AP Politics and runup to 2014 General elections

[vivek.rao]

Telangana: 8 events that will unfold in Delhi on Monday

Though the assembly's vote does not matter, the rejection poses an ethical question for the Centre and the President. It is the President's prerogative to clear the bill for discussion and vote in Parliament in the session that starts on February 5.

A flurry of activity is expected in New Delhi on Monday.

Event Number 1

Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Kiran Kumar Reddy will be in the national capital along with 150 MLAs. He is expected to first pay tributes at Mahatma Gandhi's samadhi at Rajghat and then undertake a padayatra to the presidential palace to present a memorandum on the rejected Telangana Bill to Pranab Mukherjee

Event Number 2

50 Congress MLAs would be staging a protest outside Attorney General of India Goolam E Vahanvati's bungalow demanding that the latter expedite his legal opinion on the Bill

Event Number 3

YSR Congress chief Jagan Mohan Reddy will also be in New Delhi. He is expected to meet senior leaders of the Opposition

Event Number 4

K Chandrasekhara Rao, leader of the Telangana Rashtra Samiti, will be meeting senior Bharatiya Janata Party leaders L K Advani, Sushma Swaraj and Arun Jaitley to seek the party's support for the Bill that proposes to divide Andhra Pradesh and turn the 10 districts of Telangana into India's 29th state.


Event Number 5

Attorney General Vahanvati will first hold a meeting with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh before briefing President Mukherjee on the legal sanctity of the rejected Telangana bill. He would also advise the President on whether the Bill should be referred to the Union Cabinet or seek a legal opinion

Event Number 6

Congress MLAs are expected to meet Supreme Court senior counsel Fali S Nariman, who has asked the UPA government to tread cautiously on Telangana while quoting the SR Bommai case

[The SR Bommai vs Centre case: The judgment, delivered by the Supreme Court on May 11, 1994, defined the use of Article 356 and imposition of President's rule. When the then Congress government at the Centre dismissed the S R Bommai government in Karnataka in 1989, Bommai challenged the dismissal.

In a landmark verdict, the Supreme Court held that a state government could be dismissed only under extenuating circumstances, and laid down guidelines for such a dismissal.

Though political parties have flouted the Supreme Court norms, the Bommai case has made dismissing state governments and imposing President's rule a little more difficult.]

Nariman has suggested that the President should, on receiving the rejected resolution from the Andhra assembly, forward the Bill to the Supreme Court for reference.

Event Number 7

Eight Congress MPs will meet Lok Sabha Speaker Meira Kumar at her 20, Akbar Road residence to submit a no-confidence motion against the UPA government led by Vijayawada MP Lagadapati Rajagopal and Union Minister of State for Railways Kotla Jaya Surya Prakash Reddy.

Event Number 8

Three Union ministers from Seemandhra will meet Congress president Sonia Gandhi to submit their resignation.

[Yagnasri]

Full of dramas. But Pranab was against this drama from the start. I wonder what he will do now.

[vivek.rao]

http://www.rediff.com/news/report/refer ... 140201.htm

Refer Telangana Bill first to Standing Committee: BJP

The Bharatiya Janata Party is wanting for the Telangana Bill to be referred to the Standing Committee of Home Affairs before it is introduced in the Lok Sabha. It also plans to write to the Speaker if the House Meira Kumar on the issue.


BJP will finalise its strategy in its Parliamentary Party, said a senior BJP leader.

The BJP says that the United Progressive Alliance government cannot force the T-bill through to suit its logic, bypassing an institutional mechanism of all party MPs debating it in the Standing Committee.

Incidentally, BJP leader M Venkaiah Naidu is the chairman of Home Committee.

The BJP now wants to adopt this route to scuttle the Telangana Bill.

[Muppalla]

Too many things by extremely bad/vultures/elitistic/inhuman Seemandhra people/elites/politician against innocent/nice/good/non-sinnable Telanganites. Why do they cling on and on and on like this? Give up and be done with.

[gandharva]

deleted

[bhavani]

Too many things by extremely bad/vultures/elitistic/inhuman Seemandhra people/elites/politician against innocent/nice/good/non-sinnable Telanganites. Why do they cling on and on and on like this? Give up and be done with.

Seemaandhra people/elites/politician cling on because they are extremely bad/vultures/elitistic/inhuman .

