CHAPTER I V

ATTITUDES OF RAYAIASEEMA AND CIRCAR LEADERS

Rayalaseema cons i s t s of t h e d i s t r i c t s of Cuddapah,

Kurnool, Bel lary, Anantapur and Chit toor . This area was

ceded by the Nizam t o t h e B r i t i s h i n 1800. The f i r s t

impartant landmark of the a rea i n t he h i s to ry of Rayala-

seema was provided by the 'Edic ts of Asoka' a t Erragudi,

e i g h t miles from Gooty in Anantapw d i s t r i c t . This area

was t h e p a r t of Mauryan r u l e and l a t e r Satavahana ru le .

After them, t h e Ikshwakus, t h e Pal lavas, t h e Chalukyas,

Rashtrskutas , Cholas, followed by the Kakatiyas of

Warangal ru l ed over t h i s region. After them, Hindus

organieed themselves, t o r e s i s t t h e Muslims, founded

Vijaywagara dynasty in 1336 A.D. After t he f a l l of t he

vijayanagara dynasty, the e n t i r e region of Andhra except

Kurnool, came ~ n d e r the control of Golkonda Sultanate.

bout Rayalaseema, Kalluri Subba Rao made a statement

t h a t '. . . Really speaking, it is the people of Rayalaseema,

who a r e t r u e Andhras. Rayalaseema was the kingdom of

Satavahanas, Chalukyas and Rashtrakutas and the V i jaya-

nagara kings. A l l these were Andhra dynasties .. . After

Ta l l iko ta ba t t l e , the Andhras of Rayalaseema began t o

lose t h e i r glory and prowess.. . ".' In 1790, the Marathas, the Nizam, the East India

Company formed a Tripple Alliance against the ru l e r of

Mysore. After the death of Tipu Sultan, the Mysore ru le r ,

h i s kingdom was d is t r ibu ted among the three regions. The

Nizam of Hyderabad got a s h i s share, the present d i s t r i c t s

of Goaty, Cuddapah, Anantapur and par t s of Kurnool

d i s t r i c t .

But a f t e r ten years, in the 'Subsidiary Alliance' in

1800, with the English, t o overthrow the French from

Hyderabad, t he Nizam ceded the south of the r i v e r Thunga-

1. A m r i t Bazaar Patr ika (nai ly) , dated 3.5.1938.

bhadra, ~ e l l a r y t K ~ o o l , Cuddapah and Anantapur, to

t he English. From then onwards, the d i s t r i c t s were

ca l led a s 'ceded d i s t r i c t s ' . Because of the r i s i n g of

nationalism and pres t ige , the term 'ceded' was not

t o l e r ab l e t o t he people of t h i s area. So, they wanted t o

change in to 'Rayalaseema', means ' the land of S r i

Krishnadevaraya' . Rayalaseema was a l so ca l led 'Renadu' , meaning the

land o f the kings and 'Maharajanadu', meaning the land of

t he ~ a h a r a j a s . ~ In this region, population was slender,

r a i n f a l l was v=ry a l ight , s o i l was m s t l y i n f e r t i l e and

i r r i g a t i o n works were very few, and these d i s t r i c t s

frequently suffered from famines and scarc i t ies . People

were poor and i l l i t e r a t e . 4 In t he Andhra area, e l l the

serv ices including revenue were managed by the non-

Telugus, pa r t i cu l a r ly by the Tamils, 5

Rayalaseema is land locked region, covering an area

Vianana Servaswamu, Vol. I11 (Telugu Samskrith i) Bhasha Samithi, Madras, 19591, pp. 1044-45. Imperial Gazetteer of India, Provincial Series , Madras-1 (Calcutta, Government Print ing Press, Annual, pp. 203-204.

4. Census of India, Madras Report, 1901, p.799 5, Andhra Pa t r ika (Annual, 19191, pp, 203-2040

of about 69.043 square kilometres, had 24.95% of t h e

t o t a l a r ea of t h e Andhra Pradesh. The Rayalaseema by

its locat ion extends approximately prone 12" 03. N .ta

16" 15. N l a t i t u d e s and 76" 5Se E to 79" 55. E longitudes.

~ r a p h i c a l l y , t he Rayalaseema forms the southern and

south eas te rn port ion of the Deccan Plateau. I t is

s i t ua t ed a l m s t in t he centre of the southern p a r t of the

Indian Peninsula. It is bounded, on the North by

Telangana region, Karnataka and South by the Tamil Nadu,

and on the South Coastal region of Andhra Pradesh. I t

has no s e a coas t and also it a b u t 300 t o 700 metres

above mean sea level. The Rayalaseema is the second

d r i e s t p a r t of the country next t o the Thar Desert. The

region may general ly be considered a s having a ho t s u m r

and a p leasant winter. The summer period between March

t o June is a very h o t t e s t throughout the region. The

average maximum and minimum temperatures a r e 30eC and

15.C to 28.C respect ively. 6

Rayalascema produced many prominent leaders, O f a l l ,

6. Government of Andhra Pradesh, Planning and Development of Backward Regions (A Case Study of Rayalaseema) , Hyderabad, 1971, Vol. I , p. 111.

~ a d i c h e r l a Harisarvottama Rao of Kurnool d i s t r i c t was

the most important leader of Rayalaseema. He par t ic ipa-

ted no t only in the Indian National Moven~ent, but a l so

in the Andhra Movement. Thomas Campbell says t h a t "The

p a t r i o t s blood is t he seed of Freedom's treet1. He was t he

f i r s t p o l i t i c a l pr isoner , who had sown the seeds of

pa t r io t i sm i n ~ndh ra , ' and he was ca l led as "Andhra Tilak".

He was t he staunch supporter of the separate Andhra S t a t e

from the beginning.

Another notable freedom f igh te r and f o r e m s t

p o l i t i c a l leader of Rayalaseema Neelam Sanjseva Reddy

belonged t o Anantapur d i s t r i c t . He belongs tr, the l ink

generation of t he Pre-Independence and Post-Independence

era. Th~ugh a tbp leve l leader of Rayalaseema, he was

n o t ful l -supporter of a separate Andhra Province, In t he

beginning, h e decided not t o join with t he Circars f o r

the separa te Andhra Province. Later, he changed h i s

a t t i t u d e towards Andhra State . In h i s President ial

Address t o the F1ft.h F.ayalaseemn Conference in 1947, he

s t a t ed t h a t i f proper protection was not given t o Rayala-

7. J. Hanumanta S a s t r i t s a r t i c l e in "VandemataramI1. See Kalaprapurne Poturi Nagabhushanam (ed. 1, xi .Gadicherla Sata J ayan t i Sandlika, Vijayawada, p.8.

seema, they should demand a separate Rayalaseema S ta te . 8

K a l l u r i Subba Rao of Anantapur d i s t r i c t , t h e grand

018 man of Rayalaseema, was the f i r s t Satyagrahi from

~aya laseema. He was a180 the supporter of the Andhra

province i s sue , b u t demanded weightage f o r Rayalaseema i n

t h e Andhra Leg is la tu re and t h e location of the c a p i t a l a t

Bezawada with i t s summer s e a t a t ~ a d a n a ~ a l l e , ~ in Chi t toor

d i s t r i c t .

Another important leader which Ray alaseema produced

was Kot i redd iqer i Koti Reddy, lo belongs to Chi t toor

d i s t r i c t . Later he s e t t l e d in Cuddapah. He was a lso

l i s t e d i n top rank in t h e Andhra p o l i t i c s . He was f u l l

supporter o f t h e Andhra Province iesue. l1 He worked hara

f o r the Circar-Rayalaseema t o come to an agreement on t h e

Andhra Province issue. During the disculssion in the Madras

Council on t h e reso lu t ion of the Andhra Province (~ovember,

1933), t h e p a t t e r n of w t i n g on Koti Reddy'a amendment to

make Madras, t h e c a p i t a l of t h e ~ n d h r a Province showed

8. See Andhra Pa t r ika , dated 26.10.1947, 9. For t h e Proceedings of t h e Conference, see The Hindu,

4 and 5 October, 1931 and a l so "Chennapatnam ~amasya" in Andhra Pa t r ika , dated 15 August 1949.

10. Hereaf ter , he i e to be mentioned as Kadapa Xoti Reddy. 11. The Hindu, 5 November 1929.

t h a t Ceded Districts would no t oppose an Andhra Province

i f Madras was made i t s capital. '*

Another important Rayalaseema leader was Dewan

~ a h a d u c Pat t l l Kesava P i l l a i . H e was a Tamil non-Brahmin

advocate, domiciled i n Qooty, Anantspur d i s t r i c t , go t t h e

award of "order of the Indian Empire*. He supported t he

Andhra M v e m n t , bu t was aga ins t the separate Andhra

S t a t e ,

Next prominent leader of the Rayalaseema was =a-

bhooshi Anantaswanam Awanqar, belonged to Ti rupa t i , i n

Chi t toor d i s t r i c t . He was a middle l eve l leader. Another

important l eader of Rayalaseema, who par t i c ipa ted i n t he

Andhra Movement were H. Sitarami Reddy, C.L. Narasimha

Reddy, etc. Pappuru Ramachandrulu, Nayakanti Sankara

Reddy, T.N. Ramakrishna Reddy, Idukallu Sadasivan, Neelam

Rajasekhara Reddy, Peddi Reddy Timma Reddy of Chi t toor

d i s t r i c t , etc., were t he d i s t r i c t l eve l leaders.

