Dr. JayaPrakash Naryanan (JP) has announced the LokSatta’s stand in favor of district governments. JP is an eminent and we are glad to take his contents on demotic problems. His recent abstract on the district ruling is disappointed and in this context, I would like to express my view. JP prefers to make attention towards the other countries in order to find correlation between the democratic regimes. In this regard, I would like to remind the development and consecutive lessons that are to be acquired from Germany.
Coming to the point, Germany was severed into two major pieces and Berlin was tearful of its past rulers. During the 40 years of separation some divergence occurred in the cultural life of the two parts of the shattered nation. Both West Germany and East Germany followed along traditional paths of the common German culture, but West Germany, being obviously more affected by influences from Western Europe and North America, became more cosmopolitan. Conversely, East Germany, while remaining more conservative than West Germany in its adherence to some aspects of the received tradition, was strongly moulded by the dictates of a state socialist ideology of predominantly Soviet inspiration. In a result, the people from East part were anticipated REUNIFICATION OF GERMANY and succeeded in 1990. Then, the government started implementing immediate actions to upgrade primary needs for East part. The West Germans open heartedly worked out for development of the East part in order to obviate the distinctions. The reunification was expensed the Federal Government about 2,000 billion euros and ensued qualitative research institutes and industries accompanied by assigned infrastructure in the East part.
All the parts of district/state/country/province may not be in isotropous growth and is apparently due to several reasons. However, the administration’s duty is to consider the contemporary trends in lives and to diminish inequalities by taking appropriate assignments. Nevertheless, the intellectuals of the Govt. have to come out with open heart for developing the lagging parts. The administration should never avert the lagging parts; exactly, this is what happening in India. The Govt. is keen to develop the capitals and declines the alteration of small towns to cities. To this point, I totally agree with JP words. Coming to his recent abstract, we have already district level administration in some extent but unfortunately, it is surpassed by local bodies. The IAS/IPS of district is only name sake of people’s represent and they are highly biased. According to legislation, political leaders are straight representatives of people and are responsible to mediate between Govt. and people. Even our leaders are not in prompt way (unfortunately) and then how can we expect an IAS/IPS can give a better administration. The Govt. officials should work under the control of leaders and the later should be indebted to the people. The district level budget will not suffice for evolution of lagging parts. The authorized persons from the Govt. should have to co-operate kindheartedly in allocation of large BUDGET for these affected parts. In this process, they should not think of their own city/district/state/etc and they should have solidarity to all other parts of state/country.
Personally, I feel that it is impossible to develop the Adilabad/Anathapuram/Srikakulam districts just based on their district governments rather than the state Govt. should gradually upgrade the resources in the above districts. Over the years, our administrators converged only on Hyderabad/Vijayawada/Vizag on basis of their selfish motives. Consequently, now we have the Telangana movement cause of large lagging parts in the region and followed by Seemandhra movement cause of Hyderabad. Hereafter, this should be a lesson to any administration in India if it ignores keeping efforts in evolution of the lagging parts.
Dr. V. Hari Babu,
Researcher from Germany
e-mail: [email protected]
The views expressed in the article are the author's and not of greatandhra.com.
