichapuram in the north to
Srikakulam District to Pulicat Lake in the south in Nellore district.

The state is divided into three prominent regions based on both
historical and geo-physical factors, namely, Telangana, coastal Andhra and
Rayalaseema comprising ten, nine and four districts each and hosting
population shares of 40.6%, 41.6% and 17.6% respectively. Hyderabad city,
which falls within the Telangana region

level of urbanization is rather
low in all regions – Telangana (22%) and 25 % in coastal Andhra and 23%
Rayalaseema.

Hyderabad district which is fully urbanized has grown
at the cost of all the three regions and is now central to the economies of the
three regions in Andhra Pradesh.

Telangana region has experienced unprecedented growth from 1993-94 onwards
absolute levels of income between regions do not differ much from a national perspective.

Telangana receives relatively lower amounts of FDI is chiefly due to the concentration of investments in Hyderabad city.

Overall, in spite of 50 plus years of policy protected planning and
execution, one finds regional variations in the economic development of AP.

An understanding of the perspective of the Telangana issue within a poverty,
deprivation and empowerment framework does not compulsorily support
partitioning of the state.
It is a fact that most of the economic and developmental parameters show that Telangana (excluding Hyderabad) is either on par with or a shade lower than coastal Andhra; but once Hyderabad is included, the situation in Telangana is far better.
Additionally, the rate of growth of most of the parameters of development has shown robust growth in Telangana.

Due to concentration of services such as education and health facilities, and services sector employment in Hyderabad city, other parts of Telangana are under-serviced. There is an urgent need to remove these anomalies from Telangana.

There are more colleges and students in degree colleges in coastal Andhra
than in Telangana

One of the major grievances of the people of Telangana is regarding allocation and utilization of river waters.

This report mentions and compares all 3 parts regarding water, education and health things.
Which I am not mentioning here in details.

Andhra Pradesh, like any other large Indian state is heterogeneous
in its socio-cultural makeup with a diversity of castes, tribes, linguistic and
religious communities.

This committee report even talks about caste and religious wise differences area wise and population wise.
Not going into details.

The report has given 6 options they are as follows –

1) Maintain status quo. Out of the Chief Minister and Deputy Chief Minister one of them should be from Telangana.

2) Bifurcation into Seemandhra and Telangana with Hyderabad as a union territory. Both regions to have own capital in due course, the committee says.


3) Bifurcation into Rayaltelangana and coastal Andhra with Hyderabad going with Rayaltelangana.

4) Bifurcation into Telangana and Seemandhra with an enlarged Hyderabad to become a union territory.


5) Bifurcation of Seemandhra and Telangana as per existing boundary with Hyderabad becoming the capital of Telangana. Seemandhra to have its own separate capital.

6) United state providing certain constitutional measures for socio-economic and political development and formation of Telangana Regional Council.

"Committee has rejected first three options as not practical. Options four, five and six are considered by the committee as practical.

Reality views by sm –
Thursday, January 06, 2011

This report tries and proves and supports the one AP,
Seems that report does not try and find the benefits of small state.
The report shows that state division is not required.
This report does not discuss or say the benefits of small state .

Final last word – Report favors one state.

The PDF file of this report has total 683 pages.

Suggested Reading –

Part One – Know and Understand Complete Justice B.N. Srikrishna
Committee report on Telangana –

http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2011/01/part-one-know-and-understand-complete.html

Part Two – Know and Understand Complete Justice B.N. Srikrishna
Committee report on Telangana –

http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2011/01/part-two-know-and-understand-complete.html

India – Creation Of Small States – Need of the Hour For INDIA

http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2009/12/india-creation-of-small-states-need-of.html

Read Full Article...

Part Two – Know and Understand Complete Justice B.N. Srikrishna Committee report on Telangana –

Part Two – Know and Understand Complete Justice B.N. Srikrishna
Committee report on Telangana –

The agreement was not implemented properly.

The political space in the institution of Deputy Chief Minister (or Chief Minister)
for the Telangana region was denied by the signatory to the Gentlemen’s
Agreement and the Chief Minister from Andhra area, Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy
(who became the first Chief Minister of the united Andhra Pradesh) in the very
first Ministry in 1956 by reportedly calling it an ”unwanted sixth finger of the
hand”.



in later years, other issues such as the sharing of waters and irrigation resources, land management etc., also became quite contentious.

The arrangement of Chief Minister/Dy. Chief Minister got restored only
after the 1969 “Jai Telangana” agitation.

The States Reorganization Act, 1956, and the seventh Amendment
to the Constitution of India, 1956, in the form of Article 371, took into account
the Gentlemen’s Agreement and included, besides the Constitution of the new
state, the important provision regarding the Constitution of the Regional
Committee. The relevant provisions of the SRC and Article 371 respectively are:

(i) Andhra Pradesh…..The territories specified in subsection (1) of
section 3 of the Andhra State Act, 1953 and the territories Specified
in sub-section (1) of section 3 of the State Reorganization Act,
1956.

(ii) Substitution of a new Article for Article 371- For Article 371 of the
Constitution the following Article was substituted, namely:-
371. Special Provisions with respect to the states of Andhra Pradesh,
Punjab and Bombay:-
(1)Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, the
president may, by order made with respect to the State of Andhra Pradesh
or Punjab, provide for the Constitution and functions of the Regional
Committees of the Legislative Assembly of the State, for the modification
to be made in the rules of business of the Government and in the Rules
of procedure of the Legislative Assembly of the State and for any special
responsibility of the Governor in order to secure the proper functioning of
the Regional committee.

Regional Committee of the Legislative Assembly of the
state got constituted in 1958.
However, as decided
in the Gentlemen’s Agreement, 1956, the statutory Regional Council which was
to look after the political space, the implementation of development and other
related issues was not constituted.

Regional Committee was formed in 1958, to have a sort of legislative advisory role over the executive; albeit, it was restricted to Telangana related development issues.

The position and powers of the Regional Committee were responsible for its ineffective functioning.
the powers of the Regional Committee were enlarged by the Presidential Order of 1970
1958-68 dispensation, the scope and area that the Committee was limited but got more restrictions.

Central Government made the Andhra Pradesh Public Employment (Requirement
as to Residence) Rules, 1959. The rules required that specified categories of
employment in Telangana area should be filled up only by persons who had been
residents of Telangana area for not less than 15 years.

One of the main causes of dissatisfaction of the people of Telangana was that a
large number of persons from coastal Andhra region were appointed to the posts
belonging to them on the ground that qualified personnel from Telangana were
not available.

The Regional Committee brought it to the notice of the Government
repeatedly that the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Public Employment
(Requirement as to Residence) Rules, 1959, were not being implemented

It pleaded for the extension of the Public Employment
(Requirement as to Residence) Act, 1957 by 5 years in 1964, and again in 1969.