In Ci rcar region, so many prominent leaders p a r t i c i -

pated i n t h e Andhra Movement a s well a s in t h e National

Movement. Amng them, Konda Venka tav~awa was t he f i r s t

12. See Proceedings of t he Madras Legis la t ive Council, 1933, Vo1.67, pp. 198-227 and Vo1.68, pp.958-972.

and foremost leader of the Circar region, who was r igh t ly

ca l led a s " the Father of the Andhra Movement". He belong

t o the m t u r district. He was popularly known a s

"~eerabhakta"'. Another eminent leader of Andhra was

Prakasam Pantulu, had the t i t l e "Andhra Kesariu. H e was

fought f o r the separate Andhra Sta te , with Madras a s i t s

capi ta l . Another grea t leader of Andhra was Pattabhi

Sitaramayya. He a lso devoted to the creation of the

separate Anahre Province.

Gollapudi Sitarama Saat r i , popularly known as "Swami

Siteram", belonged t o Ountur d i s t r i c t . H e worked t o ge t

Andhra S t a t e for Andhras. He was close follower of Konda

Venkatappayya. Swami Sitaram had undertaken f a s t for 2

times, t o the cause of separate Andhra State.

Another important leader of Andhra was Nyapati Subba

Rao Pantulu of Nellore, He was r ight ly ca l led a s the

"Grand Old Man of Andhral'. One important thing is, in the

beginning, he opposed the formation of separate Andhra

Province, because in h i s opinion, it was premature. But

l a t e r he changed h i s a t t i tude towards the formation of

separate Andhra Sta te , and worked for it. I t is t o be

noted t h a t Wellore people were opposed t o the separate

Andhra S t a t e f o r sometime. Subba Rao Pantulu was given

the t i t l e "Andhra Bhishma? m e above were top-level

leaders.

Other important leaders of the Circar region who

par t ic ipa ted not only in the National Movement, bu t also

in the Andhra Movement, and did yeoman service fo r t he

separate Andhra S ta te were Madapati Hanumanta Rao, N.G.

Ranga, Kasinathuni Nageswara Rao, Ayyadevara Kaleswara

Rao, Mutnuru Krishna Rao, Unnava Lakshmi Narayana, C.

Rangaiah Naidu, Mocherla Ramachandra Rao, A. 9. Krishna

Rao. etc.

Here, some questions ar ise . When did public opinion

ge t c rys t a l i s ed in the Rayalaseema region? Had the

Rayalaseema people supported t h e issue o f Andhra Provinc@

with Madras City? I f not, why they d id not give Support

t o the Circars on t h i s issue?

There was no p o l i t i c a l and soc ia l ac t i v i t y in Rayala-

seema unlike in the Circar d i s t r i c t s , because Rayalaseema

was backward area economically and po l i t i c a l l y , i f compared

with Coastal region. With the Ceded Di s t r i c t s Yomg Men's

s o c i a l 6a ther ingr13 which n e t i n 1907,14 the p a l i e

opinion c r y s t a l l i s e d f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e i n the Rayala-

seema. Before it, some leading lawyers and some land-

l o r d s a t tended the Indian National Congress Session,

p a r t i c u l a r l y f r o m t h i s region. Now, a f t e r the f i r s t

meeting, t h e CDYMSG got success t o bring the people t o

come on a s i n g l e platform t o d i scuss t h e i r needs and

wishes.

The seventh CDYMSG was held in April, 1913 a t Maha-

nandi i n Kurnool D i s t r i c t . P. Keshava P i l l a i presided

over t h e meeting.15 About two hundred de lega tes from

Kurnool, Bel lary, Anantapur and Cuddapah d i s t r i c t s

attended. Keshava P i l l a i opposed t h e question of t h e

Andhra Province.16 In h i s P r e s i d e n t i a l Address, he sa id ,

"The idea of having a separa te Province f o r t h e people

born and domiciled in t h e Telugu d i s t r i c t s , i r r e s p e c t i v e

of mother-tongue is a t present beyond the sphere of

p r a c t i c a l polit icsm.17 He was a l so t h e f i r s t t o view t h e - - -

13. Hereaf te r , it is t o be mentioned as "CDYMSG. 14. G.Oa 123, 124 and 125 (Leg is la t ive ) , 19 September 1912. 15. The Hindu, dated 24 Aprf l 1913. 16. b n d a Venkatappayya, The Andhra Movement, The Andhra

Mahasabha publ icat ion, Series-1, 19 38, PO 18 17. The Hindu, dated 24 ~ p r i l 1913.

Andhra Movement as a Brahmin Movement. According to

him, t h e Telugu Brahmin was more in Union with the Tamil

~ r a h m i n than w i t h t h e Telugu non-Brahmin. I t i s w r t h

no t ing h e r e t h a t i n those days almost a l l t h e a c t i v e

opponents of t h e Andhra Province i n t h e Ceded D i s t r i c t s

never a t t ended any Andhra Conference t o explain t h e i r

p o i n t of view. 18

In December 1913, a deputation appointed by the

Standing Committee o f t h e Andhra Conference, cons i s t ing of

the Secre ta ry and D r . Pa t t abh i Sitaramayya, Mutnuri

Krishna Rao and V a l l u r i Suryanarayana Rao, members of t h e

Standing Committee went on a l e c t u r i n g t o u r through

Rayalaseema, i n o rder to e l i c i t pub l ic opinion on t h e

quest ion of t h e Province. The deputat ion, accordingly,

v i s i t e d almost a l l t h e important c e n t r e s of Rayalaseema.

They addressed publ ic meetings end held interviews with

l eaders of t h e region. The deputat ion met with c o r d i a l

r ecep t ion everywhere. There was general agreement a s to

the d e s i r a b i l i t y o f c o n s t i t u t i n g a l l the Telugu districts

i n t o a s e p a r a t e Province though i n some places , doubt was

expressed a s t o whether t h e i n t e r e s t s of Rayalaseema m u l d

18. =. , da ted 18 May 1914.

be properly looked in to by the people of the Circars.

Ambng8t t h e e a r l i e r supporters of the question of the

mdhra Province in Rayalaseema, mention may be made of

the following gentlemen, Messrs Harisarvottama Rao,

Desapmdya Subba Rao, Mahanandayya and Narsinga Rao of

Nandyal, C.V. Narasimha Rao of Kurnool, Messrs. Virur

Pitchayya and K. Gundu Rao of Cuddapah, Ha t t i Sankara Rao

of Dharmavaram, H a t t i Siva Rao of Anantapur, Kolachala-

mala Srinivasa Rao of Bellary, Nemali Pat tabhi Rama Rao

of Madanapalli and Ramakrishnareju of Chit toor , But

Keshav P i l l a i of Cooty, Iyengar of Chittoor and Gopala-

swami Mudaliar of Bellary opposed the Movement. 19

Though some of the e lde r ly lawyers in Chit toor were

opposed t o t he question of the Province, people in the

v i l l age , i n t h e d i s t r i c t , warmly welcomed the Movement

a s was evidenced by the Proceeding8 of t he Conference

he ld a t a l a t e r da te a t T i r u t t a n i under the Presidentship

of the Hon. M r . K,V. Rangaswamy Iyengar of Srirangam, a

member of t he supreme Legis la t ive Council. A reso lu t ion

advocating t h e formation of a separate Province f o r t he

19. Konda Venka tappa~a , Op.cit., p. 21.

Andhras, was passed by an overwhelming majority,

in s p i t e of s t rong opposition put up by m. Dora~wamy

Iyengar and h i s f r i ends from Chittoor. 20

The second Kurnool D i s t r i c t Conference (1915) and

the Cuddapah D i s t r i c t Conference ( 1916) f u l l y supported

the Andhra Movement and its ideals . The t h i r d Kurnool

D i s t r i c t Conference (1916) and the Madanapalli Divisional

Conference subscribed t o the demand for an Andhra

Province. 21

The 21st Session of the Madras Provincial Conference

held in Nellore in 1915, was t h e f i r s t t o meet in t h e

Telugu d i s t r i c t s a f t e r the b g i n n i n g of the Andhra Mow-

ment. I t was expected t h a t t h e Andhras a t tending the

Conference would t r y to r a i s e t h e issue of Andhra Province

a t the ~ o n f e r s n c e . ~ ~ But K. Ekambara Aiyar, a Tamil

pleader domiciled in Nandyal ( ~ u r n o o l d i s t r i c t ) and Keshav

P i l l a i of Gooty, took ser ious exception t o discussions

20. g. 21. Kurnool D i s t r i c t Conference r The Hindu, 26 October 1915,

5,7 and 9 December 1916; and G.0.487 Public, dated 15 March 19161 0.0.62, Home, 24, January 1917; Cuddapah D i s t r i c t Conference r The Hindu, 21 November 1916f Madanapalli Divisional Conference: New India, 20 March 1917.

