UT status to Hyderabad: Stakeholders differ
The city of Hyderabad has been in the news of late, following the announcement by the UPA government about granting statehood to Telangana. However, the decision to make Hyderabad the joint capital of both Telangana and Andhra Pradesh for 10 years has not gone down well with a large section of local entrepreneurs and industrialists. Even the decision to make Hyderabad a Union Territory (UT), a separate state or the permanent joint capital of both the states has been received with skepticism among the industrialists and real estate developers of Hyderabad in general.
ACCI moots for Hyderabad centric development model:
The secretary of the Andhra Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI) stated that irrespective of what status is awarded to the city, the development model should be specific to Hyderabad, without shifting the focus on other areas like Vijayawada or Guntur. Besides, the focus on Hyderabad should not be at the cost of equitable or inclusive growth, which will have to be dealt with at a later stage. Development of areas like Vijayawada and Guntur will have to wait for the time being as the focus on Hyderabad will need to be sustained. Once Hyderabad is developed adequately, then the focus can shift to other areas as well. Moreover, it was felt that Hyderabad being made a Union territory or the joint capital of both states would result in many practical and logistical problems for developers and industrialists. Even though the ACCI was in favour of any integrated state, in the present scenario where the bifurcation is already on the cards, there is no other option for them than to go with the decision of the government.
Majority of entrepreneurs want a different capital for Andhra:
However, there is a pertinent opinion that when the division happens, there should be a different capital city for Andhra Pradesh, instead of Hyderabad. This is because, if Hyderabad is retained as the capital, it would have an impact on the transaction and compliance costs, thereby adversely effecting the prospects of industrialists in Andhra. To emphasise this point, it was stated that if Hyderabad was retained as the capital, when goods are transported to Hyderabad, it would have to pass through Telangana as well thereby resulting in double taxation. This double taxation resulting in revenue sharing between the two states would cause an additional financial burden on industrialists. Besides, the focus of development would be centralised on Hyderabad, thereby resulting in other areas with potential being neglected.
Small section of entrepreneurs want Hyderabad to be a UT:
A minority section of industrialists and entrepreneurs are in favour of Hyderabad being converted into a Union territory. The general feeling among them is that Hyderabad was developed to its present status due to the enormous investments made by many investors and industrialists from all over Andhra Pradesh. Hence, it was imperative that their interests were safeguarded. Besides, there are many politicians from Andhra Pradesh who are also lobbying for Hyderabad to be given the status of UT or the joint capital. Politicians who have invested in real estate projects in Hyderabad are of the strong opinion that their investments would go waste if the capital of Seemandhra (state that is likely to be jointly formed out of the Rayalaseema and Andhra regions), is shifted to any other city besides Hyderabad.
