For Admissions Contact @ 9133527733

Menu

JAYA BHARATH REDDY COMMITTEE REPORT

During 1983-84, Telangana Non-Gazetted employees (TNGOs) and other employees unions brought to the notice of the State Government about the injustices taking place in the appointments, postings and allotments of jobs in the Telangana region by giving representations to the Government and requested the Government to safeguard the appointments, postings and job allotments in the Telangana region.

The Jaya Bharath Reddy Committee was appointed to see whether the constitutional amendment, constitutional rule 371(D) and presidential orders were followed or not for Government jobs in Telangana and to examine if the recruitments were being done according to it or not from the time the Presidential Order was issued on 18th October 1975 till 1984.

The Jaya Bharath Reddy Committee examined the issue and found that the appointments, promotions, postings and transfers in Telangana from 1975 to 1984 were against the constitutional amendment, constitutional rule 372(D) and the Presidential orders. The committee submitted 36 pages report to the Government. This committee had given the employee census in it. The details of the employees as on 30th June 1981, also the local and non-local status of the employees were given.

The above table shows that by June 30, 1981, nearly 59,000 non-local employees were working in Telangana. The same report was submitted by the Jaya Bharath Reddy Committee to the Government. The committee provided detailed information on how many non-local employees were working in Telangana after the formation of the Andhra Pradesh State, based on a comprehensive census.

Q. What factors contributed to the growth of regional inequalities in employment between the Telangana and Andhra regions?

Introduction The Gentlemen’s Agreement of 1956 was established to ensure fair employment distribution in the newly formed Andhra Pradesh state, preserving jobs in the Telangana region for its residents. However, the agreement and subsequent legal provisions such as the Mulki Rules were frequently overlooked, leading to significant employment disparities that fuelled regional tensions.
Body 1.      Violation of Agreements and Rules:

  • Initial Violations: Despite the States Reorganization Act of 1956 incorporating the Mulki Rules, which were meant to protect employment for Telangana residents, the Public Employment Act of 1958 failed to extend these protections to Gazetted Services, leading to widespread appointments of individuals from the Andhra region in these roles.
  • Government Response: In response to growing unrest, the Telangana Non-Gazetted Officers’ Union initiated movements in 1968, escalating into the Separate Telangana Movement by 1969. The government attempted to address these issues through measures like GO 36, which proposed transferring Andhra employees back to their region, though this was halted by the Supreme Court in 1969.

2.      Further Complications and Legal Challenges:

  • Six-point Formula of 1973: This formula was introduced to quell dissatisfaction but ended up curtailing the ability of Telangana residents to challenge the improper appointments of Andhra residents, which continued to exacerbate regional inequalities.
  • Jai Bharath Reddy Committee Findings (1985): This committee confirmed that approximately 58,000 positions meant for Telangana residents had been filled by individuals from the Andhra region, in violation of established rules.

3.      Lack of Effective Implementation of Remedial Measures:

  • GO 610 (1986): Issued by then Chief Minister NTR, this order aimed to rectify the improper appointments by transferring Andhra employees out of Telangana posts within three months. However, this order was not effectively implemented even by 2015.
  • Girglani Commission (2001): Established to address these ongoing issues, the commission’s recommendations were largely ignored by the government, leaving many of the issues unresolved until the formation of the separate state of Telangana in 2014.
Conclusion The disparities in employment between Telangana and Andhra Pradesh regions stem from a complex interplay of historical agreements, administrative oversights, and legislative failures. Despite initial agreements intended to protect local employment rights within Telangana, systematic violations and insufficient enforcement of these policies led to significant imbalances.
Scroll to Top