22. The Hindu, dated 17 April 1915.

a t t h e Conference o f any "academic questionm.23 So,

t h e ques t ion was n o t d iscussed a t t h e Conference. Comment-

i ng on t h i s a correspondent t o the Andhra P a t r i k a observed r

"These P i l l a i s and Ayyars w i l l never sympathisa wi th t h e

Andhra Movement. They came t o tha Andhra country to make

money and go back to t h e i r n a t i v e homes. Our sepa ra t ion

from t h e Tamiliana w i l l c e r t a i n l y n o t a f f e c t t h e un i ty o f

t h e Indian na t ion , b u t w i l l s u r e l y a f f e c t t h e supremacy

of t h e Tamil ians i n the Telugu country ,.. who was it t h a t

s tood a g a i n s t t h e ques t ion of an AnAhre Province coming

up f o r d i scuss ion i n t h e Congress a t Madras. 24

Why d i d t h e people o f Nel lore d i s t r i c t oppose t h e

demand f o r a s e p a r a t e Andhra S t a t e ? There were some

reasons f o r t h i s . T i l l 1917, t h e t e r r i t o r i a l l i m i t s o f

Andhradesa, according t o t h e advocates of t h e Andhra Move-

ment d i d n o t i nc lude Madras. The people o f Nel lore f e l t

t h a t t h e formation o f a s e p a r a t e Province might dep r ive

them of t h e educat ional , p r o f e s s i o n a l and o t h e r f a c i l i t i e s

a v a i l a b l e a t Madras, which was n e a r e r t o them than any

o t h e r developed town in the Andhra area . 2 5

23. ibid., 21,26,27 and 29 , A p r i l 1915. 24. m r a P a t r i k . da ted 5 May 1915. 25. The Hindu. 28'0ctober 1916 and a l s o in t e rv i ew wi th

b-i Reddy, former C.M. of Andhra Pradesh da ted

The f i f t h Andhra Conference was held a t Nellore in

1917. A minority people opposed the formation of the

~ n d h r a But t h i s Conference marks a turning po in t

in the h i s t o r y of the Andhra Movement. 0 . Venkata

~ a n g a i a h was t h e Chairman of t h e Reception Committee. He

was a supporter of t h e Andhra Province, Konda Venkatappayya

presided over t h e Conference. The opponents of a separate

Province were determined t o de fea t t h e resolution on

Andhra Province. Of t h e 740 delegates, more than 480

belonged t o t h e Nellore d i s t r i c t . 27 So, Harisarvottama

Rao, a delegate from Kurnool, proposed t h a t t h e voting

should be by d i s t r i c t s , one vote being given t o each

d i s t r i c t . But M. Chengaiah (an advocate from ello ore) and

Venkatachalam objected t o it. A t l a s t , 547 supported the

proposition of Harisarvottame Rao and 450 opposed it. 28

Most of t h e Reddis and other Nel lor ians , f rust ra ted by t h e

f u t i l i t y of t h e i r e f f o r t s , abstained from fur ther p a r t i c i -

pation in t h e Conference f o r t h e day, met separate ly a t

t h e Town Hall in t h e evening and passed a resolut ion t h a t

a separate Province was no t necessary, but would be

' des i rab le only i f (a) Madras was included in the s a i d

26. Konda Venkatappayya, 0 c i t e , P-270 27. m e Hindu, 2 June 191- 28. New Xndia, 5 June 1917.

province, (b) Madras was made t h e cap i ta l , and (c) the

new province meant no addi t ional taxation. The Hon'ble

B.N. Sarma succeeded in pacifying them and they p a r t i c i -

pated i n t h e nex t days session. When the resolut ion on

the Andhra Province was taken up'they moved an amendment

f o r t h e inclusion of Madras i n the Andhra Province a s

i ts c a p i t a l . 29

The l eaders of t h e Ci rca rs and the Ceded D i s t r i c t 8

joined hands t o p r e s s t h e i s sue of Andhra Province on t h e

Secretary of S t a t e f o r India when he v i s i t e d Madras. Of

the 27 members of the Andhra deputation, who waited on

Montagu, more than ten were from non-Circar d i s t r i c t s .

Prominent among them were r G. Harisarvottama Rao,

N. Pa t t abh i Rama Rao, V. Pitchayya, P. Chenchayya,

H, Sankara Rao, N. Venkatasubbaiah, S.V. Narasimha Rao,

P. Pattabhirama Reddi and B. Ramanna. 30 The Andhra

Pradesh Congress Committee formed in 1918 had already

included Madras in i ts ju r i sd ic t ion . The Andhra PWrince

envisaged Prom 1918 onwards included the City of Madras

29. For the Proceedings of t h i s "Stormy Session", see New InBia, 1 and 5 June 1917, and a l so see The Hindu, 1,2 .and $ June 1917.

30. New Ind ia , dated 20 December 1917.

The Ceded Districts Congressmen expressed a d e s i r e

t h a t t h e n e x t Conference should be presided by l e a a s r e

from t h e Ceded D i s t r i c t s t o provide oppor tun i t i es f o r

them t o t a k e a c t i v e p a r t i n t h e Congress. So, i n 1918,

1919 and 1920, t h e Conferences were held a t Cuddapah,

Anantapur and Mahanandi (near Nandyal, Kurnool District),

respect ively. The A M s Sessions were presided over by

N. p a t t a b h i r a m Rao (Ceded D i s t r i c t s ) , G. Harisarvottama

Rao (Ceded D i s t r i c t s ) and Ranganatha Mudaliar (ceded

~ i s t r i c t s ) respect ively.

But t h e d i f fe rences between t h e Circara and Rayala-

seemaites rose up i n t h e meetings of the Andhra Provincial

Congress Committee (Hereaf ter it is mentioned as APCC)

held a t Bezawada on 4th and 5th Ju ly , 1924. T i l l then,

no one from Rayalaseema was chosen a s t h e Pres iden t of

t h e APCC. D. Gopalakrishnayya moved a reso lu t ion t o e l e c t

Har i sa rmt tama Rao of Ceded D i s t r i c t s a s Pres iden t of t h e

APCC. The major i ty of t h e de lega tes were from t h e Ci rca rs

and t h e r e s o l u t i o n was defeated, Harisarvottama Rao could

be e l e c t e d only a s a Secretary. The discontended Rayala-

31. See t h e reso lu t ion of t h e AMs, The Hindu, dated 3 June 1918.

seema l e a d e r s demanded a separa te Congress Province f o r

themselves? bu t even tua l ly t h e r e was a compromise whers-

by t h e Seema was c o n s t i t u t e d i n t o an autonomous u n i t ,

c a l l e d a Suba and G. Harisarvbttama Rao a s Subedar to

look a f t e r i t s a f f a i r s . Within a few months, however,

the Chief Sec re t a ry a t Bezawada, A. Kaleswara Rao Pantulu

managed t o see t h a t t h e Suba o f f i c e was c losed down and

t h e Subedar was l e f t over with no o f f i c e bu t only e Sabha. 32

In 1918, T.K. Narasimhachari of Chi t toor a l s o wanted a

sepa ra t e Congress Circle f o r Rayalaseema. 33 The

suggestion f o r a sepa ra t e Congress C i r c l e f o r Rayalaseema

Districts was occas iona l ly repeated in l a t e r y e a r s a l so ,

bu t the demand was n o t s t rong,

The demand f o r a s epa ra t e Province wi th Madras and

some o r a l l t h e Ceded D i s t r i c t s and o t h e r nelghbouring

d i s t r i c t s l i k e Chingalput and N ~ r t h Arcot was mooted

l a t e r a l s o on some occasions, bu t t h e r e was no p e r s i s t e n t

demand, no a g i t a t i o n f o r it. Nobody s i n c e r e l y and

incessan t ly worked f o r it. Those who argued f o r it d id

so only t o expres s t h e i r opposi t ion t o an Andhra Province.

32. 'Rayalaseema P o l i t i c s ' , Federated India , 1 September 1937, 33. The Hindu, 4 February 1918.

~ h u s it was more a re fusa l to become pa r t of the Andhra

province than a pos i t ive des i re f o r a separate Province.

There was no t much Support fo r a separate Province of

Rayalaseema a t any time. The obvious reason was t h a t

many of t he Congressmen in the Ceded Di s t r i c t s , though

they might d i f f e r with the Congressmen in the Circars on

cer ta in occasions, were not against an Andhra Province. 34

~t was only the non-Congressmen, par t icu lar ly t he jus t ices

of Rayalaseema, who opposed it.

The Issue of the Andhra University

The i ssue of the Andhra University arose during

1925-29. Bezawada was chosen as t he headquarters of t h e

University, Two persons belonged t o Chittoor d i s t r i c t

were responsible fo r t h i s , viz., The Raja Saheb of Panagel

and the f i r s t Vice-Chancellor, namely, D r . Cattamanch i

Ramalinga Reddy. With the f u l l e s t co-operation, the

University commenced i ts work in Bezawada. But t he re

were jea lous ies and in t r igues between the leaders of

Bezawada and Rajahmundry. Bezawada t r i e d t o remove the

college located a t Rajahmundry. On the other hand,

34. u., 2 July 1931..

~a j ahmunary worked f O r t ransfer r ing the headquarters

from Bezawade. A t l a s t , it was shif ted to Waltair,

The people of Rayalaseema thought t h a t Madras was much

nearer t o them than the d i s t an t Walkair. Hence, they

decided t o re-join t he Madras University. Result was

t h a t there have s ince ar isen differences between t h e

Circars ' leaders and those of Rayalaseema diviaion among

the people and indifference of the seemaites bwards a

new Andhra Province, for which they had been ag i ta t ing

fo r years previously along with the r e s t of t h e i r fellow

Andhras, 35

Andhra University was inaugurated on 26 April 1926 a t

Bezawada. But t he question of centre and the Location of

the headquarters created problem. Bezawada was t h e

na tura l headquarters. Sometime a f t e r the inauguration,

the Syndicate of t h e University unanimoualy restored in

favour of a fourth centre a t Bezawada. With the endorse-

ment of v ice-~hance l lor , t he resolution was forwarded t o

the Madras Government. The Secretary t o the Education

Department opposed it on f inanc ia l grounds. But, he

35. Rayalaseeme p o l i t i c s , Federated India, dated 1.9.19 370

suggested t h a t if t he centre could be sh i f ted from

~ajahmundry to Bezawada, then the headquarters must be

sh i f ted t o Rajahmundry.36 A Conference held on Andhra

~ n i v e r s i t y on 7 Apri l 1927. The Governor, the Chief

~ i n i s t e r D r . Subbarayan, the Director of Public

~ n s t r u c t i o n and the Vice-Chancellor C.R. Reddy were

present a t t h e Conference. They decided t o continue the

headquarters a t ~ e z a w a d a . ~ ~ This led a r i va l ry between

Rajahmundry and Bezawada. A t t h i s stage, the Ceded

~ i s t r i c t s , which were educationally more backward than the

Circar d i s t r i c t s wanted t h a t the headquarters of the

University be s i tua ted in t h e i r region to a id the progress

of educetion, In t he Andhra Mahasabha C~nference, which

was held in Anantapur resolved t h a t t he headquarters of

the University should be sh i f ted to ~nan tapu r . l8 The

Senate o f t h e Andhra University r e s ~ l v e d by 35 t o 20 to

make Anantapur the headquarters of the University. 39

36, A. Kaleswara Rao, Na Jeevithakatha Nawandhramu (Vijayawada, 1959), p.273.