Urdu was the language of administration and the judiciary in the erstwhile Hyderabad State under the Nizam as opposed to English, which was used in coastal Andhra

An agitation began in Telangana in January, 1969, as a consequence of a High Court judgment holding that the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board did not come under the purview of the Public Employment (Requirement as to Residence) Act, 1957

The non-gazetted officers from Telangana joined the movement with the
demand for the immediate repatriation to coastal Andhra region, of about six
thousand coastal Andhra employees occupying the Telangana posts.

The agitation spanning nearly for a year from December, 1968, to November, 1969, resulted in colossal damage to public and private property, loss of precious life and injury to several people across the districts

Government issued a Government Order (G.O.) assuring to remove/move all non mulki officials from their current positions and set a dead line for the same as February 28, 1969.
The state government also announced that it was extending the Mulki Rules to
the Andhra Pradesh Electricity Board as it was funded by the state.

On the announcement of these decisions, particularly the one pertaining to repatriation
of employees of coastal Andhra/Rayalaseema from Telangana region, violence
erupted in coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema regions.
During this period, Telangana Students Action committee called upon the students of Telangana to abstain from classes till a separate state was formed.

K.V.Ranga Reddy, former
Deputy Chief Minister, joined the students, stating that without separate
statehood, the injustice to Telangana cannot be rectified and prevented.
While the situation was taking a turn for the worse, the Supreme Court granted an
injunction on the state Government’s announcement of “Non-Mulki employee
repatriation by February 28, 1969”.
Subsequently, the order was declared by the Supreme Court to be ultra-vires of the Constitution. This led to the intensification of the agitation for a separate statehood.

the student agitation, as a result, passed in to the hands of the politicians demanding
separate statehood, who formed themselves into what was called the “Telengana
Praja Samithi”.

After the trifurcation of Hyderabad state in 1956, the Mulki rules
continued to be in force in the Telangana region.

As a consequence, some of the coastal Andhra employees challenged the validity of the Mulki Rules in the Andhra Pradesh High Court.
On February 14, 1972, a full bench of the five judges, with a 4-1 majority,
held that the Mulki Rules were not valid and operative after the formation of
Andhra Pradesh state
(in 1919 the Nizam of Hyderabad had issued a “Firman”
laying down that only “Mulkis” are eligible for public appointment in the state).

The High Court Judgment stirred the Andhra Pradesh Government and was a
rude shock to the Telanganites as they were always insisting on enforcement of
the Mulki Rules.
The government preferred an appeal in the Supreme Court against the ruling of the Andhra Pradesh High Court.

On October 3, 1972, the Supreme Court gave its verdict
reversing the A.P High Court decision and holding that Mulki Rules were valid and
were in force.
This judgment stirred the people in coastal Andhra region who felt
that they were reduced to the status of second class citizens in their own state
capital.
Ostensibly, to safeguard their dignity, they preferred to sever their
connection with Telanganites. This led to the “Jai-Andhra agitation”.

The AP Government announced its decision to implement the Mulki
Rules and later it was decided and agreed to allow the Mulki Rules in the twin cities
upto 1977 and in the rest of the Telangana until the end of 1980.
A Bill was introduced in the Parliament to that effect which was passed on December 31,
1972.

The people of coastal Andhra region were taken aback by the passage of the Bill as they wanted nothing short of immediate abolition of the Mulki Rules.

The Congressmen from the coastal Andhra area met on December 31, 1972, at the Tirupati Convention which was attended by a large number of the Congressmen from the Assembly and council and chairmen and presidents of the Zilla Parishads.

The Convention was presided over by B.V. Subba Reddy, who
was till then the Deputy Chief Minister and had resigned before the convention.
At this convention, a call was given to people to “Paralayse the State
Administration‟” by refusing to pay taxes and by defying the prohibitory orders.
The Jai Andhra agitation spread like a wild fire and, did, in fact, succeed in
paralyzing the administration.
It continued for more than two months, resulting in damage to public and private property, loss of human life and injury to several people across the districts.

Taking all these aspects into consideration, including the intensity of the agitation, President’s Rule was imposed in the state in January, 1973.

In the meanwhile, another twist came in respect of the definition of
Mulki Rules. The Andhra Pradesh High Court on February 16, 1973, declared that
people from outside who came to Telangana and settled there could also be
Mulkis and not only those who were born and brought up in Telangana.
As a result of this decision, the Telangana people claimed that they lost the benefit of
the Mulki Rule.

In another development , on July 11, 1973, the Andhra Pradesh
High Court gave another verdict that Mulki Rules would apply to initial
recruitment and nor for subsequent stages of promotion, seniority, reversion,
retrenchment or ousting from service, whether temporary or permanent. As a
result of these developments, and gradual loss of public support, Congressmen
from both sides realized the futility of their demand for bifurcation.

Prime Minister Smt. Indira Gandhi again intervened, and after a
series of discussion with leaders of both the regions, evolved a consensus
through the “Six Point Formula”.

implementation of the Six Point Formula was required to be backed by the
Constitutional Amendment which was enabled by the Thirty-Second Amendment
in 1973.

The statement of Objects and Reasons of the Constitution (Thirty-
Second) Amendment Act, 1973, clearly mentioned why such legislation was
needed and hence the same is reproduced below:

“When the State of Andhra Pradesh was formed in 1956, certain
safeguards were envisaged for the Telangana Area in the matter of
development and also in the matter of employment opportunities and
educational facilities for the residents of that area.

The provision of Clause
(1) of Article 371 of the Constitution were intended to give effect to
certain features of these safeguards. The Public Employment
(Requirement as to Residence) Act, 1957, was enacted, inter-alia, to
provide for employment opportunities for residents of Telangana area.

But in 1969,the Supreme Court held the relevant provision of the Act to be
unconstitutional in so far as it related to the safeguards envisaged for the
Telengana Area. Owing to a variety of causes, the working of the
safeguards gave rise to a certain amount of dissatisfaction sometimes in
the Telengana Area and sometimes in the other areas of the State.

Measures were devised from time to time to solve the problems. Recently
several leaders of Andhra Pradesh made a concerted effort to analyse the
factors which have been giving rise to the dissatisfaction and find enduring
answers to the problem with a view to achieving fuller emotional
integration of the people of Andhra Pradesh.

On the September 21, 1973, they suggested measures (generally known as the Six-Point Formula) indicating a uniform approach for promoting accelerated development of
the backward areas of the State so as to secure the balanced development
of the State as a whole and for providing equitable opportunities to
different areas of the State in the matter of education, employment and
career prospects in public services….”.
The Thirty-Second Amendment Act omits clause(1) of Article 371and makes special provision with respect to the State of Andhra Pradesh by inserting new clause 371-D

As a result of the events described above, the Mulki Rules were
repealed in 1973 by the Mulki Rules Repeal Act and the Six Point Formula (SPF)
was announced on 21st September, 1973 and 22nd October, 1973, highlighting the following:-
(1)
Constitution of a Planning Board at the state Level as well as
Sub-Committees for different backward areas.

