manufacturing bogus history

too many people, especially the young, have swallowed without questioning the entirely fictitious stories manufactured by the separate telangana activists about how progressive pre-1948 telangana actually was. the most ridiculous of those stories is definitely the incredibly naive fantasy about hyderabad being a kind of beehive of vibrant industrial activity. some valiant souls have tried to compile a list of major industries in hyderabad state before 1947 on this wikipedia page, but the list you can see, is very, very short.

let's look at what P.Sundarayya had to say about the only industry that hyderabad could truly brag about, exploitation, in feudal telangana in (the very first chapter) Telangana's People's Struggle and its Lessons:
The basic feature that dominated the socio-economic life of the people of Hyderabad and especially in Telangana was the unbridled feudal exploitation that persisted well-nigh till the beginning of the Telangana armed peasant struggle.

Out of the 53,000,000 acres in the whole of Hyderabad State, about 30,000,000 acres, i.e., about 60 per cent, were under governmental land revenue system, (called diwani or khalsa area) ; about 15,000,000 acres, i.e., about 30 per cent, under the jagirdari system, and about 10 per cent as the Nizam's own direct estate, i.e., sart khas system. It was only after the police action that the sarf khas and jagirdari systems were abolished, and these lands were merged in diwani (brought under governmental land revenue system).

The income or loot from the peasantry, from the sarf khas area, amounting to Rs. 20,000,000 annually was entirely used to meet the expenditure of the Nizam's family and its retinue. The whole area was treated as his private estate. He was not bound to spend any amount for economic and social benefit or development of people's livelihood in that area. If anything was spent, it used to be from other general revenues of the state. In addition, the Nizam Nawab used to be given Rs. 7,000,000 per annum from the state treasury.

After the police action when the sarf khas area was merged in the diwani area, the Nizam and his family offspring were to be paid Rs. 5,000,000 per annum as compensation, apart from another Rs. 5,000,000 as privy purse. The peasants in these areas were nothing but bond-slaves, or total serfs under the Nizam. Even whatever little rights existed in the diwani area were denied
to them.

The jagir areas constituted 30 per cent of the total state. In these areas, paigas, samsthanam, jagirdars, ijardars, banjardars, maktedars, inamdars, or agraharams, were the various kinds of feudal oppressors. Some of these used to have their own revenue officers to collect the taxes they used to impose. Some of them used to pay a small portion to the state while some others were not required to pay anything. In these areas, various kinds of illegal exactions and forced labour were the normal feature. Some of these jagirs, paigas and samsthanams, especially the biggest ones, had their own separate police, revenue, civil and criminal systems ; they were sub-feudatory states, under the Nizam's state of Hyderabad which was itself a stooge native state under the British autocracy in India. In jagir areas the land taxes on irrigated lands used to be 10 times more than those collected in diwani (government) areas, amounting to Rs. 150 per acre or 20-30 mounds of paddy per acre.
and so on. hyderabad was built with such loot from the countryside. a history of exploitation, written in sweat and blood, forms the foundation of the claim of the people of telangana on the city of hyderabad. is the claim of the people from andhra-rayalaseema on hyderabad any different, 53 years after merger? i don't think so. only the methods used, and the exploiters, are different. i think the claim of the ordinary people of andhra-rayalaseema should also be measured in the same light. but more on that later.

let me repeat, despite the tall claims of kcr and other votaries of a separate telangana, there was very little that resembled modern industry or economy in hyderabad or telangana in pre-1947 days. a sugar factory here, or a bidi factory there, a spinning mill here or a timber mill there: when compared with industry in calcutta, bombay or madras or even surat or ahmedabad, hyderabad was a city that belonged in the middle ages. all the loot went to build a city meant for the leisure class, for pleasure. and for the administrative classes who kept the machinery of exploitation running. hence, it had an airport, hospitals and a university. but it imported doctors, pilots, engineers and teachers from across the country. because until the last couple of decades of the feudal rule, the rulers, despite their unquestionably immense wealth, never really woke up out of their feudal stupor to build a society that could produce its own doctors, pilots, engineers and teachers. if one runs through the long list of scions of ex-jagirdars and big landlords like kcr who are now legislators and mps, one can't help but wonder: how many of them had grandfathers who had ever entertained thoughts of being economic agents of change like some of the privileged landowning classes elsewhere in the country? like those who started banks in karnataka, textile mills in mumbai, engineering industries and film studios in madras, for instance? run through the whole of telangana with a fine comb and i'm sure you'd come back with nothing more than crumbling fortresses as the only material evidence of those rural tyrants ever having existed.

