We reproduce relevant portions of the 1955 SRC ( States re-organisation report) which made Visalandhra possible and helped the integration of Andhra and Telangana. Though these areas have now separated again, history can provide valuable lessons. Dwell a little into history.
This is what the report said.
You can read the full text of relevant portions for Andhra- Telangana HERE. SRC 1955 – portions on Andhra and Telangana
You can read the entire country wide re-organisation report (Called the 1st SRC) HERE. State Reorganisation Commisison Report of 1955
On whether Telangana and Andhra should be merged: “The creation of Vishalandhra is an ideal to which numerous individuals and public bodies, both in Andhra and Telangana, have been passionately attached over a long period of time, and unless there are strong reasons to the contrary, this sentiment is entitled to consideration.” …… “The advantages of the formation of Vishalandhra are obvious. The desirability of bringing the Krishna and Godavari river basins under unified control, the trade affiliations between Telangana and Andhra and the-suitability of Hyderabad as the capital for the entire region are in brief the arguments in favour of the bigger unit. It seems to us, therefore, that there is much to be said for the formation of the larger State and that nothing should be done to impede the realisation of this goal. At the same time, we have to take note of the important fact that, while opinion in Andhra is overwhelmingly in favour of the larger unit, public opinion in Telangana has still to crystallise itself. ”
On apprehensions of the people of Telangana : “One of the principal causes of opposition to Vishalandhra also seems to be the apprehension felt by the educationally-backward ; people of Telangana that they may be swamped and exploited by the more advanced people of the coastal area. In the Telangana districts outside the city of Hyderabad education is woefully backward.”
On Why Bidar should be part of Telangana : ” The entire district of Bidar to be included in Hyderabad State on the same principles. This is a multilingual district, in which Marathi, Kannada, Urdu and Telugu are spoken respectively by 39, 28, 16 and 15 per cent of the population. Administratively, Bides has very close links with Hyderabad and even Telangana till present time. ”
On Why Kolar should remain in Karnataka : “One such area is Kolar district, which has a Telugu majority of fifty-four per cent. and a Kannada-speaking population of barely twenty-one per cent. It has intimate ties with Mysore which are of such long standing that they cannot easily be ignored. The major industry in this district is gold-mining. The mining town itself has attracted a considerable number of immigrants from the adjoining areas, mostly Tamilians, with the result that Tamil is the largest language group. in K.G.F. city today. The district is also much nearer to Bangalore than it is to Kurnool or Hyderabad. In case it is included in Andhra, it will be in the south-western corner of that State and will necessarily be somewhat remote froth the main centres of Andhra.. Taking into account all these factors as also the fact that the Telugu majority in this district’ is not large, we feel that it should remain where it is.”
On Bellary : After serious consideration we have decide to recommend the exclusion of a portion of the present Bellary district along the course of the Tungabhadra from Karnataka and its transfer to the Andhra State. We are aware that this is not in accord with the findings of an eminent judge like Shri Justice Misra and also with the decision taken by the Government of India in 1953 in respect of certain areas forming part of the present Bellary district. It is only .after giving due weight to these important pronouncements and careful examination of the merits and demerits of the different proposals that we have come to the conclusion that the change proposed is desirable.
On why Madras should remain with Tamil Nadu : “The Andhra Government has reopened this question and has presented elaborate arguments in favour of special arrangements being made for Madras city, relying in particular on the early history of the city in order to prove its Telugu origin and affiliations. The arrangements proposed, which envisage a kind of joint control for the city are, however, patently unworkable.The Tamil-speaking population of the city exceeds two-thirds of its total population at the present time and the case for its separation from the predominantly Tamil-speaking State of Madras rests on weak foundations. The future of Madras city, therefore, must now be regarded as finally settled; and, in our opinion, it will be neither necessary nor desirable to go back on a decision which has already been taken after due consideration of the various points of view.”