(2)
Preference to local candidates in the matter of admission to
educational institutions and establishment of a new Central
University at Hyderabad.

(3)
Preference to specified extent to local candidates in the
matter of direct recruitment and organization of local cadres.

(4)
Constitution of Administrative Tribunal.

(5)
Amending Constitution suitably for the above purpose.

(6)
The above approach would render the continuance of Mulki
Rules and Regional Committee unnecessary.

a major effect of the Six Point Formula was that it resulted in the abolition of the Telangana Regional Committee and setting up of a state Planning and Development Board and separate Planning and Development Committees for the three regions of the state.

The Six point Formula (SPF) was incorporated in the form of
special provisions with respect to the state of Andhra Pradesh in the Constitution
(Article 371-D) and a Presidential Order was issued through G.O. Ms. No 674 on
February 20, 1975, to mark the beginning of the implementation of the Formula.

The interregnum between September, 1973, when the formula was evolved, and February, 1975, when the same was put to implementation, witnessed two important milestones;
one was the abolition of the Mulki Rules on December 31, 1973, through the Mulki
Rules Repeal Act, 1973, which received President’s assent on December 31, 1973,
and the other was the abolition of the Telangana Regional Committee from January 1, 1974, under a Presidential Order issued on December 10, 1973.

since 1982, no leader from Telangana took reins of Andhra Pradesh as Chief Minister,
except Dr. M. Chenna Reddy who was Chief Minister for a brief period of one
year during December 1989-December 1990.

SPF was more state-centric as compared to
the Gentlemen’s Agreement, which was primarily Telangana-centric

It has been represented before the Committee that the unified state of Andhra Pradesh was maintained more through financial and political machinations than by giving equal and equitable opportunities to Telangana region and its people.

population of Hyderabad has grown three times after the formation of the state in 1956, basic amenities have not grown in the same proportion.

The industrial units that came up in the periphery of the city of Hyderabad by the efforts of migrants engaged largely their own “migrant” staff to man the industry, thus depriving the locals of employment opportunities at various levels.

Even the civic amenities planned were often diverted to meet the needs of the
migrants.

United Andhra advocates, on the other hand, insist that Hyderabad is
no longer merely a Telangana city

Presidential Order, 1975 -
The general criticism of the Telangana employees on
the Presidential Order itself and its implementation was:-

(i)
The Presidential Order which was introduced to assure justice in
Government employment and allay the fears of Telangana employees was
used to inflict further discrimination against them in practice, as reflected
in the changes of zones for employment (within the Telangana Zones);
misinterpretation of the definition of “locals” in the Presidential Order to
benefit “non-locals” and misuse of the exemption provided in the
Presidential Order for gazetted positions and Heads of the Departments
(HoDs) by upgrading several non-gazetted posts to gazetted level.

(ii)
The second point was that the Presidential Order was issued in 1975
and it took ten years for the Government to correct the anomalies and
bring out a comprehensive G.O. in 1985, popularly known as G.O. 610.

(iii)
Another issue which Telangana employees have been raising is that
although the Government has taken several measures in relation to the
reservation of employment of Telangana people, each measure stood as a
proof to the fact that the earlier measure was either not implemented fully
or wrongly implemented.

In view of the criticism by the Telangana employees, as mentioned
above, the state government in the year 1984 constituted an “Officers‟
Committee” headed by Shri K. Jayabharath Reddy,

Continued –

Reality views by sm –
Thursday, January 06, 2011

Suggested Reading –

Part One – Know and Understand Complete Justice B.N. Srikrishna
Committee report on Telangana –

http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2011/01/part-one-know-and-understand-complete.html

Read Full Article...

Part One – Know and Understand Complete Justice B.N. Srikrishna Committee report on Telangana –

Part One – Know and Understand Complete Justice B.N. Srikrishna
Committee report on Telangana –

On January 5, 2010, the Government of India constituted a Committee for consultations on the situation in Andhra Pradesh (CCSAP) to to examine the demand for a separate State of Telangana as well as for maintaining the present status of a united Andhra Pradesh

Thus committee was formed of following persons.



1. Justice B.N. Srikrishna, Retired Judge, Supreme Court of India, chairman

2. Prof. (Dr.) Ranbir Singh, Vice Chancellor, National Law University, Delhi, member


3. Dr. Abusaleh Shariff, Senior Research Fellow, International Food Policy Research Institute, Delh, member

4. Prof. (Dr.) Ravinder Kaur, Professor, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, member


5. Shri V.K. Duggal, IAS (Retd.), Former Union Home Secretary, Member Secretary

Chairperson got the status of the sitting Supreme Court Judge and the Member Secretary, the rank of a Union Minister of State


The Terms of Reference of the Committee –

(1)
To examine the situation in the State of Andhra Pradesh with reference to
the demand for a separate State of Telangana as well as the demand for
maintaining the present status of a united Andhra Pradesh.

(2)
To review the developments in the State since its formation and their
impact on the progress and development of the different regions of the State.

(3)
To examine the impact of the recent developments in the State on the
different sections of the people such as women, children, students, minorities,
other backward classes, scheduled castes and scheduled tribes.

(4)
To identify the key issues that must be addressed while considering the
matters mentioned in items (1), (2) and (3) above.

(5)
To consult all sections of the people, especially the political parties, on
the aforesaid matters and elicit their views; to seek from the political parties
and other organizations a range of solutions that would resolve the present
difficult situation and promote the welfare of all sections of the people; to
identify the optimal solutions for this purpose; and to recommend a plan of
action and a road map.

(6)
To consult other organizations of civil society such as industry, trade,
trade unions, farmers’ organizations, women’s organizations and students’
organizations on the aforesaid matters and elicit their views with specific
reference to the all round development of the different regions of the State.

(7)
To make any other suggestion or recommendation that the Committee
may deem appropriate. vi

The Committee was mandated to submit its Report by December 31, 2010.
The first meeting of the Committee was held in Delhi on February 13, 2010.

To carry out this duty the committee got the help of 28 officers and staff and also
Inter-State Council Secretariat (ISCS) will provide full secretarial assistance, including technical and budgetary support, to the Committee.

The committee gave the Public Notice was given in news papers on February 20, 2010, in 5 major English newspapers of Delhi and 32 Telugu, English, Urdu and Hindi
newspapers of Andhra Pradesh, covering all its regions, inviting the views and
the suggestions from the political parties and groups representing different
interests including individuals, organizations, institutions and associations on
the various issues as mentioned in the Terms of Reference, within 30 days of
the publication of the Notice.

But later time period was extended up to April 10, 2010 in 2nd public notice.