[Yagnasri]

destroying what is left of mafia and its b teams in 42 MP seats both short and long term basis shall be sole agenda of BJP. Just make mafia position in these seats like that in TN, UP, Bihar wherein mafia can not form a state governament or win substancial MP seats. With that mafia can not hope to cross 100 seats in any GE in forceable future. AP today is the only big staet mafia rules on long term basis without any nationa level opposition. Karnataka another one but with much less MP seats. MH it can not win without NCP. SO mafia will be out of all 40 plus states on parmanant basis. With good governanace Raj and KA can also be kept out of mafia and long term goal of taking Bengal from B teams of mafia.

[gandharva]

[Yagnasri]

BJP should ensure this drama fails. It T is given by BJP in future it will ensure all people get benifited and mafia is destroyed. Mafia should not be allowed to close this game and get most of the 42 seats for itself and its B teams of TRS and Jagan criminal gang. It is quite possible that Pranab may sit on the file seeking clarifications etc and mafia may have alibi on that. After all these years of attacks and Zehar ki Khethi comments lot of BJP leaders may not be in any mood to oblige mafia queen. D4 now at its weakest in several years.

[Vamsi.R]

how reliable is this guy ?

[Muppalla]

The stuff related to AP is a being created as a suspense thriller. No one has any hold of what will happen as everyone is doing their version of dramas. Only two things can stop this division. If introduced in Parl it is as good as done deal. The way it can stop is if BJP insists on referring to Standing Committee or if President refers to SC for legal view. In both cases as the thing takes beyond a month and as this term is getting over, this bill will have an automatic death.

All this stuff of BJP will vote against because of that and this is pure hot air. If it is introduced, it is done deal and India will have its 29th state. KKR, CBN, KCR are all doing their last minute dramas in Delhi.

[Rony]

The Congress and Telengana - From the desk of Arun Jaitley

The proposal for creation of a separate state of Telengana will now be coming up before the Parliament. The BJP has consistently supported the proposal to create a state of Telengana. At the same time, we believe that justice should be done to the region of Seemandhra.

The manner in which the Congress Party has gone about on this issue displays a complete lack of statecraft. In the year 2000 the NDA government headed by Shri Atal BIhari Vajpayee decided to create the three States of Uttarakhand, Jharkhand and Chhatisgarh. Needless to say that the creation of these three States has helped the regions for whose benefit the States were created. The then home Minister, Shri L.K. Advani handled the creation of the three States. Whereas the creation of Chhatisgarh and Uttarakhand did not face much resistance, there was an initial resistance by the ruling party of Bihar, the RJD. The Home Minister held wide consultations with all the States. A comfort level was given to each of the States that the creation of the new States would not adversely impact upon them. They were assured that the residuary State would be compensated. Unanimous resolutions were passed by the legislatures of the three States. Thereafter, both Houses of Parliament discussed the issue and by a general consensus approved the creation of the three States. Internal issues with regard to the three new States were also handled carefully. Dehradun was made the capital of Uttarakhand. The hill region of Almora was compensated by locating the High Court at Nainital. Raipur was the capital of Chhatisgarh and the High Court was created in Bilapur. The existing buildings were renovated overnight to locate the Sachivalya and the High Court premises. There was no dissent. Not a single protest took place in any of the States. As the Law Minister I visited all the three States for inauguration of the High Court Benches. There was an environment of celebration amongst the people. They were grateful to the NDA for having fulfilled the poll promise. Contradistinct it with what is happening in Andhra Pradesh. Both the regions of Telengana and Seemandhra suspect the intention of the Congress Party. Adequate home work has not been done. The deft political handling required to identify the issues and balance the creation of the new State with a possible sense of injustice that people in Seemandhra may feel has not been done. Alternatively, both regions are in a state of turmoil. The ruling party itself is on the verge of split. The State Legislature has reacted adversely to the Centre’s proposal. Consensus required to be done even within the Congress Party has not been done. A well intentioned cause for the creation of Telengana which fulfills the aspirations of the people has been made controversial on account of the lack of political management.

It is still not too late. Interests of both the regions should be factored in and justice should be done with regard to the issues of power, irrigation and eventual creation of new capital for Seemandhra. A good cause which is badly handled can hurt the cause. I do hope that the needful is done and Telengana sees the light of the day.

[RajeshA]

Published on Feb 03, 2014
By Ch. V.M. Krishna Rao
BJP backtracking on Telangana Bill: Deccan Chrnicle

Hyderabad: After publicly committing itself to supporting the Telangana Bill, the BJP, as expected, is appearing to resile from its stand under the guise of seeking “amicable solutions” to the concerns expressed in Seemandhra.

It appears now that the BJP will not allow the Congress to push the Bill through Parliament with one or two changes. Instead, it will oppose the Bill if the “concerns of all the regions of the state” are not addressed and made part of the Bill.

