The idea of
difference and uniqueness has smitten the human psyche ever since the times
human beings came into existence. As species we believe that we are different
from the rest, but if thought logically the scientists would classify us under
the category of Mammals, which also includes animals. On our own also, we
believe that we are different from the rest, in some unique way. Mostly, it is
our basic mentality and rest in our country we have various factors
contributing to it. It has been more than 60 years now that we gained
independence, but still in some way we still are engulfed in the same things –
the linguistic barriers, caste system, bickering for dominance over other
social, religious and cultural groups.
In a country
like ours, it is obvious and even understandable that the interests and
expectations of various groups tend to diverge which unfortunately has led to a
divisive nature in us. Thus, anytime the issue arises to threats to one’s
identity or a group it often ends up in demanding protection for their so
called distinct identity. This usually means and demands a new state out of the
existing one. Some recent examples are demand for creation of Telangana in
Andhra Pradesh, Vidharbha out of eastern Maharashtra, Harit Pradesh from
western Uttar Pradesh and Bodoland out of Assam.
When the
constitution was framed, it was actually recommended that states be organized
on the basis of linguistic grounds. Consequently, the first states to be
created which includes Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and Tamil Naidu. Initially,
being together on the basis of common language and linguistic culture was taken
as good basis for creating states to help in the development. But in a while,
Ethnicity and commonality of terrain are the two important factors, which were
in this time left ignored. This can be understood from the fact that when
Punjab was portioned, besides forming the Punjabi speaking region, even the
hindi speaking regions were split into Haryana and Himachal Pradesh.
Large State Vs Small state: Which one
is better?
There are
many factors which are taken into consideration when we debate over this topic.
Economic Prosperity:- Most of the
people argue that small states in comparison tend to do better. The cases put
forward by them are that of Punjab and Haryana. But on the contrary, if you
study about the economic growth patterns of the north eastern states, all
except Arunachal Pradesh, rebut and prove contrary to the fact that small states
do better.
Balanced regional development:- If
actually taken into consideration, most of the smaller states don’t show
balanced development. This alienation leads to vast gap between the different
sections of the society. This is defended by showing the development patterns
in the Mumbai-Pune industrial belt. After this only, they are now demanding the
formation of another state Vidharbha.
Ease of administration:- Many are
reluctant on the fact smaller states are easy to administer. They argue over
the facts that small states make it easier for people to reach the governments.
The grants and funds are easier to distribute and development patterns are more
even. But on the contrary, many believe that no matter small states are easier
to administer but they are often wracked by deep fractures between various
social and ethnic groups.
Henceforth, the debate is never ending of which
one of these is better. But as long as the people are happy, secure and the
development is even, it hardly matters of which one amongst the two is good and
more appropriate.
SANYUKTA SHARMA
UPCOMING AUTHOR OF THE NOVEL " The Lost Letter"