37. See, Proceedings of the Madras Legislat ive Councilt V01.39, 1928, p.359.

38, The Hindu, 16 November 1927. 39. Vide A ~ ~ e n d i x to the Proceedings of the Madras Legisla.

t i v e ~%nuncil, V01.39, 1936, p.360.

The Madras Government, on the other hand, had

d i f f e r en t views on the question of the Andhra University.

Then the Chief Minister of Madras was Dr . Subbarayan,

He, in September 1928, put in an amendment in favour of

Ftajahmundry in place of Bezawada, a s the headquarters.

H ~ S government did not accept the recommendations of the

Jo in t Se lec t Committee and the Senate and the suggestions

of the AMs, t h a t the headquarters of the Andhra University

should be in Anantapur. In short, the Oovernment would

prefer no t only sh i f t i ng the headquarters from Bezawada

to Vizagapatam, but also r e a f f i l i a t i n g a l l ex is t ing

colleges i n the Andhra University area t o the Madras

University. The University B i l l f i na l l y came up fo r

discussion in the Legislative Council on 28 January 1929.

D r . Subbarayan68 amendment seeking to es tab l i sh the head-

quarters a t Vizagapatam was carr ied by 68 t o 28. 40

The Andhras favaured Anentaput as the headquarters

of the Andhra University. The a t t i t ude of Dr. Subbarayan's

Government t o the Andhra University may have been the

outcome. Amng other things, C.R. Reddi, who himself

40. Proceedings of the Madras Legislative Council, Vo1.46, 1929, pp.249-250.

h a i l e d from t h e Ceded D i s t r i c t s was a lso responsible

f o r t h e change of headquarters from ~ e z a w ~ d a . ~ ' More

l i k e l y , the a t t i t u d e of Subbarayan towards t h e Andhra

membgrs of t h e Council, t o express the lack of confidence

in h i s min i s t ry in August 1 9 ~ 7 . ~ ~ The Rayalaseema

d i s t r i c t s suspected t h a t the in t r igues of t h e Ci rca rs

prevented t h e locat ion of t h e University headquarters

in t h e i r region. If Anantapur were made the headquarters

of t h e Andhra University, t h e r e was much cord ia l r e l a t i o n s

between the Circars and the Rayalaseema and strengthened

the movement f o r an Andhra Province. I t was a g r e a t blow

t o t h e u n i t y of Andhradesa, t h a t the c u t t i n g o f f the

Rayalaseema d i s t r i c t s from t h e operation of the

un ivers i ty . 4 3 From then onwards, the Rayalaseema delegates

opposed t o t h e reso lu t ion of separation of the Andhra

Province.

In 1931, t h e Rayalaseema Congressmen se r ious ly consi-

dered t h e question of Andhra Province. P. Ramachari, a

prominent Congress member of Anantapur and Edi tor , Sadhana

Pa t r ika , observed r "Now t h a t t h e whole question of Ind ia

41. A. Kaleswara Rao, 0 .cit., pp.271-272. 42. The Hindu, 26 l u g u h 7 . 43, Andhra University Convocation Address Azaraiah, 19291

is in t he remaking, it is l i k e l y the question of

carving provinces on l i n g u i s t i c bas i s may be discussed

a t the Round Table Conference. Hence, the western

Andhras ( L e e , the Rayalaseema) a re a s t i r and examining

the pros and cons of the (Andhra Province) question

ca re fu l ly espec ia l ly , in the l i g h t of t he Andhra

Universi ty experiencett, 44

The Subjects Committee meeting of the Andhra

Provincial Conference was held i n 1931. A t t h i s Session,

t he re was a prolonged discussion on the resolut ion in

favour of t h e Andhra Province. I n t h e beginning, the

Rayalaseema delegates opposed it. But, a t the open

session, t h e Rayalaseema delegates were neut ra l on the

reso lu t ion , request ing Gandhi t o make necessary s teps

f o r L ingu i s t i c Provinces and the formation of the

Andhra Province. 4 5

A spec i a l Conference of the AMs was held in

October, 1931, in Madras, under t he Chairmanship of

K. Koti Reddy, a prominent Congressmen from Rayalaseema.

A delegate, Kal lur i Subba Rao of Anantapur amended t h a t

4 4 , The Hindu, 28 June 1931. 45. w., 30 June 1931.

there should be weightage for Rayalaseema in t he Andhra

~ e g i s l a t u r e and the location of the capi ta l a t Bezawada

w i t h i t s summer s ea t a t Madanapalli. He withdrew the

amendment on being assured of t he appointment of a

Committee t o enquire in to the matter. Another delgate

from Rayalaseema, K. Subrahmanyam, mved an amendment

recommending t he formation of two separate Federal Telugu

Provinces, West and East, one comprising t he Rayalaseema

and Nellore d i s t r i c t s and the other , t he remaining

d i s t r i c t s , and the appointment of a "Commission" t o

s e t t l e t he boundaries of the two Provinces in t he Telugu

l i n g u i s t i c area,46 These amendments created a deep

d i s t r u s t of t he Circar districts prevalent in Rayalaseema.

A Corni t tee was appointed, t o remove t he misunderstandings

between t he Rayalaseema and Circar d i s t r i c t s , consis t ing

of K. Nageswara Rao, P i l la lamarr i Anjaneyulu, Dr . Chilaka-

luru Narayana Rao, V. Govindachari, J. Kuppuswamy Chowdary,

G. Harisarvottama Rao, K. Koti Reddy, Vavilala Venka-

teawara Sastry, V. Rarnachandra Rao and Tekuri Subrahmanyam.

In November 1933, i n the Madras Council, a discussion

s t a r t e d on t h e reso lu t ion of the Andhra Province, moved

by Koti Reddy's amendment t h a t i f Madras was made t h e

c a p i t a l of Andhra Province, t h e Ceded D i s t r i c t s would n o t

oppose an Andhra Province. 47

The people of Rayalaseema opposed Andhra Province

and Andhra University. So, they es tabl ished Rayalaseema

Mahasabha f o r themselves in 1934. The f i r s t Rayalaseema

Mahasabha was he ld on 28 January 1934, t o d i scuss the

following s u b j e c t s r 4 8

( a ) To p r o t e s t a g a i n s t t h e inclusion of Rayalaseema

a rea in t h e Andhra Univers i ty and t o appeal t o the Members

of t h e Council t o vo te down t h e amendment b i l l 1

(b) To p r o t e s t a g a i n s t the inclusl.on of Rayalaseema

in t h e propcrsed Andhra Province: and t o devise ways ou t

D £ means f o r ( i ) securing a University a t T i r u p a t i o u t of

su rp lus funds of the Devasthanam and ( i i ) t o ca r ry o u t t h e

p r o j e c t of ~ u n ~ a b h a d r a ~ ' and such o t h e r quest ions t h a t

may be brought up f o r discussion by t h e delegate .

47. See Proceedings of the Madras Leg is la t ive Council, 1933, Vo1.67, pp.198-227 and Vo1.68, pp.958-972.

48. The Hindu, 26 January 1934. 49. It is t h e p r o j e c t of i r r i g a t i o n .

N. P a t t a b h i Rams Rao presided the f i r s t s e ~ s i o n

of t h e Rayalaseema Mahasabha (hereaf te r it is mentioned

a s RMS) and t h e Reception Committee was headed by C.L.

Narasimha eddy, Satyamurthi, a Tamllian, opened the

Conference. Already he was against t o t h e locat ion of

t h e headquarters of Andhra University a t Anantapur, 51

The second RMS was held in Cuddapah in t h e f i r s t

week of September 1935, Important leaders of Rayalaseema

l i k e Kot i Reddy, Hariaarvottama Rao and P. Ramachari, e t c , ,

a t tended it. But prominent Congressmen did not a t t end

t h e f i r s t Conference a t Madras and a l so t h e second one.

Only t h e members of t h e Jus t i ce Party supported and

attended t h e RMS. 52

When e l e c t i o n s were held t o the Madras Legislative

Assembly and t h e Madras Leg is la t ive Council, according to

t h e Act of 1935, fo r t h e f i r s t time in 1937, some of t h e

prominent members of t h e RMS l i k e C.L, Narasimha Reddy,

K. Subrahmanyam, e t c . who opposed t h e Andhra Province,

contested t h e e l e c t i o n s in Rayalaseem and los t . The

50. Proceedings of the Madras Leg is la t ive Council, Vo3.46, 1929, p.119.

51. Comments in Prabhudattandbrs, September, 1935, p. 286. 52. The Hindu, 28 & 29 January 1934.

demand f o r a w ? a r a t e Andhra Province gained s t reng th

soon a f t e r t h e elect ions. Pat tabhi Sitaramayya toured

t h e Rayalaseema t o obtain t h e i r support bu t found t h a t

they were non-co-operative.