The BJP is pegging its changed stance on the AP Assembly rejecting the T Bill by way of a resolution adopted by Chief Minister N. Kiran Kumar Reddy, and also views expressed by leaders from Telangana and Seemandhra, both pointing to defects in the Bill.

These developments just before the commencement of what could be the last session of the 15th Lok Sabha may force the Congress-led UPA to negotiate with the main Opposition party if at all it is sincere in getting the T Bill passed. It was left to BJP prime ministerial candidate Narendra Modi to unequivocally state this new stand.

Meanwhile, The Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Bill-2013, that was referred to the state Legislature for expressing its views on the proposed bifurcation under Article 3 of the Constitution, was today returned to the Centre.

The Bill, which was "rejected" by the state Legislature by voice vote on January 30, was returned along with translated copies of the statements given by members of the Legislative Council and the Assembly and also over 10,000 "amendments/expression of views."

An eight-member team of officials from the state's General Administration department took the copies in 60 bundles by an aircraft to New Delhi to be handed over to the Union Ministry of Home Affairs, official sources said.

Addressing a public meeting in Meerut on Sunday, Modi spoke of the party’s concern about how the UPA government had failed to address the issues that were being raised by the people of Seemandhra.

BJP’s Prime Ministerial candidate Narendra Modi reiterated his opposition to the manner in which the UPA had undertaken the state division. He accused the Congress of adopting a divide-and-rule policy and raking up hatred among the people instead of solving the issues amicably.

“When Vajpayeeji effected the bifurcation of three states, it was a smooth affair. But when the Congress decided to handle the issue of Telangana, it miserably failed in the exercise and only created unrest in all the regions,” Modi said.

Modi said that the entire Andhra Pradesh was engulfed in the fire started by the manner in which the Congress had handled the issue.

When contacted, BJP national spokesperson Nirmala Seetharaman told this correspondent: “Whether we support the Bill or not will depend on how the UPA will bring it before Parliament. Our Parliamentary Party will take a final view on that. We are committed to Telangana but we also demand that concerns of the people of all regions must be addressed.”

She pointed out that “officially the Telangana Bill that was sent to the State Assembly was rejected and the concerned resolution was moved by none other than a Congress Chief Minister. Why should anyone blame us when the Bill was rejected by a Congress ruled state?”

To a specific question on whether or not the BJP would support the Bill in its present form, Ms Seetharaman said, “we will see what to do”.

BJP leader M. Venkaiah Naidu said, “The Telangana Ball is in the Congress court. We have already submitted our concerns on the Bill. Let us see how the Congress is going to bring amendments to the Bill, we will respond then.”

BJP Seemandhra leader Kambhampati Haribabu said. “Unless 75 per cent of our demands are met I don’t think the BJP will support the Bill in its present form. Congress leaders if they are really interested they should talk to us, convince us and get some of the amendments carried in the Bill.”

He added: “We fear the Augusta scam, other issues, the no-confidence motion moved by their own MPs may stall Parliament.”

What the BJP wants:
The BJP’s demands, as articulated at its protest at Jantar Mantar, Delhi, on Jan. 20:

• Centre should simultaneously declare in the Bill the new capital for Seemandhra state.
• 10-year tax holiday to woo industrialists to establish their units.
• Upgradation of Vijayawada, Visakhapatnam and Tirupati airports to international airports.
• Bhadrachalam revenue division along with 134 villages facing submergence under the Polavaram dam should be included in Seemandhra.
• 200 tmc ft of water from inter-river basin transfer to Rayalaseema.
• Statutory provision for protection of all ongoing irrigation projects in all three regions.
• A mechanism to provide safety and security to over 50 lakh Seemandhra people living in Telangana, especially in Hyderabad and Ranga Reddy districts, for which a constitutional amendment is needed.
• Government employees should be given an option on their posting in the event of bifurcation.
• Clarity on financial memorandum and revenue sharing of Hyderabad with Seemandhra state should be included in the Bill.
• Institutes of excellence and infrastructure projects to be established in Seemandhra should be included in the Bill.
• Steel plant should be set up in Rayalaseema.
• Special packages for all backward areas in Seemandhra.

[Dasari]

This Krishna Rao is known for long for his anti BJP stance. He covertly supports Congress. For business reasons he also converted his stance from pro united to pro T. Here he talks about BJp back tracking under the 'guise' of fairness to all. What are they supposed to do? Punish one region for the benefit of other? As far as I remember in his opinions he never questioned Congress under what criteria they are splitting the state. In anycase there is no change in BJp stance. Not yet. In this rant he is simply doing a proactive move by targeting BJP.

