By Chuppala Nagesh Bhushan
A grassroots movement argues that the road to power runs through better maths, not more slogans
HYDERABAD— For a certain kind of Indian political speech, statistics are less a rhetorical device than a weapon. In a recent address to Backward Caste (BC) activists in Telangana, T. Chiranjeevulu, a retired officer of the Indian Administrative Service and founder-president of the BC Intellectuals' Forum (BCIF), deployed numbers on judges, billionaires, distilleries and irrigation canals with the precision of a prosecutor building a case. The verdict, delivered repeatedly and without much subtlety, was that Telangana's dominant castes have converted every organ of the state—courts, bureaucracy, budgets, even canteens—into instruments of their own advantage, while BCs, who make up roughly 56% of the state's population, remain spectators to their own governance.
The speech ranged widely, but three threads stood out: an attack on the government's Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls; a forensic dismantling of "creamy layer" reservation politics; and, most pointedly, an unusually blunt indictment of the very BC organisations meant to represent the community.
A voter roll with a 25-year memory
The SIR exercise, launched to update rolls last revised systematically a quarter-century ago, requires voters to demonstrate that their parents appeared on the electoral rolls as far back as 2000. For settled, older residents this is a paperwork nuisance. For internal migrants and for Telangana's many 25- and 30-year-olds, whose own names never appeared on any list that old, it is closer to disenfranchisement by documentation. The speaker's complaint was not that verification is illegitimate in principle, but that its practical burden falls heaviest on the groups least equipped to fight it in court once struck off—a process he warned is "a very large one" to reverse.
The arithmetic of exclusion
The speech's most striking passages were quantitative. Of Telangana's 119 assembly seats, only a handful are held by BCs relative to their population share; Reddys, some 4.3% of the population, hold roughly as many seats as the arithmetic of proportional representation would never grant them. Of 18 dollar-billionaires resident in the state, none, the speaker asserted, is BC, SC or ST. Of 28 liquor distilleries licensed in Telangana, none is BC-owned. Pharmaceuticals, rice-milling, cinema, land and mining were each named as sectors effectively closed to backward castes despite their numerical majority.
The reservation debate received similar treatment. The speaker calculated that Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) reservation—10% nationally, introduced in 2019 and celebrated by some BC politicians who lobbied to have it applied in Telangana—benefits a population that, once landholding and existing government employment are netted out, amounts to perhaps 4% of the state. BCs, by contrast, receive 27% reservation nationally (and less in practice) despite comprising well over half the population. The injustice, as he framed it, is compounded by judicial inconsistency: the same Supreme Court that struck down a 50%-plus EWS quota as unconstitutional in 1992 later upheld one that breached the ceiling in the opposite direction.
A pointed rebuke to BC leadership itself
What distinguishes this address from standard caste-grievance rhetoric is its willingness to turn the same forensic scrutiny inward. Mr Chiranjeevulu did not spare BC organisations or their leaders. Many activists, he argued flatly, "lack understanding of the BC subject" and continue to run associations without having done the underlying analysis—leaving ordinary members with neither the time nor the framework to think critically about policy. He singled out the 2017–18 episode in which the state government issued a Government Order (GO) granting 42% local-body reservation to BCs without seeking constitutional protection under the Ninth Schedule, even though the government itself had proposed exactly that route to the centre. BC leaders, he said, waved the Ninth Schedule aside, accepted the GO instead, and then organised felicitation ceremonies for the chief minister—only for the High Court to strike the order down soon after, precisely as history predicted: an identical GO-versus-court pattern had already played out in 1986 under N.T. Rama Rao, and in a dozen other Indian states that breached the 50% reservation ceiling by executive order rather than legislation.
That such a sequence could repeat itself, he suggested, reflects not merely political weakness but an intellectual failure within the BC movement's own leadership—organisations celebrating symbolic wins while structural ones slip away. His prescription was correspondingly severe: BC activists should stop accepting government jobs or political postings offered as inducements, reject "recycled" leaders imported wholesale from established parties ("old wine in a new bottle," as he put it), and build an independent institutional base—complete with its own funding, media capacity and cadre—before any electoral ambitions are entertained at all.
Canals, commissions and a lakh crore in irrigation
Budgetary grievance supplied the speech's angriest passages. Of a state budget of ₹3.24trn this year, only ₹12,000 crore ("2,000 crore, generously") was allocated to BC welfare, of which a large share reportedly went unspent. By contrast, irrigation megaprojects—Kaleshwaram foremost among them—have seen costs balloon from an original ₹37,000 crore design to well over ₹1trn, with a partially collapsed barrage to show for it. The speaker calculated the effective cost of irrigating a single acre under the state's flagship scheme at roughly ₹1.6m ("16 lakh rupees")—a sum, he noted acidly, vastly exceeding anything ever transferred directly to a BC, SC or ST family. Farmer-support schemes (cash transfers, loan waivers, free electricity) were estimated to have delivered some ₹1.5trn since 2017, overwhelmingly to landowning farmers who are disproportionately from forward castes; some 2.5m landless BC/SC/ST families, he said, saw none of it.
Education as the newer front
A parallel critique targeted school education. Where OECD economies typically educate 80% of children in free government schools, Telangana's government-school enrolment has fallen from roughly 47% in 2014, at statehood, to about 28% today. The state has no fee-regulation law, unlike 18 other Indian states, and has not implemented Section 12(1)(c) of the 2009 Right to Education Act, which mandates 25% free-entry seats for disadvantaged children in private schools—a law Telangana, Kerala, West Bengal and Punjab are alone in India in not enforcing. The speaker put the cumulative annual cost of private schooling to Telangana families at close to ₹1trn, money he argued fee regulation could largely recapture.
Building a party from a movement, not the reverse
The speech's organisational logic borrowed explicitly from Tamil Nadu, where the Dravidian movement produced a succession of leaders—Annadurai, Karunanidhi, MGR, Jayalalithaa, and now the actor-politician Vijay—rather than the other way around. The plan outlined was correspondingly patient: spread ideology through social media and village outreach (since mainstream print and broadcast media, dependent on advertising from dominant-caste business interests, will not carry it); build institutional structures down to the mandal (sub-district) level over six to twelve months; cultivate roughly five prospective leaders in each of Telangana's 80 general (non-reserved) constituencies, yielding a cadre of some 400; and only then convert the movement into a registered political party. BCIF's second anniversary, on the 30th of this month, was announced as a milestone for this transition.
Whether such a movement can convert grievance-arithmetic into votes remains, as ever in Indian caste politics, an open question. But the address is notable for locating the obstacle not solely in upper-caste dominance—familiar territory for such speeches—but partly within a BC leadership it accuses of celebrating symbolic gestures, misunderstanding the policy detail of the reservations it demands, and mistaking proximity to power for power itself.
Comments
Post a Comment