The following four studies were, accordingly, awarded with a view to facilitate
the task of the Committee:-

(1)
Study on “Issues relating to Water Resources and Irrigation in Andhra
Pradesh” – to Shri A.D. Mohile, former Chairman of the Central Water
Commission (CWC).

(2)
Study on “Issues relating to Power Sector in Andhra Pradesh” – to Shri
V. B. Gupta, former Chief Engineer of the Central Electricity Authority (CEA).

(3)
Study on “Issues relating to discrimination, if any, in the matters of
employment in the Government of Andhra Pradesh and reservation in
educational institutions in respect of Telangana region, pursuant to
constitutional provisions under Article 371D, G.O. 610 and various other
assurances / agreements on this subject” – to Shri Mukesh Kacker, IAS
(Retd.), Director General, Institute for Regulation and Competition, New
Delhi.

(4)
Study on “Issues relating to Greater Hyderabad” – to the Centre for
Policy Research (CPR), New Delhi.

The Committee or its Members individually visited all the 23 districts of
the State and several villages to get a first hand feel at the ground level.

In all, the Committee, since its constitution in February, 2010, met 34 times

Union Home Minister, Shri P. Chidambaram, the Home Secretary, Shri G.K. Pillai and
the other concerned officers in the Ministry provided timely and unstinted
administrative and logistical support to committee.

February 20, 1956-
Meeting of following 8 participants was held
1. Shri B.Gopala Reddy
2. Shri Sanjeeva Reddy
3. Shri G. Latchanna
4. Shri A.Satyanarayana Raju
5. Shri B.Ramakrishna Rao
6. Dr. M. Chenna Reddy
7. Shri J.V. Narsing Rao,
8. Sri K.V.Ranga Reddy.

After their meeting “Safeguards for Telangana” was signed
popularly known as Gentlemen’s Agreement 1956

Following are the main provisions of Gentlemen’s Agreement 1956

The following points, arising out of the unification of Telangana and
Andhra, were discussed, and the conclusions arrived at are as follows:

1.
The expenditure of the Central and General Administration of the State
should be borne proportionately by the two regions and the balance of income
from Telangana should be reserved for expenditure on the development of
Telangana area. This arrangement will be reviewed after five years and can be
continued for another five years if the Telangana members of the Assembly so
desire.

2.
Prohibition in Telangana should be implemented in the manner decided
upon by the Assembly members of Telangana.

3.
The existing educational facilities in Telangana should be secured to the
students of Telangana and further improved. Admission to Colleges, including
technical institutions in the Telangana area, should be restricted to the students
of Telangana area, or they later should have admission to the extent of one-
third of the total admission in the entire state, whichever course is advantageous
to Telangana students.

4.
Retrenchment of services should be proportionate from both regions if it
becomes inevitable due to integration.

5.
Future recruitment to services will be on the basis of population from
both regions.

6.
The position of Urdu in the administrative and judicial structure existing at
present in the Telangana area may continue for five years, when the position
may be revised by the Regional Council.
So far as recruitment to services is concerned, knowledge of Telugu should not be insisted upon at the time of recruitment, but they should be required to pass a prescribed Telugu test in two
years time after appointment.

7.
Some kind of domicile rules e.g., residence for 12 years should be
provided in order to secure the prescribed proportion to recruitment of services
for Telangana area.

8.
Sales of agricultural lands in Telangana area to be controlled by the
Regional Council.

9.
A Regional Council will be established for the Telangana area with a view
to secure its all-round development in accordance with its needs and
requirements.

10.
The Regional Council will consist of 20 members as follows:
9 members of the Assembly, representing each district of Telangana, to
be elected by the Assembly members of the Telangana districts
separately.
6 members of the Assembly or the Parliament, elected by the Telangana
representatives in the Assembly.
5 members from outside the Assembly to be elected by the Telangana
members of the Assembly.
All ministers from Telangana region will be members. The Chief Minister
or the Deputy Chief Minister, whoever is from Telangana, will be the Chairman
of the Council. Other Cabinet Ministers may also be invited.

11.
(a) The Regional Council will be a statutory body empowered to deal with
and decide about matters mentioned above, and those relating to planning and
development, irrigation and other projects, industrial development within the
general plan and recruitment to services in so far as they relate to Telangana
area. If there is difference of opinion between the views of the Regional Council
and the Government of the state, a reference may be made to the Government
of India for final decision.
(b) Unless revised by agreement earlier, this arrangement will be
reviewed at the end of ten years.

12.
The Cabinet will consist of members proportionately 60:40 per cent for
Andhra and Telangana respectively. Out of the 40 per cent Telangana Ministers,
one will be a Muslim from Telangana.

13.
If the Chief Minister is from Andhra, the Deputy Chief Minister will be
from Telangana and Vice versa. Two out of the following portfolios will be
assigned to Ministers from Telangana:
(a) Home (b) Finance (c) Revenue (d) Planning and Development and (e)
Commerce and Industry.

14.
The H.P.C.C. President desires that the P.C.C. should be separate for
Telangana up to the end of 1962. A.P.C.C. President has no objection.
The above agreement was arrived at on February 20, 1956. It was
signed by
1. B.Gopala Reddy, Chief Minister of Andhra;
2. N.Sanjeeva Reddy, Deputy Chief Minister of Andhra;
3. G.Latchanna, Minister in the Andhra Cabinet & Leader of the Krishikar
Lok Party - a constituent of the United Congress Front which
contested the Andhra elections (1955) and formed the Ministry;
4. A.Satyanarayana Raju, President, Andhra Provincial Congress
Committee;
5. B.Ramakrishna Rao, Chief Minister, Hyderabad;
6. K.V.Ranga Reddy, Minister, Hyderabad;
7. Dr. M. Chenna Reddy, Minister, Hyderabad; and
8. J.V.Narsinga Rao, President, Hyderabad Provincial Congress
Committee.

the Andhra Pradesh Regional Committee Order, 1958, as approved by the President of India, under Clause 1 of Article 371 of the Constitution to give effect to this scheme embodied in the said note, was issued on February 1, 1958.

A. Regional Standing Committee

1.
There will be one legislature for the whole of the Andhra Pradesh state,
which will be the sole law-making body for the entire state, and there will be
one Governor for the state, aided and advised by a Council of Ministers,
responsible to the state Assembly for the entire field of administration.

2.
For a more convenient transaction of business of the Government with
regard to some specified matters, the Telangana area will be treated as a
region.

3.
For the Telangana region, there will be a regional standing committee of
the State Assembly consisting of the members of the State Assembly belonging
to that region, including the ministers from the region, but not including the
Chief Minister.

4.
Legislation relating to specified matters will be referred to the Regional
Committee. In respect of specified matters proposals may also be made by the
Regional Committee to the state Government for legislation, or with regard to
questions of general policy not involving any financial commitments other than
expenditure of a routine and incidental character.

