PROFESSIONS, CHECKERED CAREER,
AND LESSONS-PART THREE
(From Librarian to CPRO to CM KCR)
A Journey from Khangi School to
Center for Excellence
Vanam Jwala Narasimha Rao
Prefatory Note
(These reflections arise from close
observation and lived experience during a defining phase in the history of
Telangana. They are offered with deep respect for Kalvakuntla Chandrashekhar
Rao—a leader of rare intellectual depth, political courage, and unwavering
commitment to the idea of Telangana. What follows is not merely recollection,
but an attempt to record how vision, resolve, and governance converged to shape
a people’s destiny.
While this narrative draws upon a
professional journey that spans eleven organizations and multiple institutional
settings, it consciously begins with the final and most consequential phase of
that journey. A brief reference to my academic formation is included at the
outset only to provide essential context, before the account moves directly
into the concluding chapter of my professional life.}
IN MY VERY FIRST MEETING
with Kalvakuntla Chandrashekhar Rao (KCR) on June 17, 2014, I received an early
and enduring lesson in how a Chief Minister must articulate the vision of a new
State. Telangana, he said, did not merely require administration, but it needed
to be reinvented and reoriented. That articulation was not rhetorical.
Over the next ten years, through
continuous review meetings that covered every sector of governance and welfare,
I watched this vision translate into practice. What unfolded before me was not
governance in the routine sense, nor even the textbook notion of Good
Governance, but a distinctly different model, the one driven by long-term
thinking, institutional clarity, and a statesman’s perspective.
The context in which KCR assumed
office made this approach all the more significant. Telangana had emerged after
a fourteen-year, largely peaceful and conscious mass movement under his
leadership. As the first Chief Minister of the new State, he confronted
formidable challenges, such as institutional uncertainty, acute shortages of
experienced officers, unresolved administrative divisions, and persistent
non-cooperation from the residual State.
The situation bore comparison to the
circumstances faced by Jawaharlal Nehru at the dawn of independent India, in
terms of the responsibility of shaping governance structures, while
simultaneously giving a fractured polity a sense of direction and confidence.
Like Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru who in
his own style laid direction, action plan and a road map for the young country,
Chandrashekhar Rao also formulated plans, roadmap for the new State, which was
undergone injustices and sufferings under 60 years of Andhra Rulers Misrule.
KCR defined, designed, and delivered what all that the young state needed
during the ten years of his governance, in two consecutive terms and ensured
their execution with consistency and purpose.
In this process, I found myself
involved, directly or indirectly, actively, or passively, at different stages
of decision-making. Often, soon after the announcement of a new scheme, policy,
or program, I was either consulted or kept informed in tune with the need,
enabling me to observe closely how decisions evolved from conception to public
articulation. At the same time, KCR adopted a distinctive leadership strategy
when circumstances demanded.
On select occasions, he chose to keep
his deliberations confined to himself until the moment of public announcement.
Even senior officers in the Chief Minister’s Office were sometimes not formally
briefed in advance, though discreet consultations may have taken place. This
approach, while unusual, reflected his preference for decisiveness and control
over timing in sensitive matters.
From this close association, I learnt
how a comprehensive and integrated policy framework must precede governance.
KCR insisted that overall development could not be achieved through isolated
initiatives. Each department was required to evolve a clear policy framework as
a prerequisite for meaningful and credible budget proposals. Inclusive growth,
as he defined it, was not limited to economic expansion but extended to
empowerment across social sections.
Industrialization was viewed as the
key driver for higher and sustainable growth, while equal emphasis was placed
on maintaining ecological balance and environmental protection. Attracting
investment, both domestic and international, was treated as a strategic
necessity rather than a peripheral activity. This approach was reflected in
execution as well. From the meticulous planning and conduct of Pushkaras to
major rivers, to ensuring public participation in community development
programs, governance was designed to be both participatory and structured.
Agriculture received focused attention, with
clearly defined roles for the department and agricultural universities to
enhance productivity. Education was conceptualized on an ambitious scale,
leading to the formulation of a free and compulsory KG-to-PG model,
irrespective of caste, creed, or religion. Even while preparing for brief
international interventions, such as his address at the World Economic Forum on
Emerging Markets at Crossroads, KCR took the CMO team into confidence,
ensuring that the content, that was concise but very precise and descriptive,
rose above partisan politics and reflected the aspirations of a new State.
On sensitive and complex issues such
as farmers’ suicides, I observed in KCR a distinctly statesmanlike approach.
Rather than responding superficially, KCR insisted on going to the root of the
problem through in-depth analysis. Where established systems had gone astray,
he was willing to think afresh and attempt course correction, as seen in his
vision of developing Telangana into the seed bowl of India.
Schemes and programs were not merely
announced, but they were defined, designed, and delivered through time-bound
action plans aligned with the needs and aspirations of the people. In this
sense, his leadership qualities closely matched the attributes described by Jim
Collins in his book on Leadership, Good to Great, marked by clarity of
purpose, disciplined execution, and long-term institutional thinking.
The transition to a new government,
particularly in the context of a newly formed State like Telangana in 2014,
demanded a rethinking of established administrative methods. I learnt from KCR
how crucial the planning stage was, especially in the preparation of budgets.
The first ten months after KCR was sworn in, it was all confusion. Budget had
to be prepared based on ‘No Precedence, No Blue Print and No Specimen.’
It was difficult to arrive at right
fiscal resources. KCR envisaged, evolving an inclusive policy for formulating Budget
Proposals for the financial year 2014-2015
based on
the nature and size of state’s economy vis-à-vis country economy,
dovetailing both to generate wealth.
Fourteen ‘Expert Task Force
Committees’ were constituted. Based on their reports, the first budget was prepared based on available
information. In the second financial year it was bit of better
understanding about positive and negative aspects of state finances.
It was only after the income and expenditure under ‘Plan and
Non-Plan Schemes’ from 31st March 2015 to 31st March
2016 (One Full Year) was known clearly, ‘Factual Basis for Telangana State
Budget Calculation’ was arrived. By the time 2022-23 and 2023-24
budgets were prepared, State’s wealth increased in a
significant way due to fiscal prudence. Telangana became ‘Role Model
for Entire Country,’ and followed by rest of the states.
KCR
always used to say that ‘Funds Raised or Managed for Leveraging Economy’
shall not be construed as ‘Loans and Debts.’ Once announcing in
Assembly, KCR said that, Loans taken by Telangana were the lowest when compared
to other states. He further said that, to transform State as ‘Golden
Telangana,’ required loans only were taken, and not beyond. However, the
borrowings were within the limits of ‘Fiscal Responsibility and Budget
Management (FRBM)’ and Centre’s guidelines, strictly adhering to ‘Fiscal
Prudence Norm.’
Whether
the Budget was presented by the Finance Minister or by KCR himself, without
exception each presentation was inspirational and message-oriented, designed to
reach every section of society. Budgets were treated not merely as financial
statements but as instruments of communication.
The
welfare architecture evolved during his tenure reflected a cradle-to-grave
approach, grounded in the principles of equality of opportunity, equitable
distribution, and the State’s responsibility towards those unable to access
even the minimum conditions for a dignified life.
His oft-repeated observation that
‘Good Plan is half the success’ was not a slogan but a working principle. He
questioned the mechanical continuation of obsolete schemes and emphasized the
need to replace the mindset of ‘Government gives and people take’ with a
more purposeful approach, with ‘how the Government could serve people better
than before.’ Nowhere was this approach more evident than in his handling
of agriculture and irrigation.
