Mobilisation Phase, 1971 to 1990 — Practice

Question 1

On what date was the Six-Point Formula reached, and what was its basic purpose?

Accepted Answer

21 September 1973. It was the central government's attempt to address Telangana's grievances, especially local recruitment safeguards, without conceding bifurcation.

Question 2

Which constitutional amendment inserted Article 371D, and in what year?

Accepted Answer

The 32nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1973.

Question 3

Distinguish Article 371D from Article 371E, both inserted by the 32nd Amendment.

Accepted Answer

Article 371D empowers the President to provide, by order, for equitable opportunities in public employment and education across parts of Andhra Pradesh, enabling local cadres and local-area reservation. Article 371E separately provided for establishing a Central University in Hyderabad, addressing the education-access dimension of the same broader grievance through a distinct institutional mechanism.

Question 4

What did the 1975 Presidential Order do, and why did it matter more in practice than the 32nd Amendment itself?

Accepted Answer

It divided Andhra Pradesh into local cadres for recruitment and fixed reservation percentages for local candidates in specified zones, including a distinct Telangana zone. It mattered more in practice because a constitutional amendment authorising the President to act is only as effective as the specific order eventually issued; the 1975 Order is what actually translated Article 371D's general power into zone-wise rules candidates and employees could point to directly.

Question 5

Article 371D and the 1975 Presidential Order gave Telangana's employment safeguards a far more durable legal basis than the 1956 Gentlemen's Agreement ever had. Explain why regional disparities in employment and irrigation nonetheless persisted through the 1970s and 1980s.

Accepted Answer

In employment, the zone-wise local-cadre system the 1975 Order established was administratively complex to enforce consistently, and violations or circumventions of the local-cadre rules remained a recurring grievance even though the legal safeguard now existed in a far more durable, constitutionally backed form. In irrigation specifically, investment continued to be perceived as concentrated on the Krishna-Godavari delta systems serving coastal Andhra's already fertile, canal-irrigated agriculture, while Telangana's own traditional tank-irrigation systems received comparatively less new investment, a disparity Article 371D's employment-and-education-focused safeguards had no mechanism to address at all. This illustrates that a legally robust safeguard does not automatically produce equitable outcomes where implementation and enforcement remain weak, and where the safeguard's own scope (employment and education) does not extend to a separate grievance (irrigation investment) entirely outside its coverage.

Question 6

The 1956 Gentlemen's Agreement had four safeguards; the 1973 settlement needed six points and constitutional backing. Explain why a broader, constitutionally entrenched formula was judged necessary in 1973.

Accepted Answer

The 1973 formula was drafted specifically to survive judicial scrutiny after Mulki-style state-level employment rules had themselves faced legal challenges, meaning a purely administrative or political safeguard, however well-intentioned, risked being struck down or narrowed by courts in a way a constitutionally entrenched provision like Article 371D would not be. A broader, six-point formula also deliberately reframed the underlying grievance as backward-area development across the whole state rather than a Telangana-specific demand, a framing choice intended to make the settlement more politically durable by not appearing to single out one region for special treatment, even though its practical effect was still substantially Telangana-focused through the zone-wise cadre system the 1975 Order eventually established.

Question 7

Why does the 1971-1990 period see no comparably large street agitation compared to 1969, despite the underlying grievances persisting?

Accepted Answer

The 1969 agitation's own leadership, including Marri Chenna Reddy, had been substantially absorbed into mainstream Congress party politics by 1970-71, removing the organised political vehicle that had driven the 1969 mobilisation. The state's response, the Six-Point Formula and Article 371D, also gave the appearance of a durable, constitutional resolution, which reduced the immediate political pressure for renewed mass mobilisation even though implementation gaps persisted underneath this more elaborate legal surface.

Question 8

In what year was the Presidential Order that operationalised Article 371D issued?

Accepted Answer

1975, dividing Andhra Pradesh into local cadres and fixing zone-wise reservation percentages for local candidates, including a distinct Telangana zone.

Question 9

Why was Hyderabad city's treatment under the 1975 local-cadre zoning a specific point of contention?

Accepted Answer

Hyderabad city carried a comparatively open, non-zone-restricted recruitment character reflecting its role as the shared state capital, distinct from the wider Telangana zone surrounding it. Critics argued this exception allowed exactly the kind of non-local dominance of capital-city employment the zonal system was otherwise meant to prevent, since the capital concentrated the state's most desirable government postings, making this a recurring specific grievance within the broader employment-safeguard dispute.

Practice — Mobilisation Phase, 1971 to 1990

Sign in to save attempts to your dashboard and track your accuracy over time

Find a verified tutor

Join a live course

Browse coaching centres

About

Categories

Support

Documentation

Get Study Tips & Updates

Download Our App

Download for iOS

Download for Android

Popular Cities