5.
The advice tendered by the Regional Committee will normally be accepted
by the Government and the State Legislature. In case of difference of opinion,
reference will be made to the Governor, whose decision will be final and binding.

6.
The regional committee will deal with the following matters:-
i) Development and economic planning within the framework of the
general development plans and policies formulated by the State
Legislature;
ii) Local Self-Government, that is to say, the constitutional powers of
Municipal Corporations, Improvement Trusts, District Boards, and other
district authorities for the purpose of local self-Government or village
administration;
iii) Public Health and sanitation, local hospitals and dispensaries;
iv) Primary and Secondary education;
v) Regulation of admissions to the educational institutions in the
Telangana region;
vi) Prohibition;
vii) Sale of agricultural land;
viii) Cottage and Small Scale Industries; and
ix) Agriculture, Co-operative Societies, Markets and Fairs.
Unless revised by agreement earlier, this arrangement will be reviewed after ten
years.

B. Domicile Rules

A temporary provision will be made to ensure that for a period of five
years, Telangana is regarded as a unit, as far as recruitment to subordinate
services in the area is concerned; posts borne on the cadre of these services
may be reserved for being filled by persons who satisfy the domicile conditions
as prescribed under the existing Hyderabad Rules.

C.The position of Urdu

The Government of India would advise the State Government to take
appropriate steps to ensure that the existing position of Urdu in the
administrative and judicial structure of the state is maintained for a period of five
years.

D. Retrenchment of surplus personnel in the new State
The Government of India does not anticipate any retrenchment. The
intention is that so far as possible, the service personnel from the Hyderabad
State should be automatically integrated into the services of the Andhra Pradesh
without any process of screening. Should, however, any retrenchment be found
necessary, the entire personnel of the services of the enlarged State will be
treated on an equal footing.

E.
Distribution of expenditure between Telangana and Andhra Region
Allocation of expenditure with the resources of the State is a matter
which falls within the purview of the State Government and State Legislature.
Since, however, it has been agreed between the representatives of Andhra and
Telangana that the expenditure of the new State on central and general
administration should be borne proportionately by the two regions and the
balance of income from Telangana should be reserved for expenditure on the
development of Telangana area. It is open to the state Government to act in
accordance with the terms of this agreement in making budgetary allocations.
The Government of India proposes to invite the attention of the Chief Minister of
Andhra to this particular understanding and to express the hope that it would be
implemented.

But in future non-implementation of some provisions of the Agreement, once again, led to the agitations demanding the division of the state.

1969 “Jai Telangana movement - Telangana region
1972 “Jai Andhra” movement - Andhra region

It may be worthwhile to mention here that, the implementation of the Agreement itself started on a discordant note

The political space in the institution of Deputy Chief Minister (or Chief Minister)
for the Telangana region was denied by the signatory to the Gentlemen’s
Agreement and the Chief Minister from Andhra area, Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy
(who became the first Chief Minister of the united Andhra Pradesh) in the very
first Ministry in 1956 by reportedly calling it an ”unwanted sixth finger of the
hand”.

Continued –
Reality views by sm –
Thursday, January 06, 2011

Read Full Article...

Income Tax officials Raid home and offices of Goa Health Minister Vishwajit Rane

Income Tax officials Raid home and offices of
Goa Health Minister Vishwajit Rane

Income tax officers raided the home and office of congress leader and Goa Health Minister Vishwajit Rane at 4 places.

Raids were conducted at the minister's home in Panaji and 3 offices at Miramar, near Panaji, Sakhalim and Old Goa

Vishwajit Rane is the son of former Chief Minister Pratapsinh Rane.

Income tax department officials have not still declared what they found .


Below is the Profile of Goa Health Minister Vishwajit Rane



Name - Vishwajit Pratapsingh Rane

Father:Pratapsingh Raoji Rane

Mother: Smt.Vijayadevi Pratapsingh Rane

Birth Date : 23 March 1971

Birth Place : Mumbai

Marital Status: Married

Wife: Smt. Divya Rane

No. of Sons and daughters: Two daughters

Educational Qualifications - :B.Com, PGDM in Business Management

CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICES HELD from 25 June 2007 -

Cabinet Minister and holds portfolios of Health and Craftsmen Training.

Portfolio of Agriculture was added on 17.12.2007

Member, Fifth Legislative Assembly of the State of Goa.

Ex-Chairman of Goa Tourism and Development Corporation.

Reality views by sm –
Thursday, January 06, 2011

Read Full Article...

American National Debt crosses $14 trillion – the situation when debt reaches magic number of $14.294 trillion and President Obama what Obama will do

American National Debt crosses $14 trillion –
the situation when debt reaches magic number of $14.294 trillion
and President Obama what Obama will do

On June 1, 2010 the American national debt was $13 trillion
On December 2010 the debt reached to the 14 $ trillion.

In seven months the national debt increased by $1,000,000,000,000.
It took 212 days for an additional trillion dollars to be added to the American national debt.

So what the debt is carried forward, President Obama is not responsible for the overall debt.



Here comes the magic number $14.294 trillion

Last February President Obama and congress signed a law which fixed the statutory ceiling limit that is $14.294 trillion

What does mean the statutory limit ?
In this case Congress and President Obama can not borrow more than $14.294 trillion.

So congress has to increase this borrowing , taking loan limit.

NRO President Obama’s economic advisor Austin Goolsbee argued that a refusal by the Senate to increase the government’s debt ceiling would be “catastrophic” and a sign of “insanity.” Hmm, intertingly enough that’s not the position the Obama had in the past.

But the problem is that in Past President Obama said that
Year 2006 March –
President Obama said at the time of voting when American National Ceiling on debt was increased ,
He said: “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure.
It is a sign that the U.S. Government can't pay its own bills.
It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies.
Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally.
Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here.
Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren.
America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.
Americans deserve better.”

Thus President Obama voted against the increase in the American national debt ceiling limit.


Now the situation is that if President Obama supports the increase in ceiling limit on debt
Don’t you think it will prove or is a sign of leadership failure.

I will say he will increase it and using good speech he will prove it , he is right while in past he was right when he opposed the increase in debt ceiling .

Since Barack Obama took the Oath of Office, the American national debt has increased from $ 10,626,877,048,913.08 to $ 14,025,215,218,708.52.
That’s an increase of $ 3,398,338,169,795.44 in 710 days.

Fourteen trillion is 14-thousand billions.
A billion is a thousand millions.
A million is a thousand thousands.
A trillion has 12 zeros, to be exact.

Do you know what the national debt of India is ?
You will not find this information easily.

Reality views by sm –
Wednesday, January 05, 2011

Read Full Article...

Understanding Citibank fraud – After Shiv raj Puri Now Citi Group CEO Vikram Pandit and top management named in First Information Report

What is city bank Fraud?
What happened in city bank fraud?