[ShyamSP]

^^^
Deccan Chronicle is known Congress mouth piece in AP. Congress and its media is trying to rub their failure on BJP. Funny thing is Congress is putting it in agenda when President hasn't given any thing. It should be President pejorative than Congress party introducing the bill. Main issue at president hand is if he wants to introduce rejected bill as is or change the bill and introduce or not introduce at all. Some of his actions will trigger legal issues.

AP CM and MPs are planning to do protest in Delhi. Looks like Congress wants to create ruckus and deflect all the important issues in the final parliament meet.

[gandharva]

Is he drunk? why is he speaking so slowly?

http://ibnlive.in.com/videos/449996/wil ... reddy.html

[Dasari]

Is he drunk? why is he speaking so slowly?

http://ibnlive.in.com/videos/449996/wil ... reddy.html

I don't know where the IBN guy is getting 20 seats for Jagan. Perhaps it was true 3-4 months ago. These polls are looking into the rear view mirror. In fact it appears that YSRCP party peaked too early and currently losing steam. At present TDP and YSRCP are racing neck to neck, with YSRCP having slight advantage. The final outcome will depend on what happens in Parliament. If division is stopped, TDP/BJP will get 20 seats in SA. If division happens, it is YSRCP that will get most of the seats.

[Rony]

Interpreting a federal Constitution

The Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Bill, 2013, which creates the State of Telangana, has been decisively rejected by the Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly and Council. This rejection, together with the recording of 9,072 amendments and expression of views on its various clauses by its MLAs, and 1,157 like suggestions by its MLCs, has brought the process of the creation of new States in India into renewed focus. As has been opined previously in the pages of this newspaper, the constitutional position in this context is straightforward: Article 3 of the Constitution vests Parliament with the power to form a new State, provided that the Bill creating such a State is introduced on the recommendation of the President and he has referred it to the legislature of the affected State “for expressing its views thereon.” This would suggest that the views of the Andhra Pradesh Assembly will have no legal effect; the formation of Telangana is solely the prerogative of the government of India. While this may indeed be the position of the law as it stands today, the unprecedented nature of the rejection of the Bill by the Andhra Pradesh Assembly requires the legal interpretation of Article 3 be reconsidered. Such reconsideration is also prompted by the changing nature of Indian federalism, aptly demonstrated by the curious situation of a Congress government at the State level defying its counterpart in power at the Centre.

Unprecedented rejection

The key distinction between this instance and earlier disputes raised in relation to the formation of a new State lies in the fact that never before has an Amendment Bill been rejected by the State legislature in question. Both in Babulal Parate (Supreme Court) and Pradeep Chaudhary (Supreme Court, 2009) seminal judgments of the Court dealing with the creation of Bombay and Uttaranchal respectively, the issue before the Court was whether it was open to Parliament to amend the final Bill after the State legislature had expressed its views on an earlier, unamended version. In both cases, the Supreme Court, adopting a literal interpretation of Article 3, held that there was no requirement that an amendment to a Bill forming a new State would also have to be referred to the State legislature concerned. Such interpretation is arguably correct — the proviso to Article 3 simply states that the Bill must be sent to the State legislature concerned for expressing its views within a specified period. The provision is silent on whether later amendments have to be referred, as well as on the effect that the views of the State legislatures will have. Thus read literally, even a wholesale rejection of the Bill can be ignored by Parliament, since Article 3 merely gives State Assemblies a consultative role — their views are not binding on Parliament in any way.

However, to treat the State’s views as carrying merely formal value, as has been widely suggested, would render the constitutional process of consultation entirely nugatory in a matter of national importance. The current proviso to Article 3 was introduced by the Constitution (Fifth Amendment) Act, 1955. Before this amendment, the President could only introduce an Amendment Bill in Parliament after referring it to the State legislatures concerned for their views. This was a time-consuming process, allowing States to vacillate in responding, thereby frustrating the efforts of the government of India. This amendment was necessary to lay the groundwork for the smooth passage of the States’ Reorganisation Commission Report that recommended a radical redrawing of State boundaries and creation of new States. By adequately circumscribing State power, it was felt that no single State could hold up the process of reorganisation.