could the nizam alone be blamed?

whatever infrastructure that existed in hyderabad city before accession owes its origin to some progressive thinking on the part of the last nizam and his father. they did try to make some sincere efforts to bring modernity to the state: the university and the hospitals they built, some public buildings like the secretariat and the assembly, other infrastructure like the airport, roads and the water supply and sewerage system. the last nizam also tried hard to persuade the local rich landowners as well as industrialists and businessmen from across the country to invest in the city, offered them land and incentives to set up manufacturing units in industrial parks that he had developed. very few businessmen from outside hyderabad state actually took up the offer. and there were fewer takers among the local telangani landowners. weren't they wealthy enough? going back to sundarayya's book again:
Some of these notorious feudal deshmukhs who owned tens of thousands of acres, against whom bitter battles were fought, during 1940, are listed below :-—
1. Visunur Deshmukh—40,000 acres, landlord over 40 villages in Jangaon taluka, Nalgonda district.
2. Suryapet Deshmukh—20,000 acres.
3. Babasahebpet Deshmukh—10,000 acres, Miryalagudem taluka.
4. Kalluru Deshmukh—100,000 acres, Madhira taluka, Khammam district.
5. Jannareddy Pratap Reddy—150,000 acres, Suryapeta taluka.

Here are a few more examples of the big landlords, who owned more than 5,000 acres, in a few talukas to which the movement spread : Mallapuram Rangareddi, Chandampalli Doralu, Mosongi Doralu of Koppulu, of Devarakonda taluka ; Cherukupolli Narasimhareddi of Miryalagudem taluka ; Betavolu zamindar, Kapugallu Muttavarapu family, Penubadu Seetaram Rao of Huzurnagar taluka ; Chandupatla Sudarshana Rao, Dupalli Venkatarama Reddy of Bhuvanagiri taluka ; Musakuri family of Tangadapalli, Alwala family of Polapalli of Ibrahimpatnam taluka ; Mandameri Madhava Rao (10.000); Pusukuri family (10-20,000 acres); Narsapur Samsthanam (50-100 thousand acres) of Lakkisattibeta taluka, Adilabad district.

The land concentration in Hyderabad state and the Telangana region was tremendous. The administrative report of 1950-51 gave figures to show that in the three districts of Nalgonda, Mahbubnagar and Warangal, the number of pattadars (landlords) owning more than 500 acres were about 550, owning 60 to 70 per cent of the total cultivable land. The extent of exploitation indulged in by these jagirdars, paigas and samsthanams can be imagined from the fact that 110 of them used to collect Rs. 100,000,000 every year in various taxes or exactions from the peasantry. Out of this amount, Rs. 55,000,000 used to be appropriated by 19 of them, while the whole revenue income of the Hyderabad state before 1940 was no more than Rs. 80,000,000. This was only the legally admitted collections. But it was a well-known fact that total collections, legal and illegal, amounted to thrice this amount. When the Nizam issued his firmana banning illegal exactions, it mentioned 82 varieties of illegal exactions !

But this firmana remained a mere paper proclamation. The jagirdars, deshmukhs, the big landlords continued their illegal forcible forages with the active connivance of the corrupt officialdom of the Nizam state. To give one example :

Visunur Ramachandra Reddy, the notorious deshmukh in Janagaon tehsil of Nalgonda district, used to forcibly seize the the lands from the tenants and the peasants. He used to force the peasants in his area, of about 40 villages, to do forced labour in his fields, all through the year ; pay nazarana (presents in kind or cash) at the birth of a child in the family, marriage or death ; (every handicraftsman, artisan, merchant had to pay a certain portion of his products or fixed amounts in cash. The cobblers—shoes and ; shepherds—blankets and supply of sheep and goats for the feast and free milk ; and peasants—grain, vegetables, etc.) He built a house costing Rs. 200,000 in the thirties and forties, out of which nearly half the cost was collected in cash from the forced labour for various construction jobs. A young mother who had delivered a child only three days earlier, was made to do forced labour in his fields, leaving the infant at home, with nobody to look after it and the child died of lack of milk and care. He was so notorious that peasants hesitated to give their daughters in marriage to persons living in those villages. It was against such forced labour and illegal exactions and evictions that the Andhra Mahasabha, the cultural organisation of Telugu-speaking Andhra people of the Telangana region of Hyderabad State, waged innumerable struggles. The beginnings of the Telangana armed struggle were against the atrocities of this very same Visunur deshmukh in 1946, when his goondas attacked and murdered Doddi Komarayya, the local Andhra Mahasabha worker, in Kadivendi village on July 4.
the nizam did try, but his hindu, upper caste jagirdars were quite content with things as they were. they were very rich without ever having to work, or even having to think about work. while their control over people's lives was, to put it very mildly, almost godly in many places, the nizam's control over his jagirdars, it'd seem in hindsight, was very weak. historians have been very harsh on the last nizam, and very kind towards his hindu jagirdars, one has to admit.