Updated on Wednesday, March 09, 2011-

According to the police city bank’s assistant vice-president Binu Soman lodged a complaint with the local police, complaint states that Shivraj Puri had got a joint account opened in the names of Prem Nath, Sehna Prem Nath, and Deeksha Puri in September 2009.



A senior police officer investigating the Citibank fraud case at Gurgaon said that they have already seized 18 accounts, which have been opened in the name of the four accused. These accounts have only Rs 3.85 crore.

The main accused, Shivraj Puri, was working with the bank for the past seven-eight years

Shiv Raj Puri a relationship manager employed with Citibank's Gurgaon branch (DLF-II), allegedly collected fund from high networth individual (HNIs) and corporates were diverted into the stock market by showing a forged notification of Sebi to lure them into investments on promise of unusually high returns.

He also allegedly routed the fund garnered from the HNI customers to stock market through brokerage firms like Religare Securities.
He also claimed that these products were authorized by the bank's investment product committee.

The accused, Shivraj Puri, who is the banks relationship manager, had been arrested in this connection.

The number of investors could be 18 to 20 including corporates and HNIs who are both local.

According to Police, Rs 200 crore belonged to corporates including Hero group and Rs 100 crore to individuals.

Brijmohan Lal Munjal-led Hero group meanwhile admitted that its exposure to the fraud is to the tune of Rs 28.75 crore

Sanjay Gupta who is the Chief Financial Officer of the Hero Group was arrested in connection with the 300-crore Citibank scam as he got kickbacks for investing the company's money through Citibank manager, Shivraj Puri the main accused.

Sanjay Gupta had opened two accounts in the name of BG Finances and G2S Management Consultant in Axis Bank.
Police has already freezed these both accounts.

Both Puri and Gupta allegedly had a deal to first get the money deposited in Gupta's company, from where Puri would siphon it off to one of his 'fake' accounts.

Puri had opened three accounts in a Gurgaon branch in the names of his relatives.
He had asked customers to deposit money in these accounts under a scheme that promised double returns.
But once money was deposited, Puri transferred it into his own account.

Gurgaon Police Commissioner SS Deswal said cases of cheating and forgery have been filed against Puri and three others.
Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and SEBI both are investing this matter.

Normally Sebi does not issue a circular addressed to a banking organization as Sebi is not a regulatory authority for banks.

The local police registered an FIR naming Indian-born global CEO of the bank Vikram Pandit and 10 other officials in the Rs 300-crore Citibank fraud case.

The others who have been named in the FIR include Citibank's senior officials CFO John Gerspach and COO Douglas Peterson (both based in New York).

The others who figure in the FIR are Amit Zarpuri, Ashwini Chaddha, Amrita Farmahan, Rahul Soota, N Rajshekaran, Pramit Jhaveri and Shivraj Puri, the main accused in the fraud case.

The FIR filed by a high net worth individual (HNI) Sanjiv Agarwal with the Gurgaon police also names Citibank chairman William R Rhodes along with other senior officials based in India.

The case has been registered under sections 409, 477A, 420 and 120B of IPC.

2G Scam head is not responsible.
Common corruption wealth games head is not responsible.
Adarsh Society scam head is not responsible.
Bofors Scam no one is punished.


Then how come Vikram Pandit becomes accused in this fraud.

Indian Laws we need to amend them otherwise our nation will never improve.
Our laws are useless which protect criminals and good people fear and go to the jail.

Reality views by sm –
Tuesday, January 04, 2011

Update – Thursday, January 06, 2011

The Gurgaon police said that Citibank CEO Vikram Pandit and his colleagues in the bank's top-most rung will not be questioned and summoned in connection with the 300-crore Citibank scam that was born in Gurgaon near Delhi.

Hero Group found two more employees - Ganpat Singh and Gaurav Jain, working in the accounts department - who participated in this scam.

Updated on Wednesday, March 09, 2011-

Citi Bank Rs 460 crore fraud services of 7 employees terminated –

Last year Citi Bank detected fraud of Rs.460 crore at its Gurgaon branch

After that few employees were under suspension.
"Following disciplinary procedures, services of a few employees of our Gurgaon branch have been terminated," Citibank spokesperson said.

Director of Income Tax and Directorate of Enforcement (ED) have initiated investigation in the Citibank fraud case.

Police Commissioner (Gurgaon) S S Deswal said that seven Citibank employees have been terminated but said that they would investigate whether they were part of the scam or not.

Several depositors and high-networth individuals (NHIs) duped to the tune of Rs 460 crore in a fraud allegedly masterminded by Citibank's Global Wealth Manager Shivraj Puri.

Read Full Article...

Sri Lanka Government Planning to bring Taliban Type Rules – Planning to introduce dress code for Females –

Sri Lanka Government Planning to bring Taliban Type Rules
– Planning to introduce dress code for Females –
In Past Sri Lanka Government has already banned the use of bill boards featuring women showing cleavage or exposing thighs to advertise products or services in the country.

In 2010, US singer Akon was denied a visa to perform in Sri Lanka after Buddhist monks took offence at one of his videos that featured women in bikinis dancing around a pool in front of a Buddha statue.



Is it not possible Akon representatives did not pay a bribe to get the Visa?
Just a doubt.

The cultural ministry was considering public petitions calling for a ban on mini skirts which have raised the ire of ultra conservative sections of society, officials said.

The Cultural Ministry forwarded the petitions to a committee to study the requests and come up with a dress code for females in public places, a ministry official told PTI.

Ministry Secretary Nimal Rubashinghe said no firm stand was taken in respect of the skimpy women's clothing, but the Lakbima News daily said the government was contemplating banning mini skirts.

The Lakbima News newspaper said mini-skirts could be banned if the cultural ministry had its way under a "new era of moral purity".

Reality views by sm –
Tuesday, January 04, 2011

As soon as person goes outside of the home, the public place starts.

on the name of religion or groups Sri Lanka Government is planning to violate
the human rights of Sri Lankan females.

If you love the democracy, respect the human rights I will advise you stop visiting Sri Lanka for tours.
Always visit and tour the nation which supports human rights

This is just the beginning of murdering of Democracy if Sri Lanka government becomes successful in defining a dress code for females and controlling them, then tomorrow they will ban the jobs for females, education for females saying that Boys needs jobs and females should sit at home and cook and raise the kids.

Read Full Article...

Facts and Judgment of Income tax tribunal indirectly proves kickbacks and bribes were given and received a part of Bofors gun deal

Facts and Judgment of Income tax tribunal indirectly proves
kickbacks and bribes were given and received a part of Bofors gun deal

Indirectly its Proven Kickbacks and Bribe were given in Bofors Deal –
The truth prevailed finally the truth is out of Box

It was always said that in Bofors scam deal Quattrocchi and Win Chadha were paid the kickbacks and bribe, causing loss to the Indian taxpayers that is India.