But what if a State rejected the proposal to create a new State outright? Both the proviso to Article 3 as well as the Rajya Sabha debates prior to its passage are silent on this specific question. The reason for such silence is aptly demonstrated in a speech by MP Professor N.G. Ranga who said in the House, “I am glad really now that this Bill has come to be introduced instead of … the Congress Party trusting itself to its capacity to get the local majorities, which are also Congress majorities, to express the views of the legislatures.” (Rajya Sabha Debates, December 15, 1955). The proviso was thus brought in at a time when such disagreement between the Centre and States was not a real possibility. Neither did Parliament envisage nor did it legislate for such a situation. The rejection of the Telangana Bill by the Andhra Pradesh Assembly is evidence of a dramatically changed time. For the legal interpretation of Article 3 to ignore such change would be an anachronism. It would also be inconsonant with the Supreme Court’s characterisation of the Constitution as “a living tree” capable of continuous growth with concomitantly changing scenarios.

Bommai case

Such reinterpretation of provisions of the Constitution that have bearing on its federal character has precedent. In terms of the legality of the imposition of President’s Rule in States under Article 356, the Supreme Court in S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (Supreme Court, 1994) overruled its own precedent in the case of State of Rajasthan v Union of India (Supreme Court, 1977). While holding that the power of the President to impose President’s Rule is not above and beyond judicial review entirely, the Court narrowed down the circumstances and the manner in which such powers could be exercised. The premise of this shift in constitutional jurisprudence was that the principle of federalism was part of the basic structure of the Constitution, and this principle could only be deviated from in exceptional and extraordinary circumstances, i.e. where constitutional rule was not possible in the State. In doing so, the Court recognised the pitfalls of a literal minded construction of the Constitution as was done in the Rajasthan case. In the absence of any checks on the exceptional power of the President to impose President’s Rule and give federalism a go-by in the name of upholding the Constitution, the Court recognised that the Constitution itself could be subverted.

The Supreme Court’s course correction in Bommai has a deeper lesson. That India’s constitutionally envisaged federal structure has a strong centralising tendency is beyond question. Such a tendency is not unique to India. Federal states the world over — Canada, the United States, Australia — all display discernible centripetal forces irrespective of differences in their federal structure. But the decision in Bommai and now the Andhra Pradesh Assembly’s rejection of the Telangana Bill marks a significant change in this dynamic. It provides recognition to a more balanced union, with Centre and States seen increasingly as coordinate entities. At a time when the Chief Minister of West Bengal trumps the decision of the government of India to sign an international accord, the sole prerogative of the Central government, and the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu prevents Sri Lankan cricketers from playing in Chennai despite them having valid visas for travel in India, such a reworked understanding of federalism in India is both realistic and pragmatic.

Towards a new federalism

In the face of such changes, to merely parrot an originalist constitutional vision of a strong Centre while interpreting legal provisions is to take a blinkered view. The centralising tendency in India’s federal structure was adopted at a time when it was necessary to weld India’s disparate elements together into a nation. This was a task for which the government of India was uniquely positioned and required a supporting constitutional architecture. Thus, the federal provisions of the Constitution were as much lofty vision as political strategy. Such strategy now requires a careful recalibration since such a tool for nation-building, if used unthinkingly, will be seen purely as central hegemony. Such forced unitarity will be more harmful than a genuine recognition of a more equal federal structure that is perfectly consonant with the idea of India.

This does not in any way mean that the Andhra Pradesh Assembly’s views on the Telangana Bill should be the last word on the matter. Such an inference would be plainly unconstitutional. However, it is necessary that the Central government be required in law to adequately take into consideration the reasons why the Andhra Pradesh Assembly rejected the Telangana Bill. This obligation should be discharged in writing, demonstrating a proper application of mind with accompanying reasons as to why each recommendation has been accepted or rejected. Without such consideration, the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Bill, 2013, if passed, would seriously lack legitimacy and be inconsonant with the dynamic federal spirit of the Constitution.

[chaanakya]

Actually by not going for headcount and getting vote tally while pressing for the resolution, KKR has seriously put a question mark over the opinion of AP Legislative Assembly. It hold zero value and legitimacy as such Parliament is under no obligation to give legitimacy to the resolution even by considering it. However, one would recognise that there is no legal or constitutional backing for above opinion and that Parliament can alter the state boundaries ( not the international Boundaries of India) as prescribed in Constitution. There is no fetters on its power as of now.

[chaanakya]

Incidentally draft Bill is cleared by GOM.

[ShyamSP]

Actually by not going for headcount and getting vote tally while pressing for the resolution, KKR has seriously put a question mark over the opinion of AP Legislative Assembly. It hold zero value and legitimacy as such Parliament is under no obligation to give legitimacy to the resolution even by considering it. However, one would recognise that there is no legal or constitutional backing for above opinion and that Parliament can alter the state boundaries ( not the international Boundaries of India) as prescribed in Constitution. There is no fetters on its power as of now.

Not sure you're aware. There are written affidavits from 158 members opposing, which is majority.

