Former Chief Secretary I.Y.R. Krishna Rao said the government took a political decision on building a capital at Amaravati and went ahead with it. Unless it had a broader approach discarding its narrow view the State would encounter several problems, he cautioned.
Each region of Andhra Pradesh had characterstics that would require a visionary leadership to carry them together and it was lacking now, he said while addressing a gathering after release of his book ‘Whose Capital, Amaravati?’ on Sunday at a programme organised by the Foundation for Social Awareness.
Sri Bagh Pact
Recalling the Sri Bagh Pact, he said Coastal and Rayalaseema leaders came to an understanding and the visionary and statesman Tanguturi Prakasam Pantulu accepted Kurnool as capital. After more than eighty years, the Sivaramakrishnan Committee appointed by the Union Home Ministry displayed the same vision and suggested the same thing, he said. But the present leadership was concentrating everything at one place ignoring decentralisation for its own interest, Mr. Rao said.
Answering to a query, he said since the content of the book could not be challenged, his resignation was being raked up and it was ridiculous. On why he did not question it as Chief Secretary, he pointed out a statutory committee’s report that specifically said where capital should not be located and was higher than him was not considered.
He said he did not see as Chief Secretary the report of the committee formed with Minister P. Narayana and sought it under RTI Act adding Amaravati was probably the only capital for which location was decided without the report of a committee.
‘Exclusivity’
Asserting that an exclusive government could not build an inclusive capital, Mr. Rao said the exclusivist attitude was evident from ‘Padma’ and ‘Nandi’ awards to janmabhoomi committees, sand and mines’ allocation.
Mr. Rao also faulted the lopsided priorities of the government without spending on health and education leaving them to the corporate sector. and flourish of making history through Amaravati.
Clear cut decentralisation, empowering and responsibility at various levels in the system and delivery would drastically reduce the importance being given to the capital, he said.
The capital need not necessarily be a big city and in developed countries it was an administrative unit and cities could be developed independent of it and it would be ideally suited to Andhra Pradesh, he said. Comparison with other States would not hold good Mumbai and Chennai took generations to develop. ‘The craving to develop an instant city is likely to push the State into several problems and the capital itself may turn out to be a problem,’ Mr. Krishna Rao said.
Central Information Commissioner Madabhusi Sridhar Acharya, who released the book, recalling the Enron debacle, said a common farmer could not seek arbitration in London in the capital construction and courts would not intervene when there was an arbitration clause.
He said the government was fighting its own people spending thousands of rupees opposing decisions under the RTI Act. He demanded that the Andhra Pradesh government constitute Information Commission.
Former Union secretary E.A.S. Sarma questioned the spending on capital at the cost of Rayalaseema and North Andhra and various sectors like health and education and said such a plan would have long-term impact. It also contradicted the terms of reference of the Sivaramakrishna Committee report. Recalling his experience as Expenditure Secretary under L.K. Advani, he said the three new States carved out then got limited resources for high court, secretariat and etc.
