A+| A| A-
Unnecessary Partition
In your editorial, Reorganisation or Grandstanding? (EPW, 3 December 2011) it is rightly argued that the reorganisation of Uttar Pradesh (UP) into four states is certainly a political ploy. This state has a history of bifurcating, naming and renaming districts. There were 51 districts in the state in 1955 and now the number has gone up to 75, despite 13 districts having gone to Uttarakhand. The cost-benefit analysis of creating more states appears to be conveniently substituted by political calculations.
In your editorial, Reorganisation or Grandstanding? (EPW, 3 December 2011) it is rightly argued that the reorganisation of Uttar Pradesh (UP) into four states is certainly a political ploy. This state has a history of bifurcating, naming and renaming districts. There were 51 districts in the state in 1955 and now the number has gone up to 75, despite 13 districts having gone to Uttarakhand. The cost-benefit analysis of creating more states appears to be conveniently substituted by political calculations.
A reference has been made in the editorial to K M Panikkar’s “Note of Dissent” in the States’ Reorganisation Commission Report, arguing against the division of the state. It may be noted that he had proposed a bifurcation of UP with the new state being named the State of Agra, with that city as its capital. Until the new state of Uttaranchal (later name changed to Uttarakhand) was created in 2000 the state had remained undivided.
Dear Reader,
Or
To gain instant access to this article (download).
(Readers in India)
(Readers outside India)
