Wednesday, February 4, 2026

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

 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.

No comments:

Post a Comment