After Yogi Adityanath took over the reins of Uttar Pradesh (UP), voices for division of state have died a slow death. Now, you will rarely find any administration advocating for the break-up of one of the largest states in India.
Mayawati’s proposal for dividing UP
In 2011, Mayawati, the then chief minister of Uttar Pradesh had proposed to divide her state into four parts. The BSP Supremo’s seriousness about division can be gauged from the fact that she had rallied her party leaders to pass a supporting resolution in the UP assembly.
According to Mayawati, division of UP was unavoidable. For her party, it was becoming increasingly difficult to rule over such a vast territory. She had proposed to divide the state into four smaller states namely Purvanchal, Bundelkhand, Awadh Pradesh, and Paschim Pradesh. All these states would have different capitals and separate administrative zones.
Mayawati’s proposal was unpopular leading to her loss
Mayawati had claimed that splitting UP would result in providing a better administration to the people. However, the central government of that time was fuzzy in their approach, which led to resolution getting stuck.
The proposal proved to be unpopular, and Mayawati was ousted from UP in 2012; Akhilesh Yadav took charge as the new chief minister. Yadav proved to be a failure when it came to handling the crime rate in the state. The increasing crime rate due to the government’s inefficiency meant that again a separate faction of the political spectrum started to raise their voices for the division of the state. However, it did not fructify, and the state remained united.
Yogi Adityanath’s handling of the administration
On 19th March 2017, Yogi Adityanath, the no-nonsensical leader of BJP, took charge of state administration. Under his leadership, the nationalist party had registered a landslide victory in the state. Out of a total of 384 seats BJP contested, they went on to win 312.
The massive majority coming on the back of Yogi’s macho-man image proved to be decisive for UP. Without creating any regional, linguistic, administrative, or religious division, Shri Yogi took the state on the path of development.
Improved law and order
The first step towards development is free and fair administration. When Yogi Adityanath came to power, UP was mired by Gunda raj allegedly being promoted by the Samajwadi Party government. In order to curtail crime, Yogi Government gave a free hand to the state police. The political pressure against the encounter of criminals was removed.
The free hand to UP Police proved to be decisive for the state. Criminals running from state police were subjected to encounters by them. From March 2017 to October 2021, UP Police killed a total of 151 criminals in encounters. 3,473 suspected criminals were also injured in the process. No caste or religion-based favourable treatment was given to criminals. Slowly, criminals started to choose jail terms for the fear of their encounters.
Women’s participation leading to massive economic drive
The improved law and order scenario resulted in the encouragement of women to come forward and play their roles. According to a new poll by the Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India (ASSOCHAM), Uttar Pradesh has the highest number of women workers, with 164 lakh females contributing to the economy.
Similarly, UP has emerged as a favourable investment destination for companies looking to shift their bases in the wake of the Covid pandemic. Yogi government has carried out a total of 500 reforms to improve the ease of doing business in the state. The state has received a total of 3lakh crores in foreign direct investment (FDI) during Yogi Era. Moreover, a cumulative 36 per cent of growth was observed in the state’s export. Rising exports are an indication of increased economic activity as well as uniform distribution of gains made out of it.
CM Yogi has broken the myth that you need a small state to run it efficiently. Large or small, a state cannot run if its people have no trust in its administrators. Shri Yogi Adityanath has proved that rather than the length of the state, an administrator’s efficiency will lead to development.