Actual ly , the Congress leaders of t h e Reyalaseema

~ i s t r i c t s were n o t aga ins t the formation of separate

province, But they had no f a i t h in the Circar leaders ,

because they knew t h e a t t i t u d e s of the Ci rca r s 3ver the

changing of Andhra Univers i ty headquarters, from proposed

Anantapur t o Visakhapatnam. 53

A f t e r e l e c t i o n s , t h e f i r s t Congress minis t ry formed

in Madras, under the leadership of R a j a j i , cons i s t ed of

10 min i s te r s , and t en Parliamentary Secre ta r i es . Out of

24 jobs, including t h e Speaker and the Deputy Speaker of

t h e Assembly and t h e Chairman and the Deputy Chairman of

t h e Council, 10 went t o ~ n d h r a s . ' ~ In h i s minis t ry , he

had taken only 3 Telugus. They a r e T. Prakasam,

B. Gopala Reddy and V.V. Giri represented from Coastal

Andhra." An~thher important th ing is, he had n o t taken

53. Mal le la Srirama Murthy, Andhra Patr ika , Vol.XVIf, 1938, pp.69-93.

54. Rayalaaeema P o l i t i c s , Federated India, 1 September 19 374 55. ~,o.~o.p.4-13, ~ o r t n i u k t l y R e m r t , dated 23 July 1937.

any member from Bellary, Anan tapur, Kurnool, Cuddaph

and Chittoor d i s t r i c t s in any of f ice . This created d i s -

s a t i s f a c t i o n in Rayalaseema and they thought t h a t the

Andhra l e a d e r s d id n o t ac t ive ly p ress t h e claima of

Rayalaseema f o r p o s i t i o n s in the ministry. This created

the i l l - l e e l i n g s a g a i n s t ~ i r c a r s . ' ~ These reasons delayed

t h e formation of Andhra Province. A t Madanapalli, Papanna

Gupta t o l d P a t t a b h i t h a t "we will see how you a r e going

t o g e t your Andhra Province without o u r c s o p e r a t i o n n .

But, PaLtabhi Sitaramayya requested t h e Rayalaseemaites

t o excuse t h e Ci rca r s and b u t n o t join the Tamils and

suggested t h a t i f they d i s t r u s t e d t h e Circars , they could

ask f o r c e r t a i n safeguards in t h e Andhra Province. 5 7

R a j a j i a t T i ruchenpdu and T.S.S. Rajan, another

Tamil Min i s te r a t Raj ahmundry , spoke in unf avourable

terms regarding t h e cons t i tu t ion of an Andhra Province.

Satyamurthi was a l s o repor ted to have sympathised with

t h e f e e l i n g of separatism among Rayalaseema people. A l l

t hese made Pa t t abh i comment r "It appears t h a t t h e B r i t i s h

would g r a n t us independence sooner than the Tamil Minis ters

56. Rayalaseema P o l i t i c s , Federated I n d i a , 1 September 1937, 57. Andhra Pa t r ika , 12 October 1937.

would give us a separate ~ r o v i n c e " . ~ ~ with the

c r i t i c i sm of Rajaj i , the C.M. of Madras, the youth of

~ezawada decided t o organise t he AMS Si lver Jubi lee

Session, from 25th to 29th of October 1 9 3 7 , ~ ~ a t Bezawada,

Before the Session, when Dr. Pattabhi t3ured a l l over the

Rayalaseema, he won the i r hear t s towards the formation of

separate Andhra, and he was responsible t o brought two

p a r t i e s on a s ing le platform t o discuss t h e i r differences.

In t he Session of 16th Andhra Provincial Conference,

held a t Nandyal ( 2 1 June 19371, Messrs, Kal lur i Subba Rao

(Anantap-) and Parthasarathy (Cuddapah) speaking on t he

resolut ion ca l l i ng on the Andhra leaders t 3 ge t t he Ceded

D i s t r i c t s and Chittoor again included in t he hndhra

University area, sa id t h a t for promoting unity amng

Andhras and f o r the progress of the Rayalaseemaites,

such inclusion was absolutely necessary. Mr. C.R, Reddi

was cilso keen on these d i s t r i c t s being t ransfer red t o

t he Andhra University jur isdict ion. S. Radhakrishnan had

promised t h a t i f the Rayalaseemaites agree t o t he t ransfer ,

probably it would be qu i t e possible to develop Anantapur

58. ibid. , 15 October 1937. 59. m e l a Sriramamurthy, OD. c i t e

in to a University @ducat isnal centre ultimately. There

was a l so t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of a Law College being s t a r t ed

a t Anantapur. They urged the resolution might be

passed immediately.60 The r e s ~ l u t i o n was passed

unanim~us ly . The AMS was attended by the Rayalaseema leaders l i ke

K. Koti Reddi, Sitarama Reddy, Ramakrishna Reddy, Kalluri

Subba Rao, etc . , and inaugurated by H. Sitararna Reday,

M.L.A. It was presided over by K. Koti Reddy. Both the

p a r t i e s agreed t o s e t t l e the problems regarding t h e i r

differences, They enumerated a number of safeguards and

appealed t o t he Circars t o incorporate them in t he

programme f o r achieving a separate Prsvince and t o get

the approval of the APCC and AICC fo r it. The safeguard5

required may be summarised a s follows t (1) ~ o c a t i n g the

c a p i t a l of t he Andhra Province a t Madras o r a t any place

in Rayalaseema; ( 2 ) Weightage fo r Rayalaseema in the

Legislature; (3) Par i ty of representation in the Ministry

between the Circar and Rayalaseema; ( 4 ) Immediate sanction

of p ro j ec t s l i k e the Tungabhadra and Hangeri in view of

60. Indian Anne1 Reqister, 1937, Vol.1, Calcutta, p.277.

t h e economic backwardness of Rayalaseema~ an8 (5 ) Equal

expenditure on Rayalaseema and the Circars . 6 1

E a r l i e r i n t h e month, Koti Reddi, Ka l lu r i Subba Rao,

sankara Reddy and T.N. Ramekrishna Reddy had met repre-

s e n t a t i v e s of t h e C i r c a r s a t Waltair under t h e Chairman-

sh ip of the Vice-Chancellor of the Andhra Univers i ty and

agreed t o include t h e Rayalaseema d i s t r i c t s in t h e Andhra

Univers i ty a r e a on c e r t a i n conditions. Pa t tabh i S i ta -

ramayya a l luded t o t h i a agreement,62 suggested t h e

guarantees and safeguards t h a t may be sought by Rayala-

seema p r i o r t o working with o t h e r Telugus towards the

immediate formation of an Andhra Pnvince . The guarantees

and safeguard3 were t o be r a t i f i e d a t a l a t e r session of

t h e Andhra Conference t o be held i n Rayalaseema. The

Committee was t o c o n s i s t ~f K. Koti Reddy, T.N. Rama-

k r i shna Reddy , Konda Venkatappayya, Mahaboob A l i Baig,

Desira ju Hanumanta Rao, Deshpandya Subba Rae, N* Varada-

c h a r i , P. Ramachari, G, Harisarvottama Ra3, Subbarama

Reddi, and others .63 A t t h e A I C C Session, held a t

Calcut ta . a reso lu t ion was passed r e l a t i n g t o the Andhra ~- -

6 1. Ramakrishna Reddy, T.N., Adhyashopanyasamu, Andhra Mahasabha Rajatotsavam, Bezawada, 26 & 27 October 1937,

62. 9. 63. The Hindu, 27 October 1937-

province and recommended Linguist ic Provinces and

ca l l ed upon Madras end Bombay Legislatures t o take s t eps

t o separa te t he Andhra, Karnataka and other Provinces. 64

On 16 November 19 37, t he members of t he Committee,

appointed a t t h e Bezawada Conference (S i lver Jubi lee

session) met a t S r i Bagh, the residence of K. Nageswara

Rae i n Madras, came b an agreement, popularly known a s

"S r i Bagh Pact" on the conditions t o be f u l f i l l e d i f

Rayalaseema should co-operate with t he Coastal d i s t r i c t s

in t he demand f o r an Andhra Province. The terms of t h e

pac t were : 65

Universi ty t This Committee is of opinion t h a t two

Universi ty cent res a r e t o be developed under the h d h r a

University, one a t Waltair and the o ther a t Anantapur

so a s t o d i s t r i b u t e the centres of cu l ture over the

Andhradesa, and crea te opportuni t ies f o r soc i a l and

c u l t u r a l intercgurse amngst the Andhras and locate

co l leges in a reas favourable t o the subjects d e a l t with.

I r r i g a t i o n t That t o ensure the rapid development

of t h e a g r i c u l t u r a l and economic i n t e r e s t s of Rayalaseema

64. The Indian Express, dated 1 and 6 November 1937. 65, Konaa Venkatappama, OD. c i t . , see ~ p ~ e n d i x I, p. 39.

and Nellore t o t h e l eve l of those in the Coastal

d i s t r i c t s , schemes of i r r iga t ion should, for a period

of ten years o r such longer period a s conditions may

necess i ta te , be given a preferen t ia l claim special ly i n

respect of t he u t i l i s a t i o n of the waters of Tungabhadra,

Krishna and Pennar, giving fo r ten years exclusive

a t ten t ion in respec t of major pro jec ts beneficial to

these areas.

That whenever the question of sharing waters arose,

the needs ~f t he aforesaid areas be f i r s t met and t h a t

t h i s pol icy be implemented as from to-day in the admini-

s t r a t i o n of the Province,

Legislature t That in the matter of general s ea t s

in the Legislature, the d is t r ibu t ion s h a l l be generally

on an equal d i s t r i c t basis.

I t is agreed t h a t t he location of the University, t h e

headquarters and the High C3urt may advantageously be in

d i f f e r e n t p laces so a s not t o concentrate a l l c i v i c

importance a t the same centre.

Accordingly, it i s agreed t h a t while t he University

may continue t o be where it is, t he High Court and

the Metropolis be located in su i tab le places i n t h e

Coastal d i s t r i c t s and the Rayalaseema, t h e choice being

given t o t h e Rayalaseema.

It s h a l l , however, be open t o vary these terms by

common consent.

