<<–2/”>a href=”https://exam.pscnotes.com/5653-2/”>p>In the intricate tapestry of the Telangana statehood movement, the Pranab mukherjee committee stands as a significant chapter. Formed in January 2005 by the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government, this three-member committee, headed by the then Defense Minister Pranab Mukherjee, was tasked with examining the demand for a separate Telangana state.
Composition and Mandate
The committee consisted of Pranab Mukherjee as its chairman, and Dayanidhi Maran and Raghuvansh Prasad Singh as members. Its mandate was to elicit the opinions of various Political Parties and stakeholders on the contentious issue of Telangana statehood and to recommend a course of action to the government.
Background and Context
The demand for a separate Telangana state, carved out of Andhra Pradesh, had been simmering for decades. The movement gained momentum in the early 2000s with the emergence of the Telangana Rashtra Samithi (TRS) as a major political force. The TRS, led by K. Chandrashekar Rao (KCR), spearheaded the agitation for statehood, highlighting the perceived socio-economic and political disparities between Telangana and the rest of Andhra Pradesh.
The UPA government, which came to power in 2004, had included the Telangana issue in its Common Minimum Program (CMP). This was a significant development as it signaled the government's willingness to consider the demand for a separate state. However, the issue remained highly contentious, with strong opposition from those who favored a united Andhra Pradesh.
The Committee's Approach
The Pranab Mukherjee Committee adopted a consultative approach to fulfill its mandate. It sought the views of various political parties, civil Society organizations, and other stakeholders through letters and meetings. The committee also reviewed the existing literature and reports on the Telangana issue.
Key Findings and Recommendations
The committee's report, though not made public, is believed to have outlined the historical context of the Telangana issue, the various arguments for and against statehood, and the implications of different courses of action. It is also believed to have highlighted the complexities involved in the issue and the need for a comprehensive and balanced approach.
The committee's recommendations are not known in detail, but it is believed to have suggested a phased approach towards addressing the Telangana issue, with a focus on building consensus among various stakeholders. It is also believed to have recommended measures to address the concerns of those who favored a united Andhra Pradesh.
Impact and Legacy
The Pranab Mukherjee Committee's work, though limited in its immediate impact, played a crucial role in shaping the discourse on the Telangana issue. It provided a platform for various stakeholders to express their views and concerns, and it helped to generate a broader understanding of the issue.
The committee's report, though not made public, is believed to have influenced the government's subsequent approach towards the Telangana issue. The phased approach suggested by the committee is believed to have informed the government's decision to initiate a process of consultations and negotiations with various stakeholders.
The committee's work also had a significant impact on the Telangana statehood movement. The fact that a high-level committee had been formed to examine the demand for a separate state was seen as a validation of the movement's legitimacy. This further strengthened the resolve of the proponents of statehood and intensified their agitation.
The Pranab Mukherjee Committee's legacy lies in its contribution to the eventual realization of the Telangana state. While the committee did not directly recommend the formation of a separate state, its work laid the groundwork for the subsequent process of consultations and negotiations that ultimately led to the creation of Telangana in 2014.
The Pranab Mukherjee Committee's work on the Telangana issue is a testament to the complex and multifaceted nature of the statehood movement. It highlights the challenges involved in addressing the demands of a diverse and divided society. The committee's approach, though not without its limitations, serves as a valuable model for future efforts to resolve complex political issues through dialogue and consensus-building.