CleanUp_Squad said...

What are your sources? Obviously, you were not direct witness to the social and economic structures of Nizam's period.

Kartik said...

Dude, should I believe you? Or should I believe the TIME magazine? ( http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,770599,00.html ) You will find the reporter reporting from one of the finest cities of the World of that time! You know which city, don't you?!

Yes, Nizam did collect heavy taxes, but read that article carefully and you will know that though he was very stingy in spending money even for himself, he spent a good deal on welfare.

The fact is that from the very beginning certain vested interests have tried in every way to bury the history of Telangana. With all due respect, Sundarayya could be just one other person like that!

And please stop this age old practice of ridiculing the Telangana movement! If a new state is created it is a win-win situation for all Telugus, except those with vested interests.

By the way, after reading the first few lines of your post, I gave up on reading the remaining!

gaddeswarup said...

A couple of queries:
Is Sundarayya's book available online?
Second;a vague quesion. I remember reading somewhere that there were fairly big landowners ( perhaps not as big as in Telangana) were there in coastal Andhra too. Since the British started collecting land taxes those who were not cultivating themselves slowly started selling the land to those who were cultivating. This together with the anicuts built by the British might have been responsible for the large middle class farmers in coastal Andhra. This is all a vague memory from a thesis in some university in Hyderabad; if I try hard I may find it again. Do you have any references for this sort of changes which developed between coastal Andhra and the areas under Nizam?

oremuna said...


kuffir said...

cleanup squad,

lots of people who were are still around. but you don't have to trust anyone. please start finding out for yourself. you could start by reading the book i linked to.


what's the contradiction you find between my account and the time article? the nizam's hyderabad was rich, the people were not.

i've the same advice for you as the earlier commenter. don't believe anyone. find out for yourself.

thanks for your comment.

kuffir said...

swarup garu,

i've linked to sundarayya's book, in the second para. please check.


yes. jesus.

Kiran said...


I skimmed through the P sundarayya's book and it was quiet clear that the role of Andhra Mahasabha in telangana region was no less than that of INC in British India. I can understand why the congress(I) would like to downplay the role of AMS as it would like to project itself as the sole voice of pre-independent India but how can people who claim to sympathetic to telangana and demand separatism make such a conscious effort in ignoring its role ?

If these separatists with such moral bankruptcy and rewarded with political boundaries for their "struggle" it may or may not make telangana more richer...but it will serously damage the soul and the innocence of telangana people.

Kiran said...

"The fact is that from the very beginning certain vested interests have tried in every way to bury the history of Telangana. With all due respect, Sundarayya could be just one other person like that!"

Can i dare ask for references for the above claim like you have demanded from kufr ? or do the burden of references apply only to those who oppose the separatism ?

kuffir said...


actually, in many ways, the role of the communists was bigger. and even among the communists the role of the dalitbahujans who died in the movement was much bigger. sthe role of successive congress govts, formed with telangani and andhra congressmen, in keeping this significant part of telugu history from generations of young students across the regions has done serious damage to the collective understanding of this significant chapter in the history of the telugus (you can see its effects in the comments of a few here).

Kiran said...

Kufr ,

True. But general people atleast have a vague perception of communist's fighting the razakars and nizam. But on AMS most are likely to draw a complete blank - when it appears to be the platform through which the communists among others launched their struggles.

Ofcourse we cant learn about one without the other. Clearly AMS was the victim of congress politics against communists. Most congressmen were never keen to project the visalandhra struggle as it will diminish its pre-emenince of pre-independence era. To me the importance of AMS also lies in its symbolism due to the presence of the word - andhra. The present t separatist movement has a heavy reliance on symbolism that is violent - as can be seen in the many instances of defacement of the word "andhra".

Add to Technorati Favorites