The article, “ >Firm, first steps after formation ” (‘NH9 – Between Two States’, June 1) on one year after the formation of Telangana, was of no contemporary relevance as far as Telangana is concerned. For example, data collection on nativity from the people of Telangana, in the comprehensive household survey of August 19, 2014 never took place. It did not have any item on the nativity of household members. Thus, the question of discrimination and apprehensions about its misuse do not arise.
The fact is that the number of pension schemes of various kinds have increased as a result of the survey. The poor who were out of the economic security net for various reasons, including those political, are now under the economic security net. The number of beneficiaries under various categories has almost doubled.
The most disturbing statement made was about K. Chandrasekhar Rao, Chief Minister of Telangana, having to learn from what Mr. N. Chandrababu Naidu, Chief Minister of an undivided Andhra Pradesh, did in 1995 in terms of a household survey to determine the agenda of economic reform. KCR was very much a part of the Naidu government in 1995, and being pro-reforms is widely claimed to have been the force behind flagship schemes such as Janmabhoomi, and Vision 2020 of the TDP’s reforms document.
C. Raghava Reddy,
Hyderabad
