Seemandhra, Telangana MLAs harp on their stand on T Bill

25 Jan, 2014 07:09 IST|Sakshi
Seemandhra, Telangana MLAs harp on their stand on T Bill

Hyderabad, Legislators from Seemandhra and Telangana on Friday made forceful assertions about their respective stand on the proposed division of Andhra Pradesh during the ongoing debate in the Legislative Assembly.

While MLAs from Seemandhra opposed any division of Andhra Pradesh, their counterparts from Telangana strongly supported statehood for the region.

Around five minutes was given to each member to ensure maximum participation in the debate on draft Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Bill, which envisages bifurcation of the state.

President Pranab Mukherjee yesterday gave seven more days to the Andhra Pradesh Assembly (till January 30) to discuss the Bill before returning it to the Centre.

The President's decision came following a request from the Andhra Pradesh government which sought four weeks extension of the January 23 deadline fixed by him while sending the Bill to the Assembly.

Alleging that Telangana suffered injustice, Women and Child Welfare Minister Sunita Laxma Reddy, who hails from Telangana, said statehood is a long-pending demand of the people of the region.

She demanded that the Pranahita-Chevella irrigation project be declared a national project for the benefit of the region and her native Medak district.

Noting that all development in AP has been Hyderabad-centric, Mines Minister Galla Aruna Kumari, who hails from Seemandhra, wondered where the people of Coastal Andhra and Rayalaseema would go for education and jobs post-division.

Rayalaseema remained backward with no substantial development taking place in the industrial, education and other spheres, she said.

Muddukrishnama Naidu (TDP), who belongs to Seemandhra, alleged there was a direction from the Centre to expedite the process concerning the Bill, which he said is objectionable.

Rural Development Minister D Manikya Varaprasad, also hailing from Seemandhra, said the TDP leader can seek more time for debate but it is not correct to attribute any motives to top Constitutional functionaries.

Read More:
More News