Why Telangana and Andhra Pradesh are still fighting over a loan taken a decade ago
A dispute continues between Telangana and Andhra Pradesh. It is over nearly ₹9,000 crore in loans. These loans were taken before the states' division. The central government is mediating the loan sharing. Telangana wants a population-based sharing model. Andhra Pradesh wants location-based sharing. Telangana fears increased financial burden. Further discussions may resolve the issue. A balanced approach is needed.
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Centre steps in to mediate loan sharing dispute
Telangana raises legal and financial concerns
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Projects in question span both states
Why Telangana and Andhra Pradesh are still fighting over a loan takenEven after 11 years since Andhra Pradesh was divided to form the new state of Telangana, the two states remain in disagreement over how to share nearly ₹9,000 crore in loans taken for externally aided projects before the bifurcation. The financial liabilities tied to these projects remain unresolved, and both states have yet to agree on a clear method for dividing them, a TOI report stated.Andhra Pradesh had borrowed ₹8,929 crore under 15 foreign-funded projects before the 2014 bifurcation. These loans were meant for infrastructure and development initiatives. However, Telangana and Andhra Pradesh have not been able to agree on how the burden should be shared.Two months ago, the Union Ministry of Home Affairs held a meeting to address the issue. The Department of Economic Affairs stated that loans should be borne by the state where the project is located. For projects that benefit both states, it suggested that the share should be worked out as per the recommendations of the respective accountants general.This recommendation was not accepted by Telangana. Its officials argue that the method of division should follow Section 54(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014, which calls for a population-based sharing model.Telangana maintains that dividing the loans based on the location of the project would not reflect the law. Officials from the state say that the loans were allocated without proper consultation with Telangana and that a location-based formula would unfairly increase its financial burden.The loans in dispute are not tied only to projects in Andhra Pradesh. Some of the borrowed funds were also used in Telangana. For example, Andhra Pradesh cited the Krishnapatnam Super Critical Power Station located within its boundaries and the Hussainsagar development project in Telangana as examples where loan division should follow the project's location.However, Telangana's position remains firm. Its officials say that accepting Andhra Pradesh's formula could result in an additional ₹1,449.75 crore in liabilities for the state, which is already under financial stress.Some senior officials from both states believe that further discussions may help resolve the issue. They suggest that a more balanced approach, keeping in mind both the law and the financial realities of each state, could lead to a solution.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Ladakh: Satisfied, but statehood main issue, says Buddhist association
President of the Ladakh Buddhist Association (LBA) and former minister, Chering Dorjay Lakrook, on Wednesday largely expressed satisfaction over Centre's notifications on domicile law and job reservations for locals. However, he said that statehood and constitutional safeguards enshrined under the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution to the strategic Himalayan region still remain the main agenda for the people of Ladakh, including the Leh Apex Body (LAB) and the Kargil Democratic Alliance (KDA). 'The Centre's notifications on domicile law prescribing 15-year residency with prospective effect and 85% reservation to locals in jobs have been accepted by us,' he said. 'However, conditions like having studied for seven years and appeared in class 10 and 12 exams were not discussed by the Union ministry of home affairs with us. We will take up these clauses with the government,' he added. The former minister, who is also a member of the LAB, admitted that the LAB and KDA had arrived at a unanimous consensus for either taking 1989 as a cut-off year or 30-year prospective residency for the domicile law. 'But the government (Centre) didn't agree upon 1989 as the cut-off year. On 30-year prospective residency, the Centre told us that it will be a time consuming exercise involving law ministry and other allied departments. Though the Centre has assured us to do it, we also realised that we could not waste further time. We have already waited for six years and the career of our youth is at stake. For the past over six years, not a single gazetted job has been given in Ladakh,' he added. The LBA chief elaborated that 15 year prospective residency will come into effect from October 31, 2019. On public service commision in Ladakh, he informed that the Centre has given them three options of UPSC directly conducting Ladakh's exams, Ladakh having its own PSC or J&K PSC conducting exams for Ladakh. 'We have conveyed that any of the three options deemed appropriate by the Centre is acceptable to us,' he said. However, the veteran leader amply made it clear that statehood and Sixth Schedule of the Constitution remain the core agenda for Ladakh people. 'Talks are yet to take place on statehood and Sixth Schedule. We also want an additional Lok Sabha constituency for the region, but that's not possible before 2026 because of a rider imposed by the Supreme Court,' he said. Ladakh as of date has only one parliamentary constituency. In 2023, the Union home ministry had formed a high-powered committee under minister of state Nityanand Rai to discuss ways to protect Ladakh's unique culture.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
2 hours ago
- First Post
US team in India for trade talks, govt scans Trump's tariff concessions to other countries
As a US delegation arrives in New Delhi to negotiate a bilateral trade deal, India is observing the concessions Washington made to other nations, to make the best out of the deal negotiations. read more As a team from the United States arrives in India to negotiate a bilateral trade agreement , reports are emerging that New Delhi is observing the concessions Washington made or plans to make to other nations. According to a report by The Times of India, the Indian government is also monitoring the legal disputes that are surrounding the tariffs imposed by US President Donald Trump. During the trade talks, the delegations from both nations would try to ensure that their nations get better market access as the American leader upped the ante in terms of global trading. It is pertinent to note that the Trump administration is seeking to implement a 10 per cent baseline tariff and the suspended reciprocal tariffs ( which were 26 per cent in India's case). STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD After the announcement of the tariffs, the Trump administration used them as a tool to negotiate trade deals with several nations around the world. Earlier this year, the UK and the US signed a bilateral trade agreement to avoid tariffs. According to TOI, Indian government officials are keen to ensure that they manage to extract the best deal for Indian companies. What is India looking for? 'What we get compared to other countries…that we will ultimately finalise in the deal,' a government official told TOI. The official made it clear that India is conscious of its strategic ties with the US and is also looking to step up imports of shale gas, LNG, and crude oil from America to diversify its import basket, as prices of these items are lower in the US. New Delhi believes that these explorations would help bridge the trade gap of over $40 billion in India's favour, a major grudge Trump had before he introduced the tariffs. How the Trump administration reacts to India's plan would determine the government's future course of action on retaliating against some of the tariff hikes introduced by Trump. 'Exports are increasing… There are several things we can buy from the US… For example, shale gas, LNG, and crude oil. The more diversified our sources, the greater the benefit for us. Prices are also low in the US,' the official, who asked to remain anonymous, told TOI. Overall, the outcome of the upcoming meeting with the American team would determine India's next move.