The Ci rcar leaders were very much in te res ted t o w i n

t he co-operation of Rayalaseemaites. SO, they accepter3

a l l t h e demands of Rayalaseemaites. A t l a s t , the Rayala-

seema joined in t he Andhra University. 6 6

The 17th Session of the Andhra Provincial Conference

held a t Nageswara Nagar, Tungabhadra on 27th Apri l 1938,

under t h e Presidentship of Kal lur i Subba Rao, He made a

s t rong p l e a f o r t h e cons t i tu t ion of Andhra a s a separate

Province. I t ca l led upon t h e APCC and the Standing

Committee t o watch the development: of t he problem of

Linguis t ic Provinces and ho ld themselves in readiness t o

send a deputation t o the Secretary of S t a t e and t h e

Viceroy when the occasion demanded.

66. A m r i t Bazat Patr ika ( ~ a l c u t t a ) , dated 3.5.19 38.

A ~ ~ r a n d u m submitted t 0 the Assembly of Madras,

regarding t h e separa te Andhra by t h e Andhra l eaders

was forwarded t h e Government of India on 2 1 A p r i l 1938,

Meanwhile t h e Secre ta ry of S t a t e f o r India declared t h a t

t h e G~vernment was n o t in te res ted t 2 c r e a t e any new S t a t e

in ~ n d i a . ~ ~ The Executive Csmmittee of t h e RMS met a t

Bel lary on 26 May 1938, under the Presidentship of

Mr. D.S. Hanumantha Rao, Those present included Messrs

A. Veeraswami, H. Linga Reddi, D. Venugopalachari, N,M,

S a s t r i and H. Sitarama Reddi. In t h i s Session, a

r e s o l u t i o n was passed s t a t i n g t h a t Rayalaseema is o p p ~ s e d

t o t h e farmation of an Andhra Pravince till i ts economic

needs and demands a r e f u l l y s a t i s f i e d and request ing t h e

Premier t o communicate t h i s view t o the Secretary of

S t a t e f o r India. The Madras Government were requested

no t t a make any s p e c i a l representat ion to the Secretary of

S t a t e f o r I n d i a f o r t h e immediate formation of an Andhra

Province, unless a s p e c i a l r eso lu t ion was brought in the

Leg is la tu re and approved by it, and n o t t o commit R a ~ a l a o

seema t o t h e immediate formation of an Andhra

- - - - -

67, The Ind_ian Express, 3 May 1938*

u n l e s s a p l e b i s c i t e was taken on it in Rayalaseema. 68

"Another Rayalaseema Mahasabha was he ld towards t h e

end o f 1938 a t Adoni. T. Bhujanga Rao inaugurated the

ses s ion . I t was n o t l i k e t h a t of t h e se s s ions of 1934

and 19 35. The main aim of t h e Session was t h e postpone-

ment o f s e p a r a t e Andhra Province. There were t h r e e

reasons f o r t h e postponement of s epa ra t e Provinces r 69

( 1) Admin i s t r a t ive reason r (The r e s e r v o i r , an i c u t

and c a n a l s o f Tungabhadra P r o j e c t would be in two

L i n g u i s t i c Provinces) . When t h e r e must be u n i f i e d c o n t r o l

f o r the execut ion o f t h e Tungabhadra P ro jec t , which to u s

i s very impor tant , how can w e agree t o t h e immediate

format ion of s e p a r a t e Provinces? , . (2) The s o c i o - p o l i t i c a l reason t With t h e formation

of a new Andhra Province and t h e moral encouragement of

an Andhra Government i n power, we may, i n t h i s age of

acu te unemployment, expect soon a l a r g e i n f l u x o f t h e

members of t h e va r ious such a s lawyers,

doc to r s , c l e r k s , engineers and merchants from t h e Coas ta l

68. The Execut ive Committee Proceedings, 26 May 1938. 69. Rayalaseema Conference, Adoni Opening Address

Dewan Bahedur T, Bhujanga Rao, D i s t r i c t Judge (Ret i red) , 24 December 1938, pp.4-11-

d i s t r i c t s i n to Our d i s t r i c t s , How are our' young mcn,

of a t l e a s t t he next generation, to compete w i t h the

i m i g r a n t s unless we lay betimes the foundation of an

economic prosperi ty, through the Tungabhadra and other

schemes? With such schemes r i s ing Rayalaseema may also

turn ou t merchants and doctors and lawyers and others

able t o hold t h e i r own in t he competition of l i f e ,

Else t h e sons of t he s o i l would be without influence on

t h e i r own s o i l . Unless f i ve d i s t r i c t s of Rayalaseema

can p u l l together they cannot in fu ture Andhra . , . our

demand f o r the precedence of t he Tungabhadra and other

schemes i s based on the urge of self-preservation,

(3) The f inanc ia l reason r: I f the Andhra Province

were a province having a d e f i c i t of Rs.90 lakhs per year,

i s t he re any reasonable chance of i t s taking up the

Tungabhadra and other schemes?" . . . The decisions of t he Secretary of S ta te for India

and the Rayalaseernaites were much disappointed the Andhras,

So a publ ic meeting was held a t the Congress House in

Madras on 29 June 1938. D r . Pattabhi Sitararnayya presided

over t h e Session. K. Koti Reddi, M. Tirurnala Rao, Gadde

~ a n g a i a h Naidu, Pallam Raju, etc. , attended it. The

need f o r a separate Andhra Province was s tressed in the .

meeting.70 The h d h r a Provincial Congress Committee led

a deputation t o solve the problem by creation of Andhra

Sta t e on l i n g u i s t i c basis, to the Congress Working

Committee a t Wardha. The Committee consisted of K. Koti

Reddy, K. Subba Rao from Rayalaseema and K. Venkatappayya

and M. Pallam Raju from Coastal d i s t r i c t s . 7 1

Effor t s of S i r Vijaya

I n t h i s condition, S i r Vijayanand of Vijayanagaram

played a g rea t ro l e t o win the hear t s of Rayalaseema. He

toured a l l over the Rayalaseema. Previously, he presided

over t he AM3 a t Vizagapatam in November 1941. In h i s

Pres ident ia l Address he offered a 'blank cheque' t o

Rayalaseema. 72

He interviewed the Governor of Madras and s ta ted

t h a t ' I . , . He asked qui te casually what I thought a b ~ u t a

cap i t a l , I sa id , Madras would be our cap i t a l t o begin witht

and t h a t , a f t e r sometime, we would think of having, it a t

70. The Hindu, 30 June 1938. 71. Andhra Patr ika, 6 July 1938- 72. B e - a a i a n Emress, 10 December 19419

some p lace cen t r a l l y s i tua ted in the Andhradesh. On

the whole, the Governor seemed to be sympathetic towards

Andhra asp i ra t ion '. 73

Me wrote a l e t t e r t o Gandhi on 18.3.1942, on Anahra

Province a s f ~ l l o w s t "There is a strong fee l ing amongst

us, Andhras, t h a t you do not l i k e us, t h a t you are

aga ins t t h e formation and the establishment of a separate

~ r o v i n c e . Despite Andhradesh being overwhelmingly

Congress it never received your blessings. I f th ree

c m r e s of yearning hear t s a r e asking fo r a separate

existence, would you n o t allow them the ' r i g h t t o s in ' - a s t he g rea t Ti lak Maharaj once said? People of my Desh

a r e so d e f i n i t e about your d i s l i k e fo r the bndhraa t ha t

they even a t t r i b u t e your v i s i t t o Benaras recently for

the purpose of commanding me t o drop the Andhra agi tat ion.

The Andhra would l i k e t o know whether you ever gave any

advice to Tamil Nadu regarding Andhras and a l so wish t o

know whether, during the l a s t ministry t he Andhra question

was re fer red t o you o r not! i f so, t h a t advice did you

give them? Do you put the Andhra question on the same

73. Ooshti, dated 22.12.1941.

foot ing a t t h a t of Karnatak and Kerala whose revenues

may n o t be enough to have separate provinces? Pray,

what is your opinion regarding Andhradesh being se l f -

supporting? I t is not a f a c t t ha t , owing t o s tead- fas t

l oya l ty of t h e Andhras t:, t h e Congress movement, they

d id n o t achieve what Orissa d id? I t is f e l t t h a t had

the Andhras taken a d i f f e r e n t l i n e of act ion when the

Simon Commission come t o India, they would have got

t h e i r h e a r t ' s des i re" .

For t h i s l e t t e r of S r i Vijaya, Gandhi rep l ied t h a t ,

"I can only say t h a t t h e Maharaj Kumar is in bad hands.