Also speaker can see how many huddled up for opposing to determine.

Except handful MLAs everyone from united AP camp were opposing.
In fact if there is name list for who is supporting bifurcation it is easy for people to target and vote them out next time. Speaker saved congress from that aspect.

[Lilo]

Incidentally draft Bill is cleared by GOM.

Chaanakya ji,
Somewhat OT , but can you explain the constitutional status of this weird beast called GOM ?
Why is it in a position to "clear" (I.e rubber stamp) any Bill of National significance - be it AP splitting Bill, Food security Bill, FDI in retail bill etc etc.
How is it constituted and who constitutes it as an arbitrary adjunct to the cabinet decision making process ?

This GOM system suddenly propped up since UPA 1 and has been generously resorted to up through the fag end of the UPA2. Actually, Where in our constitution does one find this GOM system hain ji?

Or is it just one of the many extra constitutional innovations (similar to NAC, Planning Comission etc etc) by Congi mafia to monetise and pay individual cabinet or non cabinet rank congi ministers and bigwigs from allies on quid pro quo terms- and attribute to any GOI excesses a veneer of consultative consensus forming - which is the bedrock of Democratic decision making.

This "clearing by GOM" is then just a PR excersise to tom tom that India is vibrant democracy which has opaque innovations like GOMs which keep "clearing" arbitrary abominations , which are regularly passed off as pinnacles of India's legislative achievements.

Methinks , this whole T creation excersise as demonstrated by congi mafia could at anytime be struck down - just on the grounds of being "arbitrary" by the SC , if it wants to .Afterall there is enormous evidence to support this conclusion. No need to even delve into constitutional law aspects of the T-Bill.

[disha]

^^ Lilo/Chanakya, do not worry - there is eGOM (EMPOWERED gROUP oF mINISTERS) (Or in my abbrev. Egom)., since their "empowerment" is huge and their "ministria'l capabilities so small".

Anyway, from "gom" they will go to "Egom" - all to ullu'fy janta. Here is my bet, Telangana is not going to happen and CongIs will go down in Telangana (KCR/TDP battle) and SA will vote anti-congress. Either way, CongIs are dooooomed.

[johneeG]

You gotta give it to the kongis. They have elevated fooling people into an art form. GOM...EGOM...NAC...Antonio is unhappy and is crying...Pappu says the system must be changed. And if that also fails, then Biyanka will come riding on a white horse to save the heathens.

If one could be completely detached and cynical, then there is no bigger joke than the dhesh and its people. Constantly getting fooled. If one can't be detached, then there is no bigger tragedy. Its the biggest joke, if it were not such a tragedy.

[disha]

Read this http://www.firstpost.com/politics/parli ... 75887.html

The big question still is will the bill to create Telangana be passed? The answer is most unlikely. This is a constitutional amendment bill and thus both Houses of Parliament will have to be "in order" to consider its passage. The BJP is ready to support in principle but is smartly talking of the need for a good deal to the Seemandhra region. The IUML spoke of moving some amendments and then there are Congress MPs from Seemandhra who want to move a no-confidence motion against their own government at the centre. Kiran Kumar Reddy has petitioned President and believes that it will not come to Parliament for consideration. If at all the bill is placed for consideration and passage, unlike the Group of Ministers which on Tuesday had dismissed whopping 9024 amendments from the AP state legislature in one go, Parliament will have to deal with them clause by clause, with House in the order, not in the din. A division of votes in House can't take place till the House functioned in orderly manner. No prize for guessing what is expected to happen as and when this bill is introduced.

[Dasari]

Actually by not going for headcount and getting vote tally while pressing for the resolution, KKR has seriously put a question mark over the opinion of AP Legislative Assembly. It hold zero value and legitimacy as such Parliament is under no obligation to give legitimacy to the resolution even by considering it. However, one would recognise that there is no legal or constitutional backing for above opinion and that Parliament can alter the state boundaries ( not the international Boundaries of India) as prescribed in Constitution. There is no fetters on its power as of now.

Had the assembly been done without passing the resolution, T separatists would have said that assembly accepted the bill without any opposition. It is like 'heads' separatists win and 'tails' unionists lose. The significance of the assembly resolution can be guaged by the comments and name calling from TRS and T congress leaders, not by the rhetoric here. Nobody gets any prize in predicting that Congress will introduce the bill. They are on a Titatnic heading towards huge iceberg. We all know that the drunk captain under the influence of greed to win few seats in T has no ability to steer it away. Let us see whether it will break through the iceberg or go down taking the TRS and separatists with it.