On December 31, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) shot down the appeal of Chadha's son Hersh, saying "commission was paid to Ottavio Quattrocchi and Win Chadha illegally" in the Bofors deal.

The tribunal says kickbacks were paid to Quattrocchi and Win Chadha in the nearly Rs 1,500 crore Bofors deal.
It notes that 242.62 million Swedish kroners were paid to Quattrocchi and Chadha in kickbacks.
The bribes were paid into accounts of M/s Colbar Investments Limited Inc and M/s Wetelsen Overseas, controlled by Quattrocchi and his wife Maria Quattrocchi.

The kickback was paid by M/s AB Bofors as commission to Quattrocchi and Chadha through M/s AE Services and M/s Svenska.

The tribunal said the money received by Chaddha as kickback is taxable
Due to the kickback paid to the duo, India had to pay an excess amount of 242.62 million Swedish kroners for the guns.

CBI said no kickbacks were paid and now the income tax tribunal is saying
YES YES YES
The kickbacks were paid in bofors scam gun deals now top tax tribunal has confirmed this.


Kickbacks means bribe.
Kickbacks mean selling your nation to enemy for selfish reasons.



Realityviews by sm –
Monday, January 03, 2011

Read Full Article...

Complete Indian Legal History from year 1600 to 1935 Part 1 to last Part 38

Complete Indian Legal History from year 1600 to 1935
Part 1 to last Part 38

The Indian Legal history period is between 1600 to 1935.

Date of first part - 30th January 2010
Date of last part - 3rd January 2011


Link for Each part of Indian Legal history.



Know the Indian Legal History – Part One
– East India Company Year 1600
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/01/know-indian-legal-history-part-one.html

Know the Indian Legal History – Part Two –
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/02/know-indian-legal-history-part-two.html

Indian Legal History Part 3 - 1688 - Madras Mayors Court
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/02/indian-legal-history-part-3-1688-madras.html

Administration of Bombay – Legal system of Bombay 1668 – 1726 – Part 4
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/03/administration-of-bombay-legal-system.html


Indian Legal History – Administration of Bombay 1684 to 1726 - Part 5
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/03/indian-legal-history-administration-of.html

Administration of Justice at Calcutta - 1660 To 1726 and Charter of 1726 – Part 6
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/03/administration-of-justice-at-calcutta.html

Part 7 - Indian Legal History - Charter of 1753
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/03/part-7-indian-legal-history-charter-of.html

Part 8 - Indian Legal History – East India Company Becomes Diwan of Bengal
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/03/part-8-indian-legal-history-east-india.html


Part 9 – Indian Legal History – Judicial Plan of Warren Hastings 1772 and 1774
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/04/part-9-indian-legal-history-judicial.html

Part 10 - Indian Legal History – Regulating act of 1773 and Creation of Supreme Court at Calcutta.
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/04/part-10-indian-legal-history-regulating.html

Part 11 - Indian Legal History – Supreme Court Becomes Secondary at Calcutta – 1781
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/04/part-11-indian-legal-history-supreme.html


Part 12 – Indian Legal History – Establishment of Supreme Court at Bombay and Madras
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/04/part-12-indian-legal-history.html

Part 13 – Indian Legal History - Judicial Plan of 1780, First Indian Civil Code Prepared
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/05/part-13-indian-legal-history-judicial.html

Part 14 – Indian Legal History – Cornwallis and Plan of 1787 –
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/05/part-14-indian-legal-history-cornwallis.html

Part 15 – Indian Legal History – The Plan of 1793 –
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/05/part-15-indian-legal-history-plan-of.html

Part 16 – Indian Legal History – Defects and Changes Made in 1793 Plan
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/05/part-16-indian-legal-history-defects.html

Part 17 – Indian Legal History – Separation of Executive and Judicial Powers 1797 – 1813
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/05/part-17-indian-legal-history-separation.html


Part 18 – Indian Legal History – Lord Hastings Plan 1814 –
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/06/part-18-indian-legal-history-lord.html

Part 19 – Indian Legal History - Criminal Court System 1790 – Defects and Changes
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/06/part-19-indian-legal-history-criminal.html


Part 20 – Indian Legal History - Lord William Bentinck period – July 1828 to March 1835 –
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/06/part-20-indian-legal-history-lord.html

Part 21 – Indian Legal History – Regulation and Non Regulation Provinces
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/06/part-21-indian-legal-history-regulation.html


Part 22 – Indian Legal History – British Citizens and Company Courts in India –
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/07/part-22-indian-legal-history-british.html


Part 23 – Indian Legal History – Small Causes Court and City Civil Court –
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/07/part-23-indian-legal-history-small.html


Part 24 – Indian Legal History - Indian High courts act 1861
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/07/part-24-indian-legal-history-indian.html


Part 25 - Indian Legal History - Charter of Calcutta High Court 1865
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/07/part-25-indian-legal-history-charter-of.html

Part 26 - Indian Legal History – Creation of Allahabad High court and The Indian High Courts act 1911
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/08/part-26-indian-legal-history-creation.html


Part 27 - Indian Legal History the Government of India Act 1915
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/08/part-27-indian-legal-history-government.html

Part 28 - Indian Legal History – The Government of India Act 1935
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/08/part-28-indian-legal-history-government.html


Part 29 - Indian Legal History – Importance of Privy Council or King in council towards Indian Legal History –
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/09/part-29-indian-legal-history-importance.html


Part 30 - Indian Legal History – Criminal law system in India Prior to British Rule, East India Company Rule
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/09/part-30-indian-legal-history-criminal.html

Part 31 – India Legal History – Changes and development in criminal Law system in India from 1772 to 1860
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/09/part-31-india-legal-history-changes-and.html


Part 32 – Indian Legal History - British Rule in India and development law and administration –
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/10/part-32-indian-legal-history-british.html


Part 33 – Indian Legal history – Regulations and codification in British India 1793 up to year 1834
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/11/part-33-indian-legal-history.html

Part 34 – Indian Legal history – Charter of 1833
Introduction of Justice, Equity and Conscience
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/12/part-34-indian-legal-history-charter-of.html

Part 35 – Indian Legal history – Charter Act 1853,
codification of Laws and Law commissions under British India.
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/12/part-35-indian-legal-history-charter.html

Part 36 – Indian Legal history – Act of 1909 Minto Morlay Reforms
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/12/part-36-indian-legal-history-act-of.html


Part 37 – Indian Legal history – Government of India Act 1919 –
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2010/12/part-37-indian-legal-history-government.html

Part 38 - Last Part – Indian Legal history –Government of India Act 1935
http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2011/01/part-38-last-and-final-chapter-indian.html

CTRL + D is a keyboard shortcut to open bookmark

Thank you for your comments and support.




Reality views by sm –
Monday, January 03, 2011

Read Full Article...

