SP no to Congress demand for five seats in UP bypolls

NEW DELHI: An SP insider in Uttar...

Freebies, Old Pension Scheme push Himachal into Economic Abyss

NEW DELHI: The state has accumulated a...

EDITORIAL: Resolve the impasse over Philadelphi corridor

As suggested by the present writer on...

India’s dynamic state evolution: The case for reorganisation of states

BusinessIndia’s dynamic state evolution: The case for reorganisation of states

All big countries are divided for governance purposes into smaller units. These are variously called Provinces , States or Subas and are vested with administrative, constitutional, legislative, and financial powers. At present, India has 28 States and 8 Union territories ( in short UTs). After the creation of the last State of Telengana, the number of States had gone up to 29. But, after the liquidation of J&K into two UTs, this number came down to 28.

FOUR PHASES:
At the time of independence, the number of proper Indian States was only 9.The study of evolution of States in India reveals that the reorganisation of States in India has been broadly in four phases :

Phase 1 mainly covers the period from 1945 to 1950. It was primarily caused due to partition of the country and integration of around 555 princely states into Indian union. The whole exercise resulted in four categories of states- Part A, Part B, Part C and Part D. And, they accordingly find mention in the Constitution of India, 1950.

Phase II covers the period from 1953 to 1966. This was the phase of creation of states primarily based on linguistic principles according to the recommendations of the States Reorganisation Commission ( in short SRC). In fact, the state of Andhra Pradesh was created on linguistic lines even before the constitution of SRC. After the recommendations of SRC were largely accepted by the Union Government, 14 States and 7 UTs were established in 1956. Subsequently, the states of Maharashtra and Gujarat were created out of Bombay in 1960; the States of Punjab, Haryana and UTs of Chandigarh and Himachal Pradesh were carved out of Punjab in 1966. This was all done largely on a linguistic basis. Categorization of States into four was abolished and now only two categories remained.

Phase III witnessed the emergence of ultra small states on mixed grounds of language and ethnicity. It broadly covers the period from 1970 to 1987. The States/ UTs of Mizoram, Tripura, Meghalaya, Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh, Manipur, Sikkim and Goa were set up during this period. The total area of these units except Arunachal Pradesh is less than 90,000 sq km !

Phase IV starts from the year 2000 when three states of Uttarakhand, Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand were created out of bigger states having the same language. Later, Telengana was created in 2013. So, the considerations were not linguistic at all. They may have been cultural within the same language family and regional. The basis for the creation were certainly more practical issues of governance, development, identity and other affinities.

Presently, we have ultra small States having one MP and Mega States such as UP with 80 MPs and Maharashtra 48. That is the spirit and prism through which should now be seen the issue of reorganisation of future states of the Union specially UP.

THE STATE OF UP:
The whole reorganisation process has by-passed Uttar Pradesh. (in short UP). UP is not only the biggest State of India but also the biggest sub-national constituent unit of any country in the world. Its various aspects need due treatment to properly appreciate the issue of its urgent reorganisation.

The area of the State is 2,40,928 sq km which was 2,95000 sq km before the creation of the new State of Uttarakhand in 2000. Though this carving out may have made some difference in area but in terms of population its impact was infinitesimal. It is the most populous state of India having approx 240 million people. Its population is about 17% of the country with only 7.3% of area. Its position within India is almost the same as that of India in the world in terms of population! One out of 32 persons in the world lives in this State. Politically, it has 80 MPs in the Lok Sabha and 31 in Rajya Sabha, the Upper House.

Economically, the working people constitute 23.7% in the state of which 65.9 are farmers and 5.6 % are engaged in industrial activities. Per capita income in 2011 was Rs 13,262/- only. Thus, UP is economically and industrially a backward state which is also marred by the problem of regional imbalances in more than one. This backwardness pattern of UP adversely affects its social demography.

Had UP been a country by itself, it would have been the fifth biggest country in the world! Until the 2011 census, it was the 6th biggest country just after Brazil in South America with an area around three times that of India. In the 2011 census, it overtook Brazil and is now much ahead of it. Brazil is divided into 26 provinces. Presently, the 4th biggest country of the world is Indonesia with a population of 268 million and area 1.9 million sq km. It is divided into 34 provinces. It is likely that in the next Census, UP may, if not overtake Indonesia, would certainly be in the same range. Whenever it overtakes the latter, which is bound to happen sooner or later, it will occupy the 4th position among the countries in the world. And then, its target would be the USA with a present population of approx 330 million and an area of 9.8 million sq km, almost three times of India. That is not guesswork; it is a distinct possibility.

If we look at some of the powerful and important countries of the world, we find that UP is bigger than UK, France and Germany combined with a population of 218 million( with populations, area and population density of 68 m/ 242000/270, 67/640679/104, 83m/357022/232 respectively). Nearer home, it is bigger than both our immediate neighbours separately, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

The essential core of this province has always been the erstwhile North Western Province, Agra which was created in 1836 after the plan to make Agra as the fourth Presidency was aborted. Awadh was not initially part of this province which was added to it only in 1877 . The United Provinces of Agra and Awadh came into existence as one province only in 1901.Thus, for all practical purposes, the existing state of UP has had a continuous history of only about 120 years. This merged unit was the precursor of the present day Uttar Pradesh which name was given to this entity on 25.01.1950.
There have been only two territorial changes in the past in its area. First was the separation of Haryana from it and its subsequent merger with the Punjab in 1858. Second change was the carving out of it the new state of Uttarakhand in 2000 AD comprising its northern areas.

In the present context, there is an inescapable need to reorganise UP which has become a colossus. This issue has graduated beyond linguistic considerations. In a holistic sense, economic growth and overall development, cultural/ linguistic/social identities, accountable administrative structures, equitable distribution of resources, will of the people besides representation/ participation of people of area/ region in governance should be the basis for scientific reorganisation of States.

Many eminent policy thinkers have suggested the reorganisation of UP on an urgent basis. Bibek Debroy, Member, Niti Ayog, favours a State having a population of 25- 30 million and area 25-35,000 sq km. Pratap Bhanu Mehta says, “.. the emancipation of citizens of UP depends upon the political abolition of UP”.

UP has four distinct socio- cultural regions : Western, Awadh, Purvanchal and Bundelkhand. First three with around 25 MPs each and the last along with the Bundelkhand area of Madhya Pradesh would be big and sustainable States. Each of its 3 main regions would have approx 75,000 sq km area which is much larger than neighbouring Haryana or Punjab separately. Its population would be over 75 million which is much more than Haryana and Punjab combined.

It would have around 25 MPs which is more than Haryana, Punjab, and HP combined. It would be equal to Rajasthan, Gujarat and Karnataka. How can we call them small States ?
Creation of these States is an absolute imperative for good governance, quality delivery systems and overall development of the area. To continue UP as one single behemoth is simply untenable. In the present context and the circumstances analysed above, it would be unwise and unjust not to accept the idea whose time has not only come but it is overdue.

O.P.S. Malik is a former IPS officer.

- Advertisement -

Check out our other content

Check out other tags:

Most Popular Articles