[gandharva]

[Shanmukh]

Nobody gets any prize in predicting that Congress will introduce the bill. They are on a Titatnic heading towards huge iceberg. We all know that the drunk captain under the influence of greed to win few seats in T has no ability to steer it away. Let us see whether it will break through the iceberg or go down taking the TRS and separatists with it.

Dasari-ji,
How will the Congress take down the TRS with it? At least, for this election, KCR has the ability to whip up Telangana sentiments (and Twitter has been ablaze with vitriol for SeemaAndhra people - calling them `settlers' who should pack up and leave, and what not, and threatening to become Naxalites if Telangana is not granted per their wishes). While, in the long run, if KCR can only burn buses and have no other effect, it may bring down the heated Telangana rhetoricians to reality, for the time being, there is a lot of pro-Telangana sentiment, and the sides are locked for this election. Won't Congress recover, at least in Telangana, even if they just introduce the Bill?

[ShyamSP]

Nobody gets any prize in predicting that Congress will introduce the bill. They are on a Titatnic heading towards huge iceberg. We all know that the drunk captain under the influence of greed to win few seats in T has no ability to steer it away. Let us see whether it will break through the iceberg or go down taking the TRS and separatists with it.

Dasari-ji,
How will the Congress take down the TRS with it? At least, for this election, KCR has the ability to whip up Telangana sentiments (and Twitter has been ablaze with vitriol for SeemaAndhra people - calling them `settlers' who should pack up and leave, and what not, and threatening to become Naxalites if Telangana is not granted per their wishes). While, in the long run, if KCR can only burn buses and have no other effect, it may bring down the heated Telangana rhetoricians to reality, for the time being, there is a lot of pro-Telangana sentiment, and the sides are locked for this election. Won't Congress recover, at least in Telangana, even if they just introduce the Bill?

Whatever is all said-and-done so far, for Rajya Sabha elections INC and TRS are electing one person and YSRC is supporting INC candidates without fielding any candidate. Rhetoric is clouding that partners in bed are opponents.

[chaanakya]

They are on a Titatnic heading towards huge iceberg. We all know that the drunk captain under the influence of greed to win few seats in T has no ability to steer it away. Let us see whether it will break through the iceberg or go down taking the TRS and separatists with it.

I hope it goes down trying to create Telangana which will be a reality soon anyway. Spl Cabinet meeting is called tomorrow to approve Amended ( no need to refer to Assembly again, If I may remind all) Draft T-Bill which will be presented in Rajya Sabha on 10(?) Feb. That means it will not lapse even when 15th Loksabha comes to an end. Along with Vote on Account we will have Telangana before the session is adjourned sine-die.

Now, all depends how BJP plays its cards.

[chaanakya]

Incidentally draft Bill is cleared by GOM.

Chaanakya ji,
Somewhat OT , but can you explain the constitutional status of this weird beast called GOM ?
Why is it in a position to "clear" (I.e rubber stamp) any Bill of National significance - be it AP splitting Bill, Food security Bill, FDI in retail bill etc etc.
How is it constituted and who constitutes it as an arbitrary adjunct to the cabinet decision making process ?

This GOM system suddenly propped up since UPA 1 and has been generously resorted to up through the fag end of the UPA2. Actually, Where in our constitution does one find this GOM system hain ji?

Or is it just one of the many extra constitutional innovations (similar to NAC, Planning Comission etc etc) by Congi mafia to monetise and pay individual cabinet or non cabinet rank congi ministers and bigwigs from allies on quid pro quo terms- and attribute to any GOI excesses a veneer of consultative consensus forming - which is the bedrock of Democratic decision making.

This "clearing by GOM" is then just a PR excersise to tom tom that India is vibrant democracy which has opaque innovations like GOMs which keep "clearing" arbitrary abominations , which are regularly passed off as pinnacles of India's legislative achievements.

Methinks , this whole T creation excersise as demonstrated by congi mafia could at anytime be struck down - just on the grounds of being "arbitrary" by the SC , if it wants to .Afterall there is enormous evidence to support this conclusion. No need to even delve into constitutional law aspects of the T-Bill.

What Constitutional Status??

It is just a set of Senior Cabinet Ministers nominated by PMO to thrash out all objections and make changes here and there in the Draft...some commas here and "provisio" there.

Then there is this creature called E-GOM which is empowered by PMO to build consensus among various Departments/Coalition Partners as well.

Once these idiots have done their job , it would go to Cabinet where Council Of Ministers under Chairmanship of PM various agenda are considered and the draft bill will also have to be cleared by them. It has constitutional status and its advice is binding on the President who have to again give consent to the amended Draft Bill which will then be presented in either of the House. If it is presented in Loksabha then it would lapse once its term ends and if it is presented in Rajya Sabha then it would be considered by next Loksabha..