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Kurian Joseph Committee on Centre
The decision of the Tamil Nadu government to establish a panel on Centre – State relations in April this year consisting of the retired Supreme Court judge justice Kurien Joseph as chairperson along with the retired IAS officer Ashok Vardhan Shetty and former State Planning Commission chairman M Naganathan as members is a significant move to revive and reinvigorate the debate on the Centre – State relations in the country. This high-level committee constituted by the Government of Tamil Nadu is likely to submit its interim report by January 2026, and the final report within two years. The composition of its members, stated objectives and the background to the establishment of this committee are no less significant. The forming of Kurian Joseph committee acquires relevance in context of the changing political, economic and ideological realities in the country given the shift from the era of Congress dominance in Indian politics to the rise of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), Hindutva politics and the role of corporate capital in Indian economy. The mandate of the committee is to review the constitutional provisions, laws, rules and policies with respect to Centre – State relations with an aim of exploring and recommending ways to restore subjects moved from the State List to the Concurrent List. This committee is expected to suggest reforms to ensure maximum autonomy for states without compromising the unity and integrity of the nation besides overcoming the administrative hurdles in the smooth functioning of the Centre – State relations. The core objective of this panel is to study the state of Centre – State relations with a view to safeguard the rights of the states and improve the relations between the Centre and states. The underlying political function of this committee is to defend and thwart the attempts of the centre to overrun and further undermine the powers of the states reflecting the current tension and uneasiness prevailing over this subject between the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) led government at the centre and the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) government in Tamil Nadu. The formation of this committee and its core objectives resemble the circumstances and challenges, though different from another era and extent, surrounding the establishment of the Rajamannar Committee in 1969 by the Tamil Nadu government led by Karunanidhi. The Rajamannar Committee was the first state-level initiative to study and review Centre – State relations. There are other comparable initiatives by the Centre including the Administrative Reforms Commission (1969), Sarkaria Commission (1983) and the Punchhi Commission in 2007. The formation of this committeeagainst the background of the deep erosion of legislative, executive and financial powers by the states and their resistance, including the call of the chief minister of Tamil Nadu MK Stalin for state autonomy cannot be missed. This initiative is seen as a response of the DMK-led government in Tamil Nadu to the BJP's attempts at centralisation of power at the Centre. There is an appeal to consider and expedite the process of implementation of the recommendations of the Rajamannar Committee, Sarkaria Commission and the Punchhi Commission. The major concerns of the state are such as the implementation of the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) for medical admissions, the National Education Policy-2020 (NEP) and its insistence on three-language formula, the working of the Goods and Services Tax (GST), the partisan role and interventions of the Governor in state politics and the potential impact of the delimitation process if implemented with an exclusive population criteria alone. There is a sense of being penalised for its success in addressing the above issues keeping what is best for the state and its people. The longstanding dispute over the non-payment of GST dues for the state; the recent flare-up over the withholding of funds meant for Tamil Nadu's education programmes and the routine clashes between the Governor and the government of Tamil Nadu are critical pointers to this effect. The idea of participatory governance and cooperative federalism are indeed becoming distant dreams given the extent of erosion of the rights of the states and the inherent bias towards the centre in the actual working of our federalism. Though it is not easy to overlook the issues and challenges in the Centre – State relations in India and the brewing conflict(s) on a range of issues over this subject between the DMK and BJP, yet it is important to acknowledge that the establishment of Kurian Joseph Committee is part of a long standing and consistent position of the state to determine the policies for the welfare and wellbeing of the people. The decision of the Tamil Nadu chief minister to move a resolution for more autonomy and the forming of this high-level Kurian Joseph Committee are reflective of the determination of the DMK party and government to revive and restore the debate on Centre – State relations under the present circumstances of prevailing conflicts and distrust between the state and the Centre. There is no doubt that this debate is necessary which, however, requires a more cautious and balanced assessment of the rights and powers of the states against the fears of parochial regionalism and , as a matter of reality, the growing drift towards majoritarianism, excessive centralisation and the exploitation of frenzy nationalism at the centre. Neither augurs well for the unity and integrity of India. ( Manivannan is a scholar-social activist in areas of education, human rights and sustainable development through an initiative 'Multiversity.')