Part 38 - Last Part – Indian Legal history – Government of India Act 1935

Part 38 - Last Part – Indian Legal history –
Government of India Act 1935

The government of India Act 1919, section 84 provided that a commission of inquiry should be established for the development of representative institution in British India.

Under Section 84 of the said Act, a statutory commission was to be appointed at the end of ten years, to determine the next stage in the realization of self-rule in India.



Thus a commission of inquiry was established in 1927 which was called as Simon commission.

The commission consisted of Sir John Simon and six other members. All of them were members of the British Parliament who came to India.

The commission was sent to investigate India's constitutional problems and make recommendations to the government on the future constitution of India.

No Indian was the member of the Simon commission this angered the Indians and they started to oppose the Simon commission.

An All-India Committee for Cooperation with the Simon Commission was established by the Council of India and by selection by the Viceroy the Lord Irwin.

The members of the committee were: Sir C. Sankaran Nair (Chairman), Sir Arthur Froom, Rajah Nawab Ali Khan, Sardar Shivdev Singh Uberoi, Nawab Sir Zulfiqar Ali Khan, Sir Hari Singh Gour, Sir Abdullah Al-Mamun Suhrawardy, Kikabhai Premchand and Rao Bahadur M. C. Rajah.

On February 3, 1928, the Simon Commission arrived in Bombay.
The Commission published its 17-volume report in 1930.

Dominions originally referred to any land in possession of the British Empire.
1928 - Nehru Report – was prepared by a committee of the All Parties Conference chaired by Motilal Nehru with his son Jawaharlal acting as secretary.
There were nine other members in this committee including two Muslims.
The Nehru report was approved by the congress at Calcutta in December 1928.
Muslim Political partied opposed the Nehru Report.

The three Round Table Conferences of 1930–32 were a series of conferences organized by the British government to discuss constitutional reforms in India.
They were conducted as per the recommendation by the report submitted by the Simon Commission in May 1930.
The Labor Government returned to power in Britain in 1931 after that
The government decided to hold a Round Table Conference in London to consider new constitutional reforms.
All Indian politicians; Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs and Christians were summoned to London for the conference.

First Round Table Conference (November 1930 – January 1931)
B. R. Ambedkar demanded a separate electorate for the Untouchables.
Congress did not attend First Round Table Conference
89 members attended the conference


Second Round Table Conference (September – December 1931)
Gandhi-Irwin Pact –
The agreement between Gandhi and Irwin was signed on March 5, 1931.
On August 29, 1931, Gandhi sailed for England in the SS Rajputana to attend the Second Round Table Conference; He went as the sole representative of the Indian National Congress.
The second session of the conference opened in London on September 7, 1931


Congress, Gandhi said that Congress alone represented political India and there is no need for special electorate or minority status for Muslims or Untouchables.

Third Round Table Conference (November – December 1932)
Poona Pact – 1932 – Congress agreed with Ambedkar and problem of untouchable electorate was solved.

The Labour Party from Britain and the Indian National Congress refused to attend.

Thus 3rd round table conference finished with the deadlock without any final conclusions.

Mahatma Gandhi launched a Civil Disobedience Movement on the 12th of March 1930
This movement started, then was stopped and then again started.

The Government of India Act 1935 first time introduced federalism in India comprising of the provinces and the Indian states.

Meaning –
Federalism - A system of government in which power is divided between a central authority and constituent political units.

Provinces - A territory governed as an administrative or political unit of a country or empire.

The principle of bicameralism was introduced at the Centre and some of provinces.

Two houses were known as Federal Assembly and the council of state.
The council was permanent body consisting of 260 members and 1/3rd of its members retiring every 3 years. The council has 156 members for the British India and up to 104 members for the states.
Federal Assembly had a maximum duration of 5 years.
Federal Assembly was consisted of 250 representatives from the British India and not more than 125 members from the Indian states.
The election seats were divided as General Seats, Sikh Seats, and Muslim seats and reserved seats for scheduled castes and women, Anglo-Indian, Europeans and Indian Christians, commerce and industry, landholders and labor.

Introduced direct elections, thus increasing the franchise from seven million to thirty-five million people and governor general got right to nominate 6 members from scheduled classes, women and minority communities.

Every type of bill was allowed to be introduced in any house exception was finance bill.
Financial bill can only originate in the Assembly.
A financial bill could not be introduced without the recommendation of the governor general.
When two houses got divided or got different opinion regarding bill, the governor general got power to summon a joint sitting of the two houses for the purpose of voting on the bill.

The Federal Court was established in the Center.
The Reserve Bank of India was established.

Under the act of 1935 first elections were held and congress won the elections.

The central legislature was never constituted because Indian states showed no interest to join federation of India.
Later 2ND World war started
Viceroy Lord Linlithgow declared that India was at war with Germany in 1939.

Congress Ministers resigned in year 1939 to gain full independence from British Raj.
And also they were upset and angree that without their consultation UK took the war decision about India’s participation.

They resigned but they supported the British Government in 2nd world war.
Just one No was required and India would have got independence in year 1941
In 1941 Japan threw British People out of Malaya, Singapore, Burma and threatened to end their empire in India.

Subhash Chandra Bose the great son of India formed Azad Hind Fauj (Indian National Army – INA) in Singapore, and gave his famous slogan “Give me blood and I’ll give you freedom”

Japan was defeated in year 1945.
How or who killed or murdered Bose only nature knows how the great son of India died.
History books say he died in Air crash.
The military tribunal held the INA officers guilty and condemned them to harsh punishments. But Government of India understood the feelings of Indian population and cancelled the punishment.

Bicameral Legislature – such a legislature consisted of two houses, house of assembly and a legislative council.

On December 9, 1946 constituent Assembly was set up to draft a constitution for Independent India.

British Government passed the law Indian Independence Act 1947 and after passing of this act central legislature ceased to exist on 14th august 1947.
Constituent Assembly was to work as the Central Legislature of India.

The Government of India Act 1935 is the biggest act made by British Parliament.
The Government of India Act 1935 was the longest bill among the Acts which were passed by the British Parliament. Compared to the constitution of the USA, it had fewer than 8,000 words.
The Government of India Act 1935 is important because it is one of the foundation stones of the current Republic of India.
Government of India Act 1935 PDF consists of 341 Pages.

This is the final and last constitution of British India and in 1947 few amendments were made into this government of India Act 1935 and this became the functioning interim constitutions of India and Pakistan.

The constitution of India was adopted on November 26, 1949 and it became fully operational with effect from January 26, 1950.

End of the Indian Legal History.

Thank you for your comments and support.

Reality views by sm –
January 3, 2011

Suggested Reading - Read Indian Legal History from Part One

Below are the links
Complete Indian Legal History from year 1600 to 1935
Part 1 to last Part 38

http://realityviews.blogspot.com/2011/01/complete-indian-legal-history-from-year.html

Read Full Article...