Only 371D needs to be considered that could be done at a later date as well but will be done perhaps together. Methinks.

[Yagnasri]

For all their sins lot of congress politicos in AP are ensuring the communial riots bill and other Rahul rubbish bills are not even intorduced in Parliament. Must be their sole contribution to national good in their useless lifes.

CM may go in two days as per Diggi Raja.

[chaanakya]

Not sure you're aware. There are written affidavits from 158 members opposing, which is majority.

Also speaker can see how many huddled up for opposing to determine.

Except handful MLAs everyone from united AP camp were opposing.
In fact if there is name list for who is supporting bifurcation it is easy for people to target and vote them out next time. Speaker saved congress from that aspect.

Am I Not? Sure I read that . That is no substitute for a vote count in Assembly.

[chaanakya]

For all their sins lot of congress politicos in AP are ensuring the communial riots bill and other Rahul rubbish bills are not even intorduced in Parliament. Must be their sole contribution to national good in their useless lifes.

CM may go in two days as per Diggi Raja.

Well said Narayan Garu.

I think we might get president's Rule there else Elections will be difficult to conduct there. I would be sad for lives lost. How it was easy to divide Bihar and UP and MP. No ill feelings among citizens even now.

[Dasari]

Not sure you're aware. There are written affidavits from 158 members opposing, which is majority.

Also speaker can see how many huddled up for opposing to determine.

Except handful MLAs everyone from united AP camp were opposing.
In fact if there is name list for who is supporting bifurcation it is easy for people to target and vote them out next time. Speaker saved congress from that aspect.

Am I Not? Sure I read that . That is no substitute for a vote count in Assembly.

Ya right. Do you think the separatists allow the count? Can this apply to the actual bill in parliament too? The indications are that congress will try to push it through without count vote.

Btw, don't count the chickens before they are hatched. a lot of drama and suspense is ahead.

[chaanakya]

Ya right. Do you think the separatists allow the count? Can this apply to the actual bill in parliament too? The indications are that congress will try to push it through without count vote.

Btw, don't count the chickens before they are hatched. a lot of drama and suspense is ahead.

In Parliament , it is a vote count as it has to be passed by Spl Majority. Can't bypass.

However, to be clear I have no interest in Chicken or the egg either. Watching drama and suspense with interest and concern for people on the ground.

[Dasari]

t has constitutional status and its advice is binding on the President who have to again give consent to the amended Draft Bill which will then be presented in either of the House. If it is presented in Loksabha then it would lapse once its term ends and if it is presented in Rajya Sabha then it would be considered by next Loksabha .

That is the most dumbest wish. Let me make this clear. Most of this united AP rhetoric is all about getting the fair share, mostly about hyderabad revenue sharing for 10 years, polavaram/badrachalam, promise to complete pending irrigiation projects, finacial support for caiptals/airports and accesibility to education. Once these are promised, there could be jai andhra movement on the other side to get the hell out of Telangana.

So if the division is stalled for whatever reason, and the italian mafia is out of picture, the division will be done based on consensus. The only way a consensus comes out is after meeting all of the above demands. In other words the division will be done on the terms dictated by SA. I can imagine what the cry would be on T side. So careful what you wish for.

[chaanakya]

No it is not a Wish, not even the dumbest wish. Govt ( read Parliamentary Affairs Minister) has sent a letter to Secretary general (RS) to allot time on 10th Feb for introduction of this Bill in Rajyasabha as Government Business. So there it goes . I am least interested and affected by any terms of division that either party may seek to enforce. Division, it will be.

[devesh]

for the future only 2 questions are important: 1. how will the kosta rivalries break down in the post-bifurcation scenario? 2. how fast will the ex-Hindu-feudal and Ashraf alliance overtly manifest in Telangana.

if bifurcation doesn't happen, then questions are: 1. which section will be the new target base of INC? 2. to what extent will BJP renegotiate with TDP and others about a better penetration in AP?

if we get an answer for those questions, we will have a glimpse of the future of AP.

[Hari Seldon]

Dunno if this is scripted or genuine... but here goes anyway:

Won’t allow Cong to pass any Bill this session, says SP

If its scripted, it might mean even the INC doesn't want the bill to pass for some arcane reason.... doesn't add up somehow. I can see TMC opposing T-bill tooth and nail owing to gorkhaland tensions but TMC ain;t part od UPA. Will NCP oppose owing to vidarbha tensions?.