A few days ago, Dr. J. Purnachandra Rao, former Director General of Police (Andhra Pradesh), turned political activist and currently serving as National Coordinator of the BSP, approached me to discuss the key concerns of Adivasis in the Fifth Schedule areas of the country, particularly in the Telugu states. During our discussions, he focused on political reservations and caste-based politics in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. This article is based on those discussions.
A new political debate is emerging in the Telugu states around caste and political power. Critics argue that a few numerically small caste groups have dominated political leadership for decades, resulting in the marginalization of Backward Classes (BCs) and religious minorities.
Data on representation in the state assemblies of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana reflects the concerns and frustrations of communities that lack proportional representation relative to their population, or in some cases have no representation at all. According to the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), this imbalance has become a key factor driving its renewed political mobilization in both states.
From 1952 to the most recent assembly elections in Andhra Pradesh (2024), members of the Reddy community (approximately 4.82% of the population) secured 658 MLA seats, while the Kamma community (around 3.31%) secured 549 seats out of a total of 2,902 seats across 16 elections. The data indicates that 111 BC castes have had little opportunity to enter the assembly. During the same period, the Kapu community — numerically stronger than the Kamma and Reddy communities — secured only 314 seats.
The caste composition of the 2024 Andhra Pradesh Assembly provides further insight into representation patterns. Kammas (3.31%) represent 35 constituencies, Reddys (4.82%) represent 32, Kapus (9.64%) represent 18, Yadavas (6.07%) represent 7, the Sheik community (5.72%) represents 3, and Turpu Kapus (3.80%) represent only 5 constituencies.
Meanwhile, several communities such as Rajaka (2.85%), Vaddi (2.29%), and Viswabrahmin (1.35%) have no representation in the assembly, similar to many other backward communities. The Kapu community secured 18 seats largely due to the rise of the Jana Sena Party, headed by K. Pawan Kalyan, as a significant political force in the state.
Scheduled Castes (approximately 29%) hold 29 seats and Scheduled Tribes (6%) hold 7 seats, primarily due to constitutionally mandated reservations. Without these safeguards, their representation in legislative bodies would likely be far lower.
Similar trends are evident in Telangana. According to data cited by the BSP, from 1952 to the 2023 elections, three dominant castes representing roughly 5% of the population secured 798 MLA seats: Reddys (4.06%) won 576 seats, Kammas (0.71%) won 73, and Velamas (0.28%) won 149.
In contrast, three major BC communities — Mudiraj, Goud, and Yadava — comprising 16.57% of the population secured only 112 seats. When all BC communities (56.26%) are considered together, they secured only 279 seats out of a total of 1,743 seats between 1952 and 2023.
In the 2023 Telangana assembly elections after bifurcation, the politically and economically dominant castes — Kamma, Reddy, and Velama — secured about 60 seats, while BCs secured 19 and Muslims secured 7 seats. SCs (18%) hold 19 seats and STs (10%) hold 12 seats, broadly in proportion to their population due to constitutional reservations.
The data generated by the BSP has certain limitations because the population percentages of these politically dominant groups have been applied to elections held since 1952. These figures may be more relevant when applied to recent state assembly elections held since the 2011 census, as there is no corresponding population data for each election held since 1952.
He and his team have compiled data on MLA representation before and after the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh. He argues that numerically small dominant castes continue to control political power, depriving backward and marginalized communities of equitable participation. He further contends that these dominant groups sustain their influence across governance and administrative structures, and that divisions among weaker communities help maintain this dominance.
According to him, genuine freedom, equality, and social justice for marginalized communities will remain elusive unless disadvantaged groups break free from the political and economic control of dominant castes. He contends that caste remains a central barrier preventing numerically strong but economically weaker communities from accessing power and securing justice for their members.
Meaningful change, he argues, will require marginalized communities to understand the political dynamics that sustain caste dominance. In this context, he emphasizes that the vote remains the most powerful democratic tool for correcting historical injustices.
However, there is no constitutional provision that bars voters from electing a candidate belonging to a numerically small or socially forward community when contesting from a general (unreserved) constituency. The Constitution of India guarantees equality in political participation and leaves the choice of representatives entirely to the electorate. At the same time, it is equally true that social inequalities deprive certain groups of inclusive political power and representation in legislative bodies.
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar advocated the annihilation of caste, viewing it as the greatest barrier to equality and fraternity. However, present political trends suggest that caste continues to shape electoral politics in the Telugu states. Rather than weakening, caste identities appear to be strengthening, widening social divisions and limiting collective resistance to political domination.
This raises an important question: can political movements translate their advocacy into grassroots awareness and mobilize marginalized communities to recognize the importance of political power and representation?
Comments