Being a novice i n t he a r t of handling masses, he was

ev ident ly n o t taken care t o inquire into t he c r eden t i a l s

of h i s informants. I should l i k e t o know the Andhras,

who have given him the information, which he was chosen

t o t r ansmi t t o me. I am n o t a s t ranger t o Andhra Desa

myself. I r e f e r t h e Maharaj Kumar t o Deshabhakta Konda

Venkatappayya, Sh r i Prakasam, D r . Pat tabhi Sitaramafla,

Srf Kaleswara Rao and S r i Sitarama Sastry. They w i l l

probably bear with these t o t h e f a c t t h a t I was pr inc i -

p a l l y instrumental in securing from the Congress the

recogni t ion Of d i s t r i b u t i o n of the Province f o r Congress

purposes on a l i n g u i s t i c basis. I have always a g i t a t e d

f o r t h e acceptance by t h e Government of such r e d i s t r i -

bution. I have indeed adviced Tamil Nadu, when such

advice was needed, no t t o r e s i s t t h e Andhra demand. I

know t h a t t h e Congress ministry headed 'ly Shr i C. Raja-

gopalachari t r i e d t o ge t Andhra recognised a s a separate

Province, and it was no f a u l t of t h e ministry t h a t

Andhradesh has no t y e t been s3 recognised, But it is

t r u e t h a t I recognise no d i s t i n c t i o n between Karnaterk,

Kerala and Andhra o r f o r t h a t matter, any o ther Province

recognised by t h e Congress a s a separate Province. I do

n o t know enough about any Province t o be able t o say which

can be self-supporting Lor being recognised a s separate". 74

S i r Vijaya toured a l l over Rayalaseema and worked

f o r famine r e l i e f , i n the middle of 1943, appealed f o r

funds and co l lec ted more than Rs,70,000 on behalf of t h e

AMS . 7 5 Actually, the Congress leaders of Rayalaseema had

sympathy and appreciated S i r V i jaya 's e f f o r t s . But, they

74. Hari ian, 29 March 1942. 75. The _Indian Express, 14 January 1942.

d i d n o t co-operate with t h e Ci rca rs on t h e quest ion o f

Andhra Province. S i r Vijaya took t h i s quest ion i n a l l

se r iousness . H e met t h e Governor of Madras a number of

times and conveyed t o him t h e reso lu t ions passed by t h e

AMS, d i s c u s s e d the ques t ions of a separa te Andhra

Province, a s e p a r a t e budget f o r Telugu d i s t r i c t s ,

employment o f Andhras in t h e se rv ices , Masulipatnarn sea

p o r t , ? r a d i o s t a t i o n in ~ n d h r a , ~ ~ e t c . When Cr ipp ' s

Mission v i s i t e d India , S i r Vijaya interviewed him on

2 A p r i l 1942 and submitted a memarandurn f o r an Andhra

Province. 77

I n t h e sess ion of AMS, h e l d in October 1943, a t

Be l la ry , he suggested t h a t : ' 'Alth~ugh t h e AMS a s such

is n o t a p o l i t i c a l body of t h e type of t h e Congress o r

t h e League o r t h e Hindu Mahasabha, y e t it should be the

unwri t ten law among us Andhras t h a t t h e f u t u r e repre-

s e n t a t i v e s o f t h e L e g i s l a t u r e s should be chosen from

o u t o f t h e ( ~ n d h r a ) Mahasabha ranks and it should be t h e

du ty o f every e l e c t o r to make sure t h a t t h e man o r t h e

76. Andhra P a t r i k a , 3 January 1944. 77. See P r e s i d e n t i a l Address of S i r Vijaya a t Bel lary

(19431, Session of AMS, PP. 17-22.

women whom h e is choosing is going t o do h i s o r h e r

b e s t t o f u r t h e r our cause . . . Every Andhra should make

a p b i n t of Seeing W a t only those who a r e pledged to h e l p

in s o l v i n g ou r problem a r e re turned a s members of t h e

Leg i s l a tu re . Whether t h i s should be by the candidates

jo in ing some p a r t y o r t h e o t h e r o r otherwise, it i s

y e t tor, e a r l y f o r me t o forecas t" .78 In t h i s Sess ion ,

t h e l e a d e r s wanted t o make AMS a p o l i t i c a l organisa t ion .

T h i s t r e n d o f t h ink ing in t h e AMS was s t rong ly c r i t i c i s e d . 79

According t~ Lord Wavell 's announcement in September,

1945, e l e c t i o n s were h e l d t o t h e Cen t ra l and P rov inc ia l

L e g i s l a t u r e s i n 1946. Whe~i a Parl iamentary de legat ion

from B r i t a i n v i s i t e d Ind ia dur ing 1945-46, S i r Vijaya,

P r e s i d e n t and G.V. Punnayya S a s t r i , Sec re t a ry o f t h e AMS,

submit ted a memorandum, urging t h e formation of a Andhre

Province. Prof. Richard and Sorenson broadly agreed wi th

t h e idea of L i n g u i s t i c Provinces. 80

In December 1945, S i r Norman S t r a t h i e , t h e f i r s t

Advisor t o t h e Madras Goyernor, s t a t e d t h a t t h e Madras

78. x d . , p.7. 79. E d i t o r i a l i n Andhra Pa t r ika , 24 October 1943. 80. See S i r V i j aya ' s P r e s i d e n t i a l Address of t h e 24th AMS

a t Guntur. 23 and 24 February 1946. See Indian Express, 24 February 1946.

province had grown b o b i g and must be s p l i t up, and

Madras could be a separate Province l i k e Delhi, when

t h e Province was divided with Trichy a s c a p i t a l f o r

Tamil Nadu Province and Bezawada f o r Andhra, 8 1

The AMS Session was held a t Guntur, towards t h e end

of February 1946, In h i s Pres iden t ia l Address, S i r Vijaya

repeated t h a t it i s necessary t o t h e members, who were

pledged t o t h e formation of an Andhra Province. Congress-

men won t h e e l e c t i o n s , and by the end of Apri l 1946 the

Congress assumed o f f i c e i n Madras, A few months l a t e r ,

he res igned h i s Presidentship of t h e AMS, due t o i l l n e s s .

During h i s res igna t ion , he gave a statement t h a t "The

Andhra cause is sacred to every Andhra and none of us

can a f f o r d t o s i t back u n t i l our ob jec t ive of a separate

Province is achieved, Hence it is e s s e n t i a l t h a t t h e

Pres iden t , whoever, he be, should take ever increasing

i n t e r e s t in t h e work of the Mahasabha. I leave t h e

Andhra scene in t h e f u l l e s t hope t h a t in the hands of I

our Andhra Kesari , Mr. Prakasam, whr, is now in t h e saddle,

our cause is always s a f e and he can a t a l l even ts be

81. The I n d i a n Express, 13 December 1945.

t r u s t ed t o make t h e Andhra Province a f a i t accorn~li" . 8 2

Af te r t h e Independence of India, the Andhra leaders

sen t a deputation t o the Deputy Prime Minister of India,

sa rdar Pate1 and requested him t o c rea te Andhra Province

before adopting the new const i tut ion and he assured them

t o solve t he problem. The Prime Minister of India,

Nehru a l so promised t o look into t he matter.

After India ' s Independence, Andhra p o l i t i c s was

dominated by ca s t e prejudices, pa r t i cu l a r ly between t h e

two c a s t e groups, v iz , , Reddy and Kamma. The Kammas were

t he dominant cas te i n t he Coastal d i s t r i c t s and the

Reddies a r e ch ief ly found in the Rayalaseema d i s t r i c t s .

In t h i s period, N. Sanjeeva Redai dominated the Rayala-

seema p o l i t i c s . I n t he group p o l i t i c s h i s main r i v a l

was T. Prakasam. In the e lec t ions , which was held in

June 1948, N , G , Ranga, a Kamma from Guntur d i s t r i c t ,

supported by Prakasarn and h i s group defeated Sanjeeva

Reddy, wh:, supported by Kala Venkata Ra0'S group by 110

votes to ~ 2 . ' ~ . This defea t created a s t i f f opposition

82. Goshti, dated 3.7.1946. 83. The Hindu, 1 4 June 1948.

amng the Rayalaseemaites towards We Andhra Province.

N .G. Ranga r ea l i s ed t h i s . SD, he appointed Timma Reddy

a s Vice-President and K. Obul Reddy a s t he General

secre ta ry of the APCC, both from ~ a ~ a l a s e e m a . ~ ~ A few

days l a t e r , S.K. Dar appointed t o inquire the issue of

Andhra Province.

The Standing Committee of t he Rayalaseema Maha-

sabha8= met a t Cuddapah in August 1948, decided t o r e j e c t

the o f f e r o f separate Andhra.86 When the Dar C~mmission

v i s i t ed , N. Sanjeeva Reddi submitted a mem~randum request-

ing the postponement o f Linguist ic Provinces. N.M.

Sastry and H. Linga Reddy a lso opp~sed the Linguist ic

Provinces and submitted a memorandum t o form a separate

Rayalaseema Province with Madras a s capi tal .87 Tho Dar

Commission submitted Its r e p ~ r t : on 10 December and made

publ ic on 13 December 1948. The Commission did not

recommend the formation of Linguist ic Provinces. If t h e

creat ion of Linguist ic Provinces was contemplated, the

84. Sundaram, Dr. Lanka, Memorandum submitted t o the Dar Commission, 1948, p.12.

85. Hereafter , Rayelaseema Mahasabha i s mentioned a s RMS* 86. Andhra Ptabha, 8 August 1948. 87. he Indian Emress, 10 September 1946.

commission recommended t h e exclus ion of Bombay and

Madras c i t i e s from any un l ingua l province and sugges ted

t h e i r a d m i n i s t r a t i o n as P a r t C. S t a t e s . 88

Nobody was s a t i s f i e d wi th t h e Dar Commission r e p g r t .

p a t t a b h i Si taramayya e l e c t e d a s P res iden t of t h e Congress,

towards t h e end of October 1948. The Congress appointed

a Committee c o n s i s t i n g bf Jawa!iarlal Nehru, Va l l abha i

P a t e 1 and P a t t a b h i ~ i t a r a m a y y a , ~ ~ t o cons ide r the

ques t ion o f L b n g u i s t i ~ ~ r o v i n c e s , ~ ~ and submit ted i t s

r e p o r t t o the Working Committee i n A p r i l 1949, I t

recommended t h e postponement of t h e L i n g u i s t i c Provinces

by a few yea r s . The Committee, h ~ w e v e r , f e l t t h a t t h e

c a s e of Andhra was an except ion . The cond i t ions mentioned

were r " I f an Andhra Province i s t o be formed, i t s

p r o t a g o n i s t s w i l l have t o abandon t h e i r c l a ims t o the

C i t y o f Madras . . . (An Andhra Province) w i l l have to

be conf ined t o t h o Province o f Madras and can be brought

88. See T e x t of the Repor t i n The Hindu, 14 December 1948. 89. It i s p o p u l a r l y known a s JVP Report. 90. R e p o r t o f the L i n g u i s t i c Provinces Committee appointed

by t h e J a i p u r Congress, 1948, A l l I nd ia Congress Committee, New Delhi , 1948, Para-1,

91. The i s s u e of Madras C i t y i s t r e a t e d s e p a r a t e l y i n t h e f o l l o w i n g chap te r .

abou t on ly wi th t h e wi l l i ngness and consent of t h e o t h e r

component P a r t s of the Madras Province. We do n o t r u l e

o u t the p o s s i b i l i t y of changes o r cond i t ions a t a l a t e r

s t age" . 9 2

The Congress Working Committee accepted t h e r e p o r t

on 4 A p r i l 1949. But t h e s e cond i t ions d isappointed t h e

Andhras. T. Prakasam opposed t h e formation of hndhra

S t a t e w i t h ~ u t Madras C i t y , a s i t s c a p i t a l . But

D r . P a t t a b h i agreed t o l o s e t h e Madras City. The Tamils

d i d n o t want t o g ive t h e Madras C i t y even a s a temporary

c a p i t a l t o the new Andhra Province. The Madras Government

appointed a P a r t i t i o n Committee c o n s i s t i n g ~f T. Prakasam,

8. Gopala Reddi, N. Sanjeeva Reddi, Kala Venkata Rao,

M. Bhaktavatsalam, T.T. Krishnamachari and K, Madhava

Menon. P.S. Kumaraswami Raja, the Chief Min i s t e r , was

i ts Chairman. I n t h i s s i t u a t i o n , T. 'Prakasam submitted

a d i s s e n t i n g n o t e on t h e ma t t e r of s e p a r a t e Andhra S ta t e . 9 3

The APCC gene ra l body meeting was h e l d i n Madrab,

decided t h a t Madras C i t y should be t h e temp3rary c a p i t a l

of Andhra Province. Its demand was t h a t Visalandhra

92. See pages 14 and 16 of t h e Report , 93. Minor i ty n o t e by Prakasam, i n t h e P a r t i t i o n Committee

should be w i t h Hyderabed. a s i t s permanent c a p i t a l . The

~ a y a l a s e e m a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s unanimously w ~ i l t e d t h e

l o c a t i o n of t h e c a p i t a l i n Rayalaseema. The APCC agreed.

In case , t h e Madras Government d i f f e r e d Lrom t h e s e

demands, the APCC requested t h e Central Government t o

a r b i t r a t e t h e ques t ions under dispute . 9 4

The Report o f the P a r t i t i o n Committee with

~ r a k a s a m ' s d i s s e n t reached t h e Government of Ind ia i n

t h e f i r s t week of January 1950. But t h e Government post-

poned t h e i s s u e of AnBhra. On 24 January 1950, t h e

Government o f I n d i a announced t h a t it was e s s e n t i a l t h a t

t h e ou t s tand in j d i f f e r e n c e s and u n r e s ~ l v e d ques t ions

should b e s e t t l e d before t h e ques t ions could be taken up

again. 9 5

Kot i Reddi, M.L.A., i n t h e course of a l e t t e r t:,

Jawaharlal Nehru, Prime Minis ter , on t h e quest ion of a

formation o f t h e Andhra S t a t e r s a i d t "Andhras i n t h e

f i v e Rayalaseema d i s t r i c t s a r e t o t a l l y opposed t o t h e

formation of an Andhra S t a t e , i f t h e Andhra c la im t o

Madras Is t o be abandoned. The formation of a S t a t e i s

94. The Indian E m r e s s , 5 January 1950. 95. w., 25 January 1950.

accep tab le on ly i f Madras i s s u b s t a n t i a l l y a s soc ia t ed

wi th it i n some form o r o the r by immediate n a t u r a l agree-

ment. Otherwise i ts pos i t i on should be determined when

t h e Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil S t a t e s a r e a l s o formed.

~ e a n w t l i l e t h e adminis t ra t ion of Andhra s h ~ u l d funct ion

from Madras Ci ty" , 9 6

C. L. Narasimha Reddy, P res iden t o f Rayalasee~na Maha-

sabha in t h e course of a l e t t e r t o Prime Minis ter ~ u t l y i n g

Rayalaseema opposi t ion t o the formation of an Andhra S t a t e

s a i d r "In t h e f ace of so many l i f e and death problems

f a c i n g t h e Government and i n view of t h e forthcoming

e l e c t i o n s , it i s unwise f o r anybody t o t r y and coerce the

Prime Min i s t e r of Ind ia by meaningless f a c t s . The people

o f Rayalaseema, would t h e r e f o r e r eques t you n o t t o hurry

wi th t h e formation of an AndhrB S t a t e un le s s t h e wishes

o f t h e people of Rayalaseema a r e a sce r t a ined by means of

a p l e b i s c i t e " . 9 7 Of course, h i s view was connected with

t h e f e a r of l o s i n g jobs to t h e C i rca r Brahmins.

From t h e above, it i s t o be understood t h a t , Andhra

b v e m e n t was born in t h e Coas ta l region. From t h e beginning

96. The Hindu, 25 September 1951, 97. u., 29 September 1951.

a l l t h e Ci rca r leaders were staunch supporters of t h e

separate Andhra S ta te , except Nellore people. Another

important t h i n g is t h a t most of the leaders from Circar

d i s t r i c t s were Brahmin community, On t h e o ther hand,

most of t h e leaders of Rayalaseema were non-Brahmins.

When t h e h o s t i l i t y come up between Brahmin and non-

Brahmins, t h e i s sue of the separate Andhra Province was

delayed till 1952.

The c a s t e fee l ings rose up from t h e non-Telugus and

non-Brahmins of t h e Rayalaseema d i s t r i c t s . The Rayala-

seem d i s t r i c t s looked upon t h e movement, from t h e

beginning, a s a Brahmin movement, f o r securing p o l i t i c a l

and adminis t ra t ive o f f i c e s and pDwer. They thought t h a t

t h e well-educated Circar Brahmins would f i l l a l l t h e posts

i n t h e Ceded Districts too and t h a t they would have t o

complain aga ins t the unequal yoking with t h e Circar

Andhras, who were then complaining s imi la r ly againet t h e

Tamils. The opinion of t h e people of Nellore d i s t r i c t

was d i f f e r e n t . They thought t h a t i f Andhra S t a t e was

formed, they would lose of jobs, and f o r educational i n s t i -

t u t i o n s and o t h e r purposes. Madras City is s o near t o them,

if compared with other c i t i e s in Andhra. So, they

opposed the Andhra Province issue in the beginning.

The Rayalaseema people were not only backward

economically, bu t also po l i t i c a l l y ineffective. The

Congressmen belong t o Rayalaseema d i s t r i c t s also began

t o consider t he question of t h e i r backwardness seriously.

But there was one essent ia l difference in approach t o

the quest ion between Congressmen and non-Congreesmen of

Rayalaseema d i s t r i c t s , Many Congressmen l i ke K. Koti

Reddi, P. Ramachari and K. Subba Rao were not in favour

of the formation of an Andhra State , withgut provided

cer ta in safeguards t o the Rayalaseema d i s t r i c t s , The

non-Congressmen were usually opposed t o the format iu i l of

an Andhra S ta te . Though s~metimes, some of them

expressed a des i r e for a separate Rayalaseema province,

they did n o t ser iously ag i ta te for it. The Andhra leaders

belonging t o the Circars, in order t o a l l y the apprehen-

sions of the Ceded Di s t r i c t s , were prepared t3 ~ r o v i d e

reassurances and safeguards. But the Shif t ing of the

Andhra University headquarters from Bezawada t:, Waltair

in 1929, instead of the Anantapur, widened the gulf between

t h e Ceded Districts and Circars . Later , t h e C i r c a r

l eade r s , who s t r o n g l y favouring immediate format ion of

an Andhra Province, wanted co-operation of t h e Ceded

D i s t r i c t l e a d e r s ernd so come t o terms with them by

concluding t h e S r i Bagh Pact towards t h e end of 1937.

It can be seen dur ing Pre-Independence, t h a t t he

Brahmin and non-Brahmin r i v a l r i e s towards t h e formation

of t h e Andhra Province. But a f t e r 1947, wi th in t h e

Congress P a r t y i n Isndhra, r eg iona l f e e l i n g s and c a s t e

r i v a l r i e s a rose i n p o l i t i c a l s t r a t e g y .and t a c t i c s . S ince

1947, it h a s been a confronta t ion between t h e Kammas of

t h e Coas t a l d i s t r i c t s and t h e Reddies of t h e Ceded

Districts. A l l o t h e r communities too were t h e r e inc luding

the Brahmins and t h e Har i jans , One of t h e no tab le t h i n g

h e r e i s t h a t t h e r o l e of the Brahmins in Pre-1947 p o l i t i c s

now passed t o t h e Kammas and t h e ReddiBs, These two

communities possessed super l o r education, g r e a t economic

resDurces and a l s o cons iderable numeral s t r e n g t h , A f t e r

Independence, due t o t h e misunderstandings between

C i r c a r s , Rayalaseema d i s t r i c t s , Tami 1 and Telugus, among

v a r i o u s groups of congressmen, va r ious regions , c~t'nmunities,

etc. , t h e formation of t h e Andhra S t a t e was delayed

till 1952.

The r e f o re , t h e l eaders of Rayalaseema d id n o t extend

t h e i r whole-hearted co-operation t o t h e Ci rca rs in t h e

i s sue o f t h e formation of a separate Andhra State .

Fur ther , t h e P a r t i t i o n Committee postponed t h e issue. So,

t h e i s s u e dragged on till p o t t i Sr i ramululs martyrdom - t h e s u b j e c t mat